J. Gordon Melton

[IDon'tKnow]

I noticed that Melton the lead apologist for LSM during the godmen trial, is also known for defending groups such as Aum Shinrikyo, the Family (Children of God), People's temple, and Scientology. In addition it would also seem that they're might be a certain level of colusion between him and said groups, (they ask him for help, he helps them). All of this makes him look like a somewhat unsavoury person.

With that question in mind I was wondering if anybody knew under what circumstances, Melton was brought into help LSM during the godmen situation (did he approach LSM or the other way around)? also what was history like back then?

I ask this not because I believe that the mindbender/godmen are true (I haven't read them, but I do get the impression that they are mostly baseless.) I was simply wondering whether questionable methods were used to disprove them (besides the courts of course).

Also I have no interest in vampirism or whether or not someone is an expert in it.

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

I have never read this book, just found it on-line (thought it was banned or recalled after LSM's successful lawsuit). I have no idea what was exposed in it's pages, or whether it was balanced or fair. Anyone here ever read it and do a review? Just curious.

...this one's still available too, although of course neither are still in print. Better watch out Amazon.com, if LSM's league of Prosecuting Attorneys, AKA "DCP" learns of this, it'll be one quick trip to the Supreme Court for you!

Review of either book anyone?

Ray

[Cal]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Review of either book anyone?

They were both fairly unscholarly works. I think in one of them they kept misspelling "biblical." I'm not sure which one.

But both of them got some things right and other things wrong. On the other hand, thinking back there were some things they said that I dismissed that now sort of made sense.

One example, and I know this is vague, because I can't even remember which book it was from. But I remember an account of the writer visiting an LC meeting and listening to the popcorn testimonies and other declarations and being troubled by the unusual tone and cadence of them. What was it?, he asked. Finally it came to him. Everyone sounded Chinese, even though they were largely white Americans!

I remember at the time I thought the guy was crazy. But now I think there was something to it. I think we had picked up the way the Chinese saints would speak very rapidly and then end on a very high, extended note. "Di-di-di-di-di-di-deeeeeeeeeee!" Everyone did it. Though I don't know what they sound like now.

[UntoHim]

Something to keep in mind is that both of these books were produced in th 70s at a time when The Local Church was somewhat secretive and extremely uncooperative towards all outsiders (Cult busters or no). The authors were forced to fill in a lot of blanks when it came to writing about the teachings and practices. So I don't think the "unscholarly" term applies as much as incomplete and or not fully accurate....and considering who they were dealing with it's a wonder they got as much information as they did. Not giving excuses, but these books need to be placed within the context of the time they were produced. Nevertheless, in the case of the Mindbenders, I don't think the Local Church should have been included with non-Christian cults such as the Unification Church and Hare Krishna, and in the case of The God-Men, I think the book cover played upon any prejudices the American public may have against Asian believers.

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Originally Posted by Igzy

One example, and I know this is vague, because I can't even remember which book it was from. But I remember an account of the writer visiting an LC meeting and listening to the popcorn testimonies and other declarations and being troubled by the unusual tone and cadence of them. What was it?, he asked. Finally it came to him. Everyone sounded Chinese, even though they were largely white Americans!

I remember at the time I thought the guy was crazy. But now I think there was something to it. I think we had picked up the way the Chinese saints would speak very rapidly and then end on a very high, extended note. "Di-di-di-di-di-di-deeeeeeeeeee!" Everyone did it. Though I don't know what they sound like now.

Interesting observation; I have to confess I've heard it too. I mean, the "Chinese saints" in our church largely didn't participate at all.... only two ever stood to share anything, and the most of them sat quietly by themselves. Most of the caucasian folks in our locality admitted that, though they'd been meeting with the chinese people for years, they didn't even know their names... yet Chinese pronunciations seemed to abound. The way many of the caucasians would call on the Lord, wish I had it recorded, but I'm sure you've heard it "OOOOOOOOOOOHHHHH LOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHDDDDDD JEEEEEEEEEE/ZUSSSSS" That "Jesus" was often GEE-ZUS, with such a hard Chinese "Z" for the second syllable. Weird habit. The "R" in Lord was often slurred too, just like the Chinese might say it. Learned worship, done by rote, I suppose.

Ray

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Something to keep in mind is that both of these books were produced in th 70s at a time when The Local Church was somewhat secretive and extremely uncooperative towards all outsiders (Cult busters or no). The authors were forced to fill in a lot of blanks when it came to writing about the teachings and practices. So I don't think the "unscholarly" term applies as much as incomplete and or not fully accurate....and considering who they were dealing with it's a wonder they got as much information as they did.

