Eutychus (Acts 20:9)

His name meant “Good Luck”, and he lived in an age when Lady Luck was even more fervently worshiped than at modern race-tracks or lottery machines.

Young “Lucky” had had a hard day; but slipping away after the evening meal, he had found his way to the meeting place to hear the famous Paul. However, the room was warm, and after several hours even the apostle’s impassioned discourse was not enough. He dozed, he slumped in his window seat — no one paid any attention — and then he disappeared! Did anyone reflect on his name as “Lucky” lay still on the dark street below? Had his “luck” finally run out? Did someone remember the Preacher’s words: “Time and chance happeneth to all men” (Ecc 9:11)? Was it just “chance” that had done in poor Eutychus? (This often-misapplied verse should yield its true meaning to a bit of concordance work on the word “chance”.)

Or… another possibility. Had this “accident” happened to the young sleeper so “that the works of God should be made manifest in him”? (John 9:3). Do not all things — even a fatal fall from an upper window -work together for good to them that love God (Rom 8:28)? Paul assures us that “whether we wake or sleep” we shall live together with Christ (1Th 5:10).

Brethren, have we fallen asleep in the “back row” because the “night” is long? Or have we suffered a reversal of “fortune” and blamed it all on “chance”? There may be a little “Eutychus” in all of us! Maybe a great fall is just the thing we need to wake us from our “sleep”. If it is, then the Father in His infinite patience and mercy will see to it that we receive it.

“And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, ‘Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him'” (Acts 20:10).

Let us wake from our “falls” with a greater awareness of the wonder of God’s healing grace. “Whom He loveth He chasteneth” (Heb 12:6) -and the dozing disciple may awake with a jolt. The “fall” may be unpleasant, but the “bringing up alive” will be the source of “not a little comfort” (Acts 20:12).

Explaining God

This was written by an 8-year-old, Danny Dutton, of Chula Vista, California, for his third-grade homework assignment. The assignment was to explain God.

EXPLAIN GOD

One of God’s main jobs is making people. He makes them to replace the ones that die, so there will be enough people to take care of things on earth. He doesn’t make grown-ups, just babies. I think because they are smaller and easier to make. That way He doesn’t have to take up His valuable time teaching them to talk and walk. He can just leaves that to mothers and fathers.

God’s second most important job is listening to prayers. An awful lot of this goes on, since some people, like preachers and things, pray at times beside bedtime. God doesn’t have time to listen to the radio or TV because of this.

God sees everything and hears everything and is everywhere which keeps Him pretty busy. So you shouldn’t go wasting His time by going over your Mom and Dad’s head asking for something they said you couldn’t have.

Atheists are people who don’t believe in God. I don’t think there are any in Chula Vista. At least there aren’t any who come to our church.

Jesus is God’s Son. He used to do all the hard work like walking on water and performing miracles and people finally got tired of him preaching to them and they crucified him. But He was good and kind, like his Father, and he told His Father that they didn’t know what they were doing and to forgive them and God said “Okay!”

His Dad (God) appreciated everything that he had done and all his hard work on earth, so He told him he didn’t have to go out on the road anymore. He could stay in heaven. So He did. And now he helps his Dad out by listening to prayers and seeing things which are important for God to take care of and which ones he can take care of himself without having to bother God. Like a secretary, only more important. You can pray anytime you want and they are sure to help you because they got it worked out — so one of them is on duty all the time.

You should always go to church on Sunday because it makes God happy, and if there’s anybody you want to make happy, it’s God. Don’t skip church to do something you think will be more fun like going to the beach. This is wrong. And besides the sun doesn’t come out at the beach until noon anyway.

If you don’t believe in God, besides being an atheist, you will be very lonely, because your parents can’t go everywhere with you, like to camp, but God can. It is good to know He’s around you when you’re scared in the dark or when you can’t swim and you get thrown into real deep water by big kids.

But… you shouldn’t just always think of what God can do for you. I figure God put me here and He can take me back anytime He pleases. And… that’s why I believe in God.

Advice for speakers and writers

No scrivener, amanuensis, practitioner of elocution, or any other purveyor of specific principles, subjective homilies, or miscellaneous and sundry expostulations, whether by the mechanism of graphic impression or vocal emanation, should endeavor or assay to utilize any polysyllabic combination in lieu of a relevant, logical, and appropriate monosyllabic alternative, or indeed of any other more diminutive definitional counterpart.

