Christadelphian Controversies 

Christadelphia is more of a movement than a denomination. There is no head office, nor agreed system of power brokering whereby doctrine or practice is pronounced and enforced from some central point. It is inevitable that the local autonomy practiced by individual churches is going to mean that some others will not agree with them, perhaps to the point of effectively ceasing fellowship with each other- be it formally or informally. There is now a huge range of opinion within the movement, and yet the cardinal points of doctrine listed here appear to be commonly held and preached by all bearing the name Christadelphian.

Issues over which there are marked differences of opinion include the following:

• The role of women: some allow women to speak and play an equal role in church meetings, others do not
• Head coverings for women: some require these, others do not
• Prophecy: some insist on the continuous historic line of interpretation, others do not; see here
• Related to this is the question of whether the 'Millennium' will be a literal 1000 year reign or not; see here
• Creation or evolution; some insist upon rejecting anything that appears to accept evolution, whilst others describe themselves as theistic evolutionists; see here
• Is Genesis 1 to be read literally or otherwise? See here
• Was Noah's flood local or global? See here
• Should the Lord's table be closed or open to all? See here
• What level of knowledge is required before baptism; or is a simple confession of faith in Jesus Christ sufficient? See here
• Is human nature sinful of itself, or is committed sin our only moral problem? Did the Lord Jesus sacrifice to atone for His own nature, or purely for our sins?
• Is abortion permissible? See here
• When, if ever, is it permissible to divorce and remarry? Is remarriage adultery? See here