I brought these books forward only because, in the brief time I affiliated with the LRC, there were a few "divisive" elements that were quarantined:

1) Titus Chu and the "Great Lakes saints". These became personna non-grata, and when I was in Anaheim RG spoke this in a tone as Grave as his name: "The lights went out all across the midwest. There are no lampstands left there, the Lord has no testimony in these places." We were warned not to fellowship with these ones, do not go there, and do not look even to contact them. You might be poisoned.

2) The "Rebellion" of Dong yu Long(?) in South America also illicited a warning letter from LSM, with an admonition to not even go on-line and try to look into these matters yourself, for fear of a poisoning.

Knowing that this is LSM's modus operandi, should we not also start to question what else they deemed "poisonous", my poisonous friends?


Ray

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Knowing that this is LSM's modus operandi, should we not also start to question what else they deemed "poisonous", my poisonous friends?


Ray

Merely visiting this forum or any like it that provides a counterpoint, will elicit the term poison, poisoned, or poisonous.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Terry

Merely visiting this forum or any like it that provides a counterpoint, will elicit the term poison, poisoned, or poisonous.

Adding to what I posted several days ago, I was thinking about the ongoing campaign for the US presidency. In proper context to the LSM/LC, it would be like a US citizen questioning or criticizing the foreign policy of the Obama adminstration. Or speculating why Obama has yet to provide proof of his birth certificate or what countries passport did Obama use when he visited Pakistan. To listen to such question or speculating, the LSM/LC approach would be avoid the poison. When it comes down to it the manner LSM applies the word poison is nothing more than playing politics.

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

I brought these books forward only because, in the brief time I affiliated with the LRC, there were a few "divisive" elements that were quarantined:

1) Titus Chu and the "Great Lakes saints". These became personna non-grata, and when I was in Anaheim RG spoke this in a tone as Grave as his name: "The lights went out all across the midwest. There are no lampstands left there, the Lord has no testimony in these places." We were warned not to fellowship with these ones, do not go there, and do not look even to contact them. You might be poisoned.

This displays the true attitude of the Anaheim Politburo to those who will not walk in lock step with them even in the tiniest of details. The Church in Cleveland did not quarantine Titus Chu and neither did many other churches in the GLA (and hopefully elsewhere).

These churches aren't lampstands anymore. Seriously? Is this what HQ has decided? So it's not just a matter of "the work". It's not just a dispute between co-workers. Now entire regions of churches have no light? Has Ray Graver read Revelation 2-3 recently? Does he understand that even by then they were still considered lampstands? And does he know that it is the Lord who removes lampstands not Ray Graver or Benson Phillips or Ron Kangas? And does he understand that a coworker's relationship with LSM is not grounds for lampstand removal? Has he been so long in the bowels of the "Ministry Office" that he actually believes his own poppycock now?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

T
And does he understand that a coworker's relationship with LSM is not grounds for lampstand removal?

When you ask a question in that manner, it does become quite obvious a denomination is in place. When a church is considered a lampstand contingent on it's relationship to a specific ministry.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

1) Titus Chu and the "Great Lakes saints". These became personna non-grata, and when I was in Anaheim RG spoke this in a tone as Grave as his name: "The lights went out all across the midwest. There are no lampstands left there, the Lord has no testimony in these places." We were warned not to fellowship with these ones, do not go there, and do not look even to contact them. You might be poisoned.

Sadly this is true. Anaheim CA had the highest level of radioactive fallout of any EPA air monitoring station in the continental US for iodine 131. It turns out that Anaheim is now the only church in the US that is "glowing". So it is critical that nothing from Anaheim travel to the rest of the country lest it be poisoned. Kudos to RG for warning the saints they might be poisoned and not to spread that poison.

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed...hima-radiation

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Terry

When you ask a question in that manner, it does become quite obvious a denomination is in place. When a church is considered a lampstand contingent on it's relationship to a specific ministry.

And taking that one step further, in the case of other denominations, even if they were to assert that a particular assembly was being expelled from their association/denomination, would they contend that the assembly ceases to be a church? Or would it be that they merely are not granted the ability to claim affiliation and benefit from the resources of the group in the same manner that other assemblies in good standing would?

The latter is very different from declaring an assembly to not be a "lampstand." That is to deny that their assembling qualifies as "assembling" for purposes of the New Testament (thinking of Hebrews and "not forsaking the assembling" passage). Do the Baptists take that kind of stand? Or the Presbyterians?

I have mentioned the national ruckus that was raised over Irving Bible Church deciding that a woman could preach in their meetings, and especially once it actually occurred. While a "Bible church" is not part of a denomination, so no one can throw them out, I note that no matter how "concerned" many of the respondents were, none suggested that IBC was not a church. That it had lost standing as a legitimate church.

