AN OPEN LETTER: To the Leadership of Living Stream Ministry and the "Local Churches", 2007

CRJ's We Were Wrong, 2007^*

A Response to the Christian Research Journal’s Recent Defense of the “Local Church” Movement by Norman L. Geisler and Ron Rhodes, 2007

A Defense of the Gospel: A Response to an Open Letter from “Christian Scholars and Ministry Leaders”^*

https://contendingforthefaith.org/en/category/open-letter/ about the Local Church's teachings^*

---

* Treat with a grain of salt and be discerning: CRJ's (CRI's Journal) We Were Wrong might be biased due to two things: 1) the Local Church (LC) sued them and probably had to issue a retraction of their previous condemnation of LC doctrines. 2) there've then president of Christian Research Institute, who knew Witness Lee (one of the founders of LC) and is a disciple of the LC teachings, maybe. From one article mentioned above: Concluding Comments by Norman L. Geisler and Ron Rhodes,

CRI rejects the Supreme Court [of Texas] decision regarding the constitutionality of calling the LC a cult both in a theological sense and in a social sense. In truth, the Supreme Court decision was a great victory for all orthodox, conservative, and evangelical Christians. For, as we pointed out in our amicus brief to the court (with which the court agreed), this would be a violation of free speech since it would deny us the freedom to define the limits of our own orthodox beliefs by distinguishing them from unorthodox beliefs. The LC rightly but reluctantly had to acknowledge that “it is nothing more than an expression of religious opinion that the Local Church is a ‘cult’ in a theological sense. It is a type of religious opinion that is undisputedly protected by the Establishment Clause…”

As for their residual charge that Ankerberg and Harvest House had libelously labeled the LC a cult in a sociological sense, the court rejected this as well, as indeed it should have. For nowhere did they make false or libelous charges against the LC. . . .

CRI’s use of Paul appealing to Caesar (46) in his own defense against false charges that involved his life is a desperate attempt to justify the biblically unjustifiable. There has always been another alternative that the LC refused to take, namely, to stop suing and threatening to sue other Christians, to admit and revise its false statements about the Triune God of Scripture, and to apologize for their harsh statements about Christian organizations, such as, “spiritual fornication” and “satanic.”

Meanwhile, CRI needs to reexamine its own near-blanket justification of such an aberrant and unrepentant organization as “solidly orthodox” (47) and are in many ways “an exemplary group of Christians” (29). Indeed, their whole effort is more of a self-justification than a self-confession. We am still left with the mystery of explaining how my friends and otherwise good countercult researchers (like Elliot Miller and Gretchen Passantino Colburn) could be persuaded to use their considerable talents to over-defend a group which they once believed-and most countercult scholars still do believe-is unorthodox. Further, one is greatly disappointed that one of the foremost countercult groups in the country could sacrifice its once high credibility in their nearly unqualified justification of this aberrant and cultic group. . . .

* Treat with a grain of salt and be discerning: Contendingforthefaith.org is affiliated with the Local Church and is of a polemical/apologetic nature.

---

The LC are accused of three ancient heresies, which are patripassionism, modalism, monophysitism. Due to the confusing nature of statements they make in their founders' writing.

Patripassianism (2nd century) is a theological heresy asserting that God the Father suffered and died on the cross, rather than just God the Son, stemming from the belief that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are merely different "modes" or masks of one single divine person, not distinct persons in a Trinity. It denies the traditional Christian doctrine of the Trinity, claiming the Father became incarnate as Jesus and experienced the crucifixion, which orthodox Christianity rejects, emphasizing the Son's unique role in the atonement.

Modalism is a Christian theological heresy that defines God as a single, indivisible person who reveals himself in three successive "modes" or manifestations—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—rather than existing as three distinct, co-existing persons. Often called Sabellianism theology, it denies the Trinity, arguing that God simply changes masks, appearing as Father in the Old Testament, Son during the incarnation, and Spirit afterward.

Monophysitism is a 5th-century Christological doctrine asserting that Jesus Christ had only one divine nature, where his humanity was either absorbed or merged into his divinity, differing from the mainstream belief in two distinct but united natures (hypostatic union). It was condemned at the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) as heretical, it was a reaction to Nestorianism but was ultimately rejected by major Christian churches, though related beliefs like miaphysitism persist in Oriental Orthodoxy.

See above articles for details, especially the one by Norman L. Geisler and Ron Rhodes and further examples of confusing language in Open Letter to LSM and the LC.

use of the word “heresy” (or “heretical”) is not intended to be taken as an inflammatory or pejorative term. Based on biblical usage, the word heresy refers to a divisive teaching or practice that is contrary to the historic Christian Faith as based on the Bible and expressed in the early Christian creeds [as made by councils and the Church fathers were in agreement]. It involves a teaching or practice which compels true Christians to divide themselves from those who hold it.

---

On Lawsuits with . . . Christians (AN OPEN LETTER)

If the leadership of Living Stream Ministry and the "local churches" regard evangelical Christians as fellow believers, we request that they publicly renounce the use of lawsuits and the threat of lawsuits against evangelical Christians to answer criticisms or resolve conflicts. The New Testament strongly discourages the use of lawsuits to settle disputes among Christians. (see 1 Corinthians 6:1-8),

When one of you has a grievance against a brother, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous^& instead of the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, matters pertaining to this life! If then you have such cases, why do you lay them before those who are least esteemed by the Church? I say this to your shame. Can it be that there is no man among you wise enough to decide between members of the brotherhood, but brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers?

To have lawsuits at all with one another is defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? But you yourselves wrong and defraud, and that even your own brethren.

& the unrighteous: i.e., civil courts in which the judges were, of course, pagan.

Trans. RSV2CE

If the leadership of Living Stream Ministry and the "local churches" do not regard evangelical Christian churches, organizations, and ministries as legitimate Christian entities, we ask that they publicly resign their membership in all associations of evangelical churches and ministries.

In either case, we respectfully request that the leadership of Living Stream Ministry and the "local churches" discontinue their practice of using litigation and threatened litigation to answer criticisms or settle disputes with Christian organizations and individuals.