(Translation: Never use a big word when a small word will do.)

April 15, the parable of

There once was a very great nation, which was in its time the wealthiest nation in the world. Its government devised a method of collecting revenues from its citizens that involved their voluntary reporting of annual income. The date selected by law by which this reporting was to be completed was the 15th day of the fourth month of the following year.

So it came to pass that, shortly after the end of every year, all across this great land, millions of businesses and individuals who had paid out moneys to their workers or landlords or business associates began to file information reports. Copies of these reports went to the central government itself, while other copies went to the recipients of the income.

It then became the responsibility of all individuals to compile their own reports, from the information provided, of the total income they had received during the previous year.

These income figures, from all the diverse sources, were reduced by other figures, called “deductions”, provided by other businesses in like manner. These deductions — such as amounts given to charities, amounts paid for medical expenses, and certain amounts paid out for “usury” — were subtracted from the total income, so as to produce a new number, called “taxable income”. After further calculations, the individual was able to determine and to render to the government an amount of “income tax”.

Throughout the year, during many instances when money exchanged hands, the government (by various means) was able to extract and confiscate portions of such moneys almost immediately as they were paid out. This was called “withholding”. This was far-sighted in that the government, through the remainder of the year, was able to use this money which technically still belonged to the individual “taxpayer”. This was clever also in that the amounts “withheld” during the year usually exceeded the amount actually owed by the taxpayer at the end of the year.

Thus, when the taxpayer filed his report with the government, he could usually expect to receive back some surplus as what was called a “refund”. And so the taxpayer was guarded, by a benevolent (?) government, against the danger of earning much money during a year, owing much money at the end of the same year, and having little or nothing left with which to pay.

But, invariably, every year many taxpayers wait until the 14th or even the 15th day of April to begin compiling their income and expenses for their annual report. This, despite the fact that — for most people — all the necessary information is available by the end of January!

What is there about people that, having 75 days to perform a relatively simple task, they will wait 74 days, or even 74 days and 21 hours, and then try to perform the same task under great pressure of time? The consequences: foolish errors that could have been easily avoided; frayed nerves; sleepless nights; late-evening rushes to the post office to beat the deadline; and delays in receiving refunds. Why do we so often make life more difficult than it need be?

The professional tax preparer sees such senseless procrastination close up, and multiplied a hundredfold. And he learns something about human nature: It is not pleasant to think about certain things, and many people do not think about them until they are absolutely forced to. This is silly, imprudent, and wasteful. And it happens all the time.

It is a favorite fantasy of the little child that, if he closes his eyes, difficult or uncomfortable facts or circumstances will disappear. The adult knows that reality is not changed simply by his refusal to contemplate it. But sometimes, somewhere deep in his subconscious, he deludes himself into thinking like that “little child”.

There is a time, a day, of ultimate reckoning, upon the return of Jesus Christ (Acts 17:31). We do not know (in fact, we are told that we cannot know) the actual day. But we do know it is coming. It is coming as surely as next April 15th. (And, when it comes, it will negate the effect of all subsequent April 15ths!) Shall we wait until the very day itself, and then rush around frantically trying to tie, up the loose ends of our lives? Or shall we use the available time… now… to prepare ourselves for the inevitable? And the right preparation… now… will make the inevitable so much more pleasant.

May the little “deadlines” of our lives remind us, as they roll around one by one, of the great “deadline” somewhere over the horizon.

Don’t wait until the last minute to prepare for the most important accounting you will ever know.

April 23: Deu 6:5, Ecc 2:17, John 19:2

Reading 1 – Deu 6:5

“Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” (Deu 6:5).

“O God, be thou exalted over my possessions. Nothing of earth’s treasures shall seem dear unto me if only Thou art glorified in my life. Be Thou exalted over my friendships. I am determined that Thou shalt be above all, though I must stand deserted and alone in the midst of the earth. Be Thou exalted above my comforts. Though it mean the loss of bodily comforts and the carrying of heavy crosses I shall keep my vow made this day before Thee. Be Thou exalted over my reputation. Make me ambitious to please Thee even if as a result I must sink into obscurity and my name be forgotten as a dream. Rise, O Lord, into Thy proper place of honor, above my ambitions, above my likes and dislikes, above my family, my health and even my life itself. Let me decrease that Thou mayest increase, let me sink that Thou mayest rise above. Ride forth upon me as [Thy Son] didst ride into Jerusalem mounted upon the humble little beast, a colt, the foal of an ass, and let me hear the children cry to Thee, ‘Hosanna in the highest’ ” (AW Tozer).