Now to the extent that there are sects/denominations that hold that only their group is correct, and only they are "saved" and/or "going to heaven," then I would suppose that those kinds would take the same kind of position as the LRC. In fact, that would be the only kind of group that I would expect those kinds of declarations to come from.

So the LRC has clearly identified themselves with those that exclude others based on non-core doctrines/issues. In effect, they have no true claim to any kind of "generality." For the LRC, it is all special. Or rather they are special (and by implication no one else is).

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by OBW

So the LRC has clearly identified themselves with those that exclude others based on non-core doctrines/issues. In effect, they have no true claim to any kind of "generality." For the LRC, it is all special. Or rather they are special (and by implication no one else is).

Exactly! And the quote by Ray Graver clearly expresses their attitude towards churches in their own system who will not follow LSM policies to the letter.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

when I was in Anaheim RG spoke this in a tone as Grave as his name: "The lights went out all across the midwest. There are no lampstands left there, the Lord has no testimony in these places." We were warned not to fellowship with these ones, do not go there, and do not look even to contact them. You might be poisoned.

Reading this again . . . it's just amazing any Christian could talk this way.

"If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in the darkness, we lie and are not practicing the truth." I John 1.6

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Something to keep in mind is that both of these books were produced in th 70s at a time when The Local Church was somewhat secretive and extremely uncooperative towards all outsiders (Cult busters or no). The authors were forced to fill in a lot of blanks when it came to writing about the teachings and practices. So I don't think the "unscholarly" term applies as much as incomplete and or not fully accurate....and considering who they were dealing with it's a wonder they got as much information as they did. Not giving excuses, but these books need to be placed within the context of the time they were produced.... and in the case of The God-Men, I think the book cover played upon any prejudices the American public may have against Asian believers.

Well, I couldn't help myself. I had to purchase SCP's "The God-Men" for myself, and see what caused the stir and raised the wrath of Witness Lee.

UntoHim, this book is nothing like what you have suggested here (perhaps you're relying on something you heard while you were within the "Local Church"?). Rather than being "unscholarly" or "incomplete", "The God-Men: An inquiry into Witness Lee & the Local Church" is in fact very well researched and thoroughly documents what Neil Duddy uncovers in his four years of research WITHIN the Local Church. Duddy also went out his way to check the facts with the men best equipped to give them to him: Witness Lee and the closest members of his entourage.

I would like to share what I am reading here on Local Church Discussions. I think this community in particular owes it to Neil Duddy and the SCP to hear what they had to say - since it was the donations and tithes of Local church members around North America, which were (even if unwittingly) fed into the hands of LSM and redirected to their team of Prosecuting Attorneys (DCP). Those tithes, given for the Glory of our God, were then used in direct violation of 1st Corinthians chapter 6 to financially cripple this Christian author and this Christian apologetics organization.

Think about it saints - plenty of people have said plenty of bad things about Witness Lee and LSM. Why was this author and this publishing firm in particular targetted for such a legal attack? If it bankrupted SCP after four years of "pre-trial" wrangling (orchestrated by DCP), then imagine how much of your own money, donated with the best of intentions, was used to achieve that end? Why would LSM sink that much of your money into this? If this book is really so shoddily written and easily refuted, then what did they have to fear? I'll tell you what. What they've always feared; the Truth.

I will start a new thread, and invite you to read this book with me as I go through it and excerpt (in a balanced way) a book that LSM has successfully banned - even if that success was only gained by default through sheer financial duress.

Ray

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Think about it saints - plenty of people have said plenty of bad things about Witness Lee and LSM. Why was this author and this publishing firm in particular targetted for such a legal attack? If it bankrupted SCP after four years of "pre-trial" wrangling (orchestrated by DCP), then imagine how much of your own money, donated with the best of intentions, was used to achieve that end?

The SCP lawsuit happened several decades before DCP was ever created. However the means to engage in such a lawsuit undoubtedly came from the same source.....the saints giving.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

The SCP lawsuit happened several decades before DCP was ever created. However the means to engage in such a lawsuit undoubtedly came from the same source.....the saints giving.

Officially there was no DCP in those days. It all started out with Dan Towle of Fullerton as WL's legal liaison, and never sopped "growing."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by NeitherFirstnorLast

Rather than being "unscholarly" or "incomplete", "The God-Men: An inquiry into Witness Lee & the Local Church" is in fact very well researched and thoroughly documents what Neil Duddy uncovers in his four years of research WITHIN the Local Church. Duddy also went out his way to check the facts with the men best equipped to give them to him: Witness Lee and the closest members of his entourage.

