The Christadelphians and Knowledge
Most Christadelphians would strongly disagree that their faith is Gnostic. Yet this depends entirely on how one defines Gnosticism. There are at least two forms of gnosis: Mythological Gnosis and Non-Mythological Gnosis. Mythological Gnosis involves elaborate cosmologies, emanations, aeons, and mythic narratives about divine realms. Non-Mythological Gnosis, however, centers upon knowledge—specifically saving knowledge—without necessarily adopting mythological frameworks.
I would class the Christadelphians as a gnostic group which does not believe in Mythological Gnosis.
I have studied Christadelphian teachings since 2006 and was baptized in 2009. There is a great emphasis on knowledge in Christadelphian meetings. Bible study, doctrinal precision, and careful interpretation are central. The culture of the ecclesia revolves around correct understanding. The assumption is clear: right belief matters eternally.
Around 2011 I began to study the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the Nag Hammadi Library. After studying certain Gnostic groups, particularly the Valentinians, I came to the conclusion that Christadelphians share some structural understandings with them—though not their mythology.
What is Gnosticism? Gnostics considered the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the remote supreme divine being; esoteric knowledge (gnosis) of whom enabled the redemption of the human spirit. Knowledge was not merely intellectual—it was transformative and salvific.
Christadelphians likewise believe that there is a process based around knowledge and work that leads to salvation. One must possess knowledge of what the Bible teaches if one would be saved. As stated in the Christadelphian Messenger:
“One must also possess knowledge of what the Bible teaches if one would be saved” (Christadelphian Messenger, No. 4, “The One Hope of Everlasting Salvation”; No. 47, “Christendom Creeds not Christianity,” p. 1; No. 11, “A Refuge from the Judgment Storm,” p. 4).
Christadelphians believe the Correct Knowledge (ἐπίγνωσις, εως, ἡ, epignósis) of the Gospel is essential for salvation. This concept of ἐπίγνωσις—full, precise knowledge—mirrors the Gnostic insistence that ignorance is the fundamental human problem. Christadelphians call their version of this teaching “Resurrectional Responsibility.” It is summarized in Bible Basics by Duncan Heaster:
Knowledge of God's Word brings responsibility to Him.
Only the responsible will be resurrected and judged.
Those who do not know the true God will therefore remain dead like the animals.
This teaching establishes a sharp distinction between the knowing and the unknowing. Knowledge creates accountability; ignorance results in remaining in the grave. The structure is strikingly similar to certain Gnostic frameworks in which awakening through knowledge separates the enlightened from the ignorant masses.
The Christadelphian Statement of Faith, formally known as the Birmingham Amended Statement of Faith (BASF), reinforces this epistemological foundation. The entire Christadelphian Statement of Faith includes “the truth to be received,” “the commandments of Christ,” and “the doctrines to be rejected.”
In Clause 24 of the “truth to be received,” we read:
“That at the appearing of Christ prior to the establishment of the Kingdom, the responsible (namely, those who know the revealed will of God, and have been called upon to submit to it), dead and living -- obedient and disobedient -- will be summoned before his judgment seat ‘to be judged according to their works,’ and ‘receive in body according to what they have done, whether it be good or bad.’
2 Cor. 5:10; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rom. 2:5-6, 16; 14:10-12; 1 Cor. 4:5; Rev. 11:18.”
The phrase “those who know the revealed will of God” is crucial. Responsibility is grounded in knowledge. The part underlined in the historical development of the clause was inserted to rule out the belief that baptism made a person responsible rather than knowledge. Thus, knowledge—not ritual—is determinative.
In Clause 22 under “Doctrines to be Rejected,” we read:
“22. We reject the doctrine - that those without knowledge - through personal choice, immaturity, or lack of mental capacity - will be saved.
23. We reject the doctrine - that man can be saved by morality or sincerity, without the Gospel.
24. We reject the doctrine - that the Gospel alone will save, without obedience to Christ's commandments.”
These rejections further define the epistemological boundary. Salvation is not through sincerity. It is not through morality alone. It is not through ignorance. It requires knowledge of the Gospel and obedience flowing from that knowledge. In this sense, ignorance excludes; knowledge includes.
Christadelphians also possess a distinct dualism. There are two basic doctrines of the Bible, as expressed in their literature:
“There are two basic doctrines of the Bible: (a) The nature of flesh; and (b) the spirit manifestation of God. The former teaches us what we are, and what we must guard against; the latter outlines what we can become, and what we must aim for.”
This dual structure resembles certain Gnostic contrasts, though without mythological cosmology. Flesh represents what humanity presently is; spirit manifestation represents what humanity may become.
Another striking quotation reads:
“Men were not ushered into being for the purpose of being saved or lost! God manifestation not human salvation was the great purpose of the Eternal Spirit. The salvation of a multitude is incidental to the manifestation, but was not the end proposed. The Eternal Spirit intended to enthrone Himself on the earth, and in so doing, to develop a Divine family from among men, every one of whom shall be Spirit, because born of the Spirit, and that this family shall be large enough to fill the earth, when perfected, to the entire exclusion of flesh and blood (1 Cor. 15:28).”
Here the purpose of existence is not merely individual redemption but participation in divine manifestation. Salvation is subordinated to a larger revelatory process. This parallels Valentinian emphasis on participation in divine fullness—though again, without mythological aeons.
Christadelphians also distinguish between classes of believers. As written:
“into two classes the one the fellowservants, and the other the brethren, of the deceased souls. The brethren are fellowservants, but all the fellowservants were not brethren -- even as Christadelphians are christians, but all christians so-called are not Christadelphians.”
This differentiation resembles the Valentinian distinction between categories of people—though Christadelphians define theirs ecclesially rather than cosmologically. There is an inner body defined by shared doctrine and knowledge.
For these reasons, I describe myself as:
“I am a Gnostic Christadelphian.”
You may say that this is, is a contradiction if ever I've heard one. That's like saying “I'm a Muslim Catholic” or “I'm a Buddhist Mormon”.
But it is a self-definition and self-designation. It recognizes that Gnosis need not require mythological cosmology. It can simply denote the conviction that knowledge—ἐπίγνωσις—is essential for salvation. Christadelphians do not teach emanations or mythic divine hierarchies. They do not embrace Mythological Gnosis. Yet they place extraordinary emphasis on knowledge as salvific, boundary-defining, and responsibility-creating.
Therefore, the label “Gnostic Christadelphian” defies conventional categorization, yet accurately reflects a structural similarity: salvation is inseparable from knowledge.
It is very good to defy the laws of labels and be who you are.