Reading 2 – Ecc 2:17

“I hated life, because the work that is done under the sun was grievous to me. All of it is meaningless, a chasing after the wind” (Ecc 2:17).

Here, in Ecclesiastes, may be the place where eastern philosophies come into closest intersection with the truth of the Bible. The Buddha, for example, stated: “True wisdom is a desire to be nothing, to be blown out, to enter into Nirvana”, that is, to become extinct, with the residue of life, in some sense, mingled into the Eternal. And so much of the religions that characterize the Far East breathe out this same spirit: the spirit of self-abnegation, or stoic calm and resigned acceptance of the inevitable — as though (which Zen Buddhism teaches us) “life and death are all the same”, and…

“Life is like a dewdrop,

Empty and fleeting;

My years are gone

And now, quivering and frail,

I must fade away.”

It IS true — so sadly true… if a man knows not God, or even if — knowing God — he lives a life as though he has no care for the Eternal and His priniciples and purpose.

True Christianity has much in common with this sort of pessimism. The only feature that makes it different is the hope of eternal life, beyond a life of frustration and futility and vanity. Without the empty tomb of Christ, and the heart-skipping hope it gives us, our lives would be not one whit beyond or above those of the countless millions who have gone on before us, into the oblivion of their own final resting places.

Reading 3 – John 19:2

“The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head” (John 19:2).

But the crown of thorns became a crown (stephanos) of victory. There is a crown of pride (Isa 28:3), which no one should wear. A crown of thorns (Mat 27:29), which no one can wear. And a crown of life (Jam 1:12), which everyone may wear.

“In making fun of the king of the Jews, they were mocking, not Christ, but their own Caesar, and every Caesar, king or ruler than ever had been, or will be. They were making human power itself a subject of scorn). Thenceforth, for all to see, thorns sprouted under every golden crown, and underneath every royal robe there was stricken and smitten flesh” (M Muggeridge). From that time forward, every power and every pretension of foolish mankind would appear ludicrous alongside the one true crown, the crown of thorns worn by Jesus. From that time forward, the only meaningful power would be that which originated in his suffering.

*****

“They clothed him in a purple robe” (v 2).

Was the robe at Christ’s trial purple (Mark 15:17; John 19:2,5) or scarlet (Mat 27:28)? Many commentators state that the two colors were often confused, and dismiss the matter casually as “purple, or scarlet”, as if to say it does not matter. Purple was the color of royalty, whereas the common Roman soldiers’ cloak was scarlet (so we are told). Perhaps the cloak initially thrown over Jesus’ shoulders was scarlet, belonging to one of the soldiers; but that it was further augmented by a purple scarf or cape, since the intention of his mockers was clearly to portray Jesus as king.

April 22: Deu 5:24, Ecc 1:18, John 17:3

Reading 1 – Deu 5:24

“And you said, ‘The LORD our God has shown us his glory and his majesty, and we have heard his voice from the fire. Today we have seen that a man can live even if God speaks with him’ ” (Deu 5:24).

“God’s great design in all His works is the manifestation of His own glory. Any aim less than this were unworthy of Himself. But how shall the glory of God be manifested to such fallen creatures as we are? Man’s eye is not single, he has ever a side glance towards his own honour, has too high an estimate of his own powers, and so is not qualified to behold the glory of the Lord. It is clear, then, that self must stand out of the way, that there may be room for God to be exalted; and this is the reason why He bringeth His people ofttimes into straits and difficulties, that, being made conscious of their own folly and weakness, they may be fitted to behold the majesty of God when He comes forth to work their deliverance. He whose life is one even and smooth path, will see but little of the glory of the Lord, for he has few occasions of self-emptying, and hence, but little fitness for being filled with the revelation of God. They who navigate little streams and shallow creeks, know but little of the God of tempests; but they who ‘do business in great waters,’ these see His ‘wonders in the deep.’ Among the huge Atlantic-waves of bereavement, poverty, temptation, and reproach, we learn the power of Jehovah, because we feel the littleness of man.