I understand that there was a semblance of scholarship, but some of his key stories were not real at all. The "original" research for this book matched that for the other book Mindbenders. Thomas Nelson Publishers actually retracted that book when they were informed of certain behind the scenes activities concerning the authors.

That said, I welcome your input. Usually the truth lies somewhere between the two extremes. It is my belief, however, that these forums, filled with the stories of former members, have provided the best record of what the LC is all about.

[NewManLiving]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Just stating the facts. Any church, even a denomination, will have a proportion of members who satisfy those categories. Certain denominations have a large proportion of free-masons, and other secret societies who worship Satan, in many cases even the pastor or priest is one.

Yes I agree: J Gordon Melton who defended the Local Church is very involved with vampirology and is/was president of the American Dracula Society. How is that for Satanic? He is also a Methodist minister. Apparently the LSMLC had no qualms appealing/hiring Melton for their defense. What hypocrisy!

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

Yes I agree: J Gordon Melton who defended the Local Church is very involved with vampirology and is/was president of the American Dracula Society. How is that for Satanic? He is also a Methodist minister. Apparently the LSMLC had no qualms appealing/hiring Melton for their defense. What hypocrisy!

That is the study of vampires, that does not mean he was/is one.

[NewManLiving]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

That is the study of vampires, that does not mean he was/is one.

He was president of the American chapter of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula, may still be president and continues to participate in all the events. Now if I were to use your particular brand of logic that you have disseminated across this forum, then he certainly is a vampire.

http://www.kelebekler.com/cesnur/txt/vamp2.htm

Far more than just study. But then, one can stick their head in the sand and just be flippant about it. Why are you so afraid of the truth?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

He was president of the American chapter of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula, may still be president and continues to participate in all the events. Now if I were to use your particular brand of logic that you have disseminated across this forum, then he certainly is a vampire.
Far more than just study. But then, one can stick their head in the sand and just be flippant about it. Why are you so afraid of the truth?

Originally Posted by Evangelical

That is the study of vampires, that does not mean he was/is one.

The best study is through personal experiences.

You and I have no idea what he was, or are you now extolling Methodist ministers?

[least]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

He was president of the American chapter of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula, may still be president and continues to participate in all the events. Now if I were to use your particular brand of logic that you have disseminated across this forum, then he certainly is a vampire.
http://www.kelebekler.com/cesnur/txt/vamp2.htm
Far more than just study. But then, one can stick their head in the sand and just be flippant about it. Why are you so afraid of the truth?

NML, what role is this 'president' in LSMLC? Can't say the v word.
I'm shaking. After Evangelical assured that there is 'no blasphemy' in LCers proclaiming themselves gods, I said ah well, people I know in there are fine. Now how is a v personality involved with them?

[UntoHim]

Ok guys, enough of the vampire stuff. I could be wrong, but I doubt that OnHisPath started this thread to discuss "The American chapter of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula".
-

[least]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Ok guys, enough of the vampire stuff. I could be wrong, but I doubt that OnHisPath started this thread to discuss "The American chapter of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula".
-

OK. Soooo .... this vampire is useful in successfully bringing down 'undesirables' ...
If cannot kick them out by the LSM blending force, cannot make the members quarantine them, cannot silent them other ways, then sue them and break them .... The vampire can do it ... just pay him? The LSM has monies, monies, monies
Sorry forum owner, if I offend you. In case they use a vampire to suck you dry ...

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

He was president of the American chapter of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula, may still be president and continues to participate in all the events. Now if I were to use your particular brand of logic that you have disseminated across this forum, then he certainly is a vampire.

Why are you focusing on the fact that the LC consulted him and not the fact that he is also a REVEREND? The latter to me is worse than the former. The organization or system that allowed him to be called a Reverend and minister in the Methodist church and a vampire is the one and same degraded system the Recovery stands against. Still, I would not be comfortable with consulting him either. To a degree, I agree the LC should not have consulted the services of a man who likes morbid cosplay. A v------ is a mythical thing. We may as well say he is a unicorn (hopefully unicorns are acceptable discussion). So you think because LSMLC hired a v------, or a unicorn, or a water fairy, to defend them, there's a problem. It depends, what degree of associate he has with the LC? Is he an elder? Is he in charge of something? I am interested to know as well. I don't really see the problem to consult an unbeliever's services, just like I don't see a problem with a Christian hiring a non-Christian plumber (who may be into all sorts of things).

But back to reality for a moment. According to the Bible, real Satanism is frustrating God's purpose (Matt 16:23). Real Satanism is offering a tasty looking fruit to a hungry woman (Eve in Genesis). Real Satanism is far more benign than Hollywood movies and popular Christianