10AR15-05
( - previous issue - )
Apologia Report 15:5 (1,010)
February 10, 2010
Subject: Geisler and Rhodes respond to CRI's Local Church defense
In this issue:
CULTURE - a critique of Focus on the Family's Truth Project in
Christian Scholar's Review
FEMINISM - feminist views of Jesus grouped in three main categories, distinctions made between evangelical feminists
LIVING STREAM MINISTRY/LOCAL CHURCH - Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes respond to Christian Research Journal's recent defense of LSM
---
CULTURE
"Learning in a Time of (Cultural) War: Indoctrination in Focus on the Family's The Truth Project" by Randal Rauser, associate professor of historical theology at Taylor Seminary, Edmonton and author of Finding God in the Shack [1]. Rauser attempts a majority view approach as he begins: "In a world of religious marketing, a growing number of evangelicals have branded themselves as truth defenders. While one may think that 'truth defender' is poor branding in a postmodern culture, there are some signs that concern for truth may actually be coming back in vogue. ... I would propose that the main reason for the interest arises from a growing cultural weariness of the spin, half-truths, and outright lies that seem to pervade our culture. But if truth is becoming a hot commodity once again, why does evangelical truth branding remain more likely to repel than attract the wider culture? The most basic reason may be that the wider culture does not believe evangelicals are especially interested in the truth. ...
"[T]here is a widespread suspicion that evangelicals are more
concerned with furthering a particular political, social agenda than
with the truth per se."
The abstract reads: "Randal Rauser argues that Focus on the
Family's popular lay-worldview curriculum entitled The Truth Project [www.thetruthproject.org] fails to provide a true Christian worldview education, and instead evinces the marks of indoctrination. He begins with the core problem that the curriculum encourages simplistic binary categories which distort the issues and inhibit the student from developing skills of critical evaluation. As a result of this binary opposition, the curriculum distorts the complexity of issues, fails to understand and fairly evaluate alternative positions, and misrepresents the complexities of and difficulties with the Christian worldview. He closes by considering how the rhetoric of a culture war is used to justify simplistic binary categories." Christian Scholar's Review, 34:1 - 2009, pp75-90.
Our own Robert Velarde, a former Truth Project editor, responds:
"The Truth Project was adapted from a two-semester seminary course on the Christian worldview and edited down to a 13-hour video presentation for laypeople. Obviously, whenever detailed academic content is distilled like this, nuances that scholars revel in are not as pronounced as they could be. Focus had no intention of 'indoctrinating' anyone with The Truth Project, but, rather, sought to equip laypeople to understand and interact with common ideas opposed to Christianity (such as metaphysical naturalism) and to communicate basic Christian worldview principles in an engaging way."
---
FEMINISM
Jesus and the Feminists: Who Do They Say That He Is? by Margaret Elizabeth Kostenberger [2] -- reviewer Esther Yue L. Ng explains: "Kostenberger surveys different feminist views of Jesus grouped under three main categories: (1) radical feminists who reject Christianity wholesale due to its perceived 'patriarchy'; (2) reformist feminists who opt to stay within the Christian tradition to reform it; and (3) evangelical feminist who emphasize the full equality of men and women while professing commitment to scriptural inspiration and authority."
Kostenberger "asserts that ... 'divergent understandings of Jesus
found among feminists ... raise concerns regarding the viability of
feminism at large. ... The evidence shows that the feminist quest for self-fulfillment and self-realization leads to a distortion of the
message of the Bible.'"
She also "distinguishes between evangelical feminists who argue for a 'developmental hermeneutic' from those who claim that God's
intentions are egalitarian from the beginning. ...
"Given the broad scope of the book, it is perhaps inevitable that
some feminists or movements receive an inadequate treatment." Ng mentions only one feminist and one movement in particular: While "Elisabeth Schussler Fiorenza features prominently in Kostenberger's book," Ng makes significant additional remarks. She also briefly clarifies a concern over Third Wave feminism as expressed by Kostenberger.
For readers who "may wish for clarification or nuancing on a number of matters," Ng recommends Evangelical Feminism, by Pamela D.H. Cochran [3], and Gospel Women, by Richard Bauckham [4]. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 52:3 - 2009, pp605-607.
---
LIVING STREAM MINISTRY/LOCAL CHURCH
"A Response to the Christian Research Journal's Recent Defense of the 'Local Church' Movement" by Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes -- refers to the most recent issue of CRI's magazine (32:6 - 2009) which is almost entirely devoted to a defense of the Living Stream Ministry/Local Church (LC) movement founded by Witness Lee.
After summarizing the main controversies provoked by the LC
throughout its history in America, the bulk of the paper evaluates CRI's defense of the LC. Early on, the authors list five "controversial and contradictory" theological statements by Lee and his movement. Geisler and Rhodes find it incredible that "CRI admits, 'to be sure, Lee should have stated his concern more carefully.' And 'the LC certainly could have and should have taken greater care to explain the nuances of their controversial teachings....'"
A discussion of "apparently unorthodox statements" is followed with brief examples of the LC's exclusivism and rejection of all other Christian bodies. Much attention is given to the contradictory nature of LC theological statements.
In a section titled "A Response to the CRI Arguments for the LC," the authors focus at length on the doctrine of coinherence. "CRI attempts to exonerate the LC from heresy on the Trinity by invoking the doctrine of coinherence in God. They claim that this means that it is legitimate to speak of one Person of the Trinity as being the other Person because there is an 'interpenetration [of] one another.' However, this, in our view, is a serious misunderstanding of coinherence."
The authors respond to the LC use of Scripture in its defense of
the Trinity (Isaiah 9:6, 2 Corinthians 3:17, and John 14:10) and the
LC distinction between the Ontological Trinity and the Economic
Trinity. They then observe that "the LC makes a distinction between the 'essential Trinity' and the 'economic Trinity.' ...
"Ultimately, the problems for the LC view here (and CRI apologists) are that: 1) in the 'essential Trinity' they either a) have a traditional modalistic heresy of not affirming three really distinct
Persons in God, or else b) they have a contradiction (wherein God is both one Person and not one person but three distinct persons), and 2) in the 'economical Trinity' they have a heresy, constituting a new sub-category of modalism - what we might call operational modalism."
Next are criticisms that: "Witness Lee used a traditional
modalistic analogy for the Trinity...."; "the LC holds to a
progressive form of modalism in which the one God expresses Himself in three stages or successive steps"; and "Lee did not hesitate to distinguish his view from the orthodox view of the Trinity...."
The authors also express their concern that "CRI apologists attempt to justify Witness Lee and the LC by defending the belief in 'twofold truth.'" They then explain how such reasoning is contradictory.
Geisler and Rhodes note that CRI objects to criticism of the LC
which allegedly involves "'imprecise' statements that could possibly be construed as including the LC and that 'imprecise allegations can still result in character assassination and should therefore be considered defamatory.'" This is quite ironic given that the theological imprecision of the LC itself lies at the root of the
controversy.
The conclusion notes unanswered concerns over the suspicious
"refusal to use the orthodox statement on the Trinity which speaks of three distinct 'Persons'...." as noted in the LC theological journal Affirmation and Critique. <www.tinyurl.com/y97qshh>
-------
SOURCES: Monographs
1 - Finding God in The Shack, by Randal Rauser (Authentic, 2009, paperback, 160 pages) <www.tinyurl.com/yav7z3j>
Note: Apparently, Roger Olsen also wrote a book by the same name which was released two days before Rauser's!
Finding God in the Shack: Seeking Truth in a Story of Evil and
Redemption, by Roger E. Olson (IVP, 2009, paperback, 160 pages) <www.tinyurl.com/ya5srpp>
2 - Jesus and the Feminists: Who Do They Say That He Is? by Margaret Elizabeth Kostenberger (Crossway, 2008, paperback, 256 pages) <www.tinyurl.com/ygou86k>
3 - Evangelical Feminism: A History, by Pamela D.H. Cochran (New York Univ Prs, 2004, paperback, 245 pages) <www.tinyurl.com/ydp95mu>
4 - Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels, by Richard Bauckham (Eerdmans, 2002, paperback, 364 pages)
--------
( - next issue - )