“Thank God, then, if you have been led by a rough road: it is this which has given you your experience of God’s greatness and lovingkindness. Your troubles have enriched you with a wealth of knowledge to be gained by no other means: your trials have been the cleft of the rock in which Jehovah has set you, as He did His servant Moses, that you might behold His glory as it passed by. Praise God that you have not been left to the darkness and ignorance which continued prosperity might have involved, but that in the great fight of affliction, you have been capacitated for the outshinings of His glory in His wonderful dealings with you” (CH Spurgeon).

Reading 2 – Ecc 1:18

“For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief” (Ecc 1:18).

The sorrow is in seeing more clearly all human failings and hopelessness. “Great scholars do but make of themselves great mourners” (Henry). Cp Jesus in Joh 11:35; Heb 4:15; Isa 53; Rom 12:15. Yet “wisdom” (proper wisdom) brings life also: Ecc 7:12.

With this agree also the words of Paul in 1Co 1:20: “Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?”

THE MORE KNOWLEDGE, THE MORE GRIEF: “Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth” (1Co 8:1). Knowledge of itself and for itself is sterile, and caters only to pride. Truly creation is marvelous, and natural curiosity is continually delighted with its infinite variety, but such knowledge of itself — though fascinating — is lifeless and vain.

Even the knowledge of the Scriptures — though this is the only important knowledge — pursued simply as knowledge, is empty and dead if it does not transform the character and purify the heart. In fact, knowledge and wisdom of themselves just open up the heart to a greater experience and discernment of grief and sorrow and the utter vanity of all earthly things.

How is this true, that the more we learn, the more we experience sorrow and grief? In several different ways:

The more we learn, the more we see of grief and sorrow in the world. Knowledge can be a heavy burden. The more we learn, the clearer we can think, and thus the more we see is madness and folly. The more we learn, the more clearly we may see how easily the things of life could go wrong. The more we learn, the more we see that nothing is permanent. The more we learn, the more we understand how little we really know. We may discover whole areas of knowledge to which we have not even given a single thought; we know nothing of these things and may never learn. The more we learn, the more we realize our inability to control the future.

This is the sad experience of all who are wise and understand. Jesus wept when he entered into the fellowship of Mary’s sufferings (John 11:35), because in that suffering he saw all the suffering of all humanity (cp Heb 4:15; Isa 53). But we may rejoice in the knowledge that the time of suffering will give way, at last, to the time of deliverance and glory (Psa 30:5; 126:5,6; Luk 6:21-23; Rev 21:4).

Reading 3 – John 17:3

“Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” (John 17:3).

Eternal life is not — literally — a present possession; this is a plain Bible teaching: Mat 19:29; 25:46; Mar 10:30; John 12:25; Rom 6:22; Gal 6:8; Tit 1:2; 3:7; Jud 1:21.

But… “eternal” life could be, either: (1) a life that never ends, or (2) a mortal life taken up with eternal things. If I spend my life thinking about eternal things, and living AS THOUGH I were in the presence of God, and AS THOUGH I were in His Kingdom already (because it is so real and meaningful to me, even now), and living in faith that that day is coming… then that is the sense — admittedly a limited and imperfect sense, but real nonetheless — in which I have an “eternal” life even now!

This is what may be called the present aspect of eternal life; and may help in appreciating the fulness of some passages in John’s writings: ie, John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47,54; 10:28; 17:3; 1Jo 5:11,13.

In this sense, “eternal life” may be thought of as a continuum: a widening experience, beginning in the present death-prone world, but leading on to a fulness of personal knowledge in the age to come.

“In Christ eternal life, the life of God Himself, was brought into the experience of men that they might know it and share in it themselves — in some measure here and now, perfectly and everlastingly in the day ‘when he shall appear’ and when by God’s grace ‘we shall be like him’… It is a truth to ponder upon, to weigh in the mind, to carry with one through all the complexities and uncertainties of this mortal life, to call to remembrance in moments of crisis and decision, to rest upon in the less dramatic routines of daily living” (Melva Purkis, “A Life of Jesus”).

