All Posts in Category "Geisler and Rhodes"

An index to responses written by members of the local churches to criticisms of the churches and of the ministry of Witness Lee.

A series of articles addressing various deviations from biblical truth and false and hypocritical statements in an article posted on the Internet by Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes. That article attacked the “We Were Wrong” issue of the Christian Research Journal and defended a 2007 open letter.

The articles on this site responding to criticisms of the local churches and the ministry of Witness Lee are centered around three primary issues—the Trinity, God’s complete salvation, and the practical expression of the church. The first round of responses were published in the 1970s in response to the criticisms of inexperienced apologists who had a limited understanding of biblical truth and even less of the ministry of Witness Lee. After an interim in which many additional resources presenting Witness Lee’s teachings were published, beginning from 1999 Harvest House Publishers and others associated with that company raised the same issues again, essentially repeating those earlier accusations without regard to the responses or other writings already published. Those renewed criticisms called forth a second round of responses.

An examination of whether the historic Christian creeds or the Bible should be the ultimate yardstick of truth in light of criticism from Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes.

While it is common (and not wrong) to refer to the Three of the Divine Trinity as three “persons,” the term persons is problematic because it can lead to misunderstanding. This article examines whether Norman Geisler was justified in criticizing a statement of faith in the journal Affirmation & Critique because it did not explicitly use the word persons in its definition of the Trinity.

In a single paragraph in which Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes errantly accused Witness Lee and the local churches of teaching the heresy of patripassianism, they misattributed and misrepresented three quotes.

This article refutes the false accusation of Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes that the local churches teach patripassianism. It shows their error in asserting that affirming the involvement of the Father in the Son’s work is equivalent to of patripassianism and presents both the biblical record and a number of respected scholars that support the principle of the co-working of the Father and the Son (see also Scholars Who Affirm the Working Together of the Three of the Divine Trinity).

Excerpts from respected scholars who affirm that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit all work together and that the work of any of the Three involves the other Two.

Second Corinthians 3:17 says plainly, “And the Lord is the Spirit.” Many respected scholars recognize that “the Lord” in this verse refers to our Lord Jesus Christ. However, Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes argue otherwise. This article shows their error. (See also Scholars and Bible Teachers Who Affirm That the Lord is the Spirit).

Isaiah 9:6 is a prophecy concerning the coming Messiah, Jesus Christ, who through incarnation is the Child born to us, yet the mighty God, and the Son given to us who is called “Eternal Father.” Witness Lee affirmed the perspicuous meaning of this verse based on the principle of coinherence, that is, the mutual indwelling of the Divine Trinity. For this, Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes wrongly accused Witness Lee of heresy. This article shows their error.

A list of excerpts from respected scholars who affirm that 2 Corinthians 3:17, 1 Corinthians 15:45, and other verses identify the Lord Jesus Christ with the Spirit.

Norman Geisler criticized an article by Ron Kangas in which the latter said, “God is infinite, and man is finite, yet in Christ the two became one.” In his criticism Geisler both misrepresents what Ron Kangas said and deviates from the biblical revelation of both the Person of Christ and of the Divine Trinity.

A list of excerpts from respected scholars who affirm the biblical revelation that God became incarnated in Christ, joining the infinite God with finite man.

The Twofoldness of Divine Truth is a classic study by the British Bible teacher Robert Govett. Norman Geisler misattributed the principle Govett articulated, calling in “[Witness] Lee’s mysterious doctrine” and wrongly claimed that it contradicts a philosophical principle called “the law of noncontradiction.” This article sketches the scope of his error and links to both Govett’s original booklet and a more detailed examination of the application of Govett’s teaching in an Affirmation & Critique article by Ron Kangas.

In an article in the journal Affirmation & Critique Ron Kangas applies the principle set forth in Robert Govett’s The Twofoldness of Divine Truth to central truths in the Bible. These truths include salvation, Christ indwelling the believers and being at the right hand of God, Christ being both the only begotten and the firstborn Son, Christ having a body of flesh and bones yet also being the life-giving Spirit to indwell His believers, God being immutable yet processed and consummated in His economy, etc.

In an attempt to scandalize fellow believers, Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes strung together a series of quote fragments in a way that completely misrepresented Witness Lee’s biblical critique of the deviations from the biblical patternof the system of organized Christianity that has developed over the centuries. This article examines the true nature and content of that critique as well as the attitude of Witness Lee and the local churches toward fellow believers in Christ.

This article exposes the way Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes used a dishonest and hypocritical apologetic method to attack Witness Lee’s biblically-based criticisms of the Roman Catholic Church.

Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes castigated Witness Lee for criticizing the Roman Catholic Church when they and apologists with whom they associate have made similar and even more severe statements concerning it.

A list of biblical critiques of scholars and Bible teachers whose teachings parallel Witness Lee’s expositions concerning the parable of the mustard seed in Matthew 13:31-32; the parable of the woman, the leaven, and the fine flour in Matthew 13:33-35; the identity of Thyatira and Jezebel in Revelation 2:18-29; and the prophetic identity of Babylon the Great in chapters 16 through 18 of Revelation. At the end of the list are biographical sketches of the authors cited.

An evaluation of the accusation that the local churches are “litigious.” That accusation was based on false claims of legal threats with respect to Christian Research Institute, James Bjornstad and Regal Books, Salem Kirban, Jerram Barrs and InterVarsity Press, and Moody Press. The local churches’ application of an appropriate standard for considering legal action is evident also in dealings with Jesus People USA and Geisler and Rhodes themselves. While Geisler and Rhodes condemn the local churches for their appeals to the courts, they do not criticize those who have borne false witness against us and have, in fact, joined with them in propagating falsehoods.

Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes repeated a falsehood that is accepted as axiomatic among some countercult apologists, namely, that the local churches drove SCP into bankruptcy. From source documents this article looks at the actual causes and motivating factors behind SCP’s bankruptcy declaration.

An examination of how Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes misrepresented the subject and scope of the libel lawsuit over the Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions, the content of that book, and of the court’s decision in the case.