*****

“On the other hand [after having stated the obvious Bible teachings about eternal life NOT being a present possession!: GB], what are we to make of those other passages which speak of eternal life in the here-and-now? We cannot, and must not, ignore them. Some endeavours have been made to reconcile them by saying that in these texts eternal life is being spoken of prospectively, so that when we are told we ‘have eternal life’ it really means ‘you will have’. You have become ‘heirs of eternal life’, and though not possessing it now, you will do so in the Kingdom Age. There are certain texts which could be said to support this view (eg Tit 3:7 and Heb 1:14), though they do not seem to me to completely answer our problem. However, I believe it is possible to see a balance which would take in both aspects of eternal life, without violating either the Biblical view of human nature or the rules of common sense interpretation. The Greek word for ‘eternal’ has the meaning of ‘belonging to the age’ (aionios). The basic idea is not so much the quantity as the quality of life. The Kingdom Age will be ushered in by the coming of Christ in glory, when the qualities of God’s world will be brought to the world of men in the Earth. The Kingdom of God will embody all the principles of His nature, and His will. The glory of that age will be the glory of God Himself, represented in the very person and presence of His Son. So that ‘the glory of God will fill the earth as waters cover the sea’ (Hab 2:14). To live in that glorious age the believers will be raised from the dead and receive the gift of immortality. This is ‘the promise which he has promised us’.

“In the present life, however, the aionian life, ‘eternal life’, is that new relationship with God into which the believer enters at baptism. It is, in this sense, living in anticipation of the life of the Kingdom NOW. The new life in Christ is ‘eternal life’ in terms of quality rather than quantity. By ‘eating my flesh and drinking my blood’, Jesus declares, ‘you have eternal life’. In other words, we become related to the quality of spiritual life which is even now seen in the Lord Jesus Christ, and which will one day be manifested in all the world in glory” (Len Richardson, “Balancing the Book” 82,83).

1. Preface

In the Preface to the second edition of Biblical Fellowship, (published by the author: see title page). the author has written: “What does require further investigation is the very concept of ‘first principles’: What precisely are ‘first principles’? (The author is well aware that “first principles” as used here is not really a Biblical term. The phrase “first principles” and the word “principles” have a specialized meaning when used in Hebrews 5:12 and 6:1: all that can be said with certainty is that they have to do with foundation principles of the Law of Moses.) And how can they be Biblically determined? These are important questions because, no matter how well Biblical principles of fellowship may be understood, there is still the question of where and how they should be applied. And being able to draw clearly defined and consistent lines between first principles and matters of lesser importance is crucial to the process. It is my hope to deal with these important but difficult matters in a further work.”

In offering Bible-based answers to these questions, this present work is something of a companion to that previous one. It is strongly recommended that both works be studied together.

In its present form, this work should be of particular interest to all Christadelphians and members of the Abrahamic Faith. But an abridged form (chapters 5 through 9, combined with chapter 11) could be useful as a simple statement (and proof) of the saving gospel — especially for the instruction of the young and of others who are interested in what the Bible teaches.

2. Introduction

So the question has often been asked, in discussions about fellowship matters: “How do we define first principles?”

One answer is obvious: “Why, of course, first principles are those Bible teachings listed in the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith.” (This should not imply that this present study has nothing to say about the Birmingham Unamended Statement of Faith. With the exception of BASF Clause XXIV (see chapter 14m), the two statements are practically identical. So, virtually all of the following analysis will equally apply to the BUSF.) However, the phrase “first principles” is used throughout this work as it is commonly used by Christadelphians: to mean fundamental, essential, or saving Bible Teaching. This answer may sound a bit like: ‘How dare anyone even suggest that our venerated Statement of Faith, which has been handed down to us by our forefathers, which has withstood more than 100 years of assaults by the wicked, is not completely satisfactory!’

But is this definition of first principles Biblical, or merely traditional? To define “first principles” Biblically, we must ask: “What makes some doctrines essential, while others are not?” To answer this question is to attempt to distinguish, on a Biblical basis, between:

matters of exposition on which a difference of opinion may — and should — be tolerated, and
those fundamentals of our faith where it is critical that there be a unity of view.

It may well be that, in attempting to define first principles, we confirm and validate the generally-accepted answer (‘the BASF, of course!’). But it may also be that Bible-based research may suggest reasonable improvements upon the BASF (and, to a similar degree, upon the BUSF also).

3. The Two Extremes, and Why They Must Be Rejected

How should we define first principles? The possible answers to such a question range from the grossly simplistic (and therefore unworkable) to the far-too-detailed (and also therefore unworkable).

On the one hand, it might be suggested that John 3:16, for example, is sufficient as to belief:

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

But such a response tells us only that belief in Christ is essential; it does not define or limit that belief in any practical way. All who profess to be Christians can — and do — accept John 3:16.

On the other hand, the statement that ‘all the Bible must be believed’, while commendable in one respect, proves totally impractical in application, and means essentially: ‘One must believe all that I believe — nothing more and nothing less — in order to be saved!’ Along this road lie the cults, with their dictatorial leaders.

Along this road also lies a perpetual restlessness of mind — in which satisfaction and comfort can never be attained, because they are tied to constantly changing goals.

A variation on one “extreme”

A variation on this second “extreme” is the idea — not so often stated in words as taken for granted in fellowship discussions — that the degree of knowledge possessed by the “fathers” should somehow be a standard for all. It is as if some of our elders were to say to themselves, ‘It is a pity to let all this learning…30 or 40 or 50 years worth…go to waste. Here’s what we’ll do: we’ll use our advanced knowledge [and whatever we can find in the “pioneer” writings, whether relevant to first principles or not!] to dictate fellowship policy to all those who know less or have less experience in the Truth than we!’

But the Bible plainly speaks of those who are “newborn babes”, still “unskilled in the word of righteousness”, still in need of “milk” rather than strong meat — but for all this nonetheless “in Christ”, “holy brethren”, and “partakers of the heavenly calling” (cf. esp. 1 Cor. 3; Heb. 3; 5; 1 Pet. 1). Some such “babes” were baptized after less than 24 hours of instruction in the faith, e.g., the jailer at Philippi (Acts 16:32,33) and at least some of the 3,000 Pentecost converts (2:38-41) and the Samaritans (8:12). So, clearly, applying a “Statement of Faith” or a “test of fellowship” that would effectively exclude some such “babes” is going too far in our demands upon believers. (For this point, as well as others, the present writer is indebted to A.H. Zilmer, author in 1925 of a privately circulated manuscript entitled “What is Fundamental?”)

Finding middle ground

Either extreme, therefore, would be chaotic in its application to any fellowship situation. Somewhere in the middle, between “almost nothing” and “almost everything”, right-thinking believers must draw lines to divide essential beliefs from non-essential. Is such a task impossible? Is there no Scriptural guide to follow? Can we not, in Robert Roberts’ words, know “how far we ought to go and where we ought to stop…in our demands on fellow-believers”?

He continues:

“[Men of God] are afraid on the one hand of compromising the truth in fellowship; and on the other, of sinning against the weaker members of the body of Christ. The only end there can be to this embarrassment is found in the discrimination between true principles and uncertain details that do not overthrow them.” (“True Principles and Uncertain Details”, The Christadelphian, May 1898, Vol. 35, No. 407, p. 182)

Brother Roberts then proceeds with some examples both of what he calls “general principles” and what he calls “uncertain details”, to good effect. And the article cited above is still well worth reading. But he does not attempt to describe any characteristics or give any evidence which would make a doctrine essential for salvation or fellowship, or to describe any process of differentiation between essentials and non-essentials. And, so far as can be determined, this task has never been properly undertaken in the 100 years since.

So what are the first principles? And how can we identify them as such? This study will attempt to answer both questions, insofar as the Bible provides the answers. And it will also compare the results with the most common Christadelphian statement of faith, the BASF (and with its closest variant, specifically, the BUSF), and answer a further question: “Does our statement go too far, or not far enough, in defining essential doctrine?”

4. A Simple, but Necessary, Point

Before proceeding, then, a rather simple but necessary point needs to be made. It is Scripturally provable, and unanimously held by Christadelphians (insofar as the writer knows), that true belief must precede true baptism (Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:36-42; 8:4-12,26-39; 16:13-15,23-34; 18:4-11; etc.).

Therefore, we may assume that the doctrines essential for salvation are the same doctrines which are essential for Scriptural baptism, no more and no less. Furthermore, we shall assume that the purpose of what we today call a “statement of faith” should not be to define all that might profitably be believed, but rather to define only what should be believed as a prerequisite for baptism and admission to fellowship (again, no more and no less).

Therefore, ideally, these three should be perfectly equivalent:

doctrines essential to salvation,
doctrines to be believed before baptism, and
a (Biblical) “statement of faith”.

To continue: If we can find in the Bible either a “statement of faith” (in the words of Scripture), or if we can determine the doctrines that were required to be believed before being baptized, then we shall have given a Biblical answer (not merely an intuitive or subjective or traditional answer) to the question: “How should we define first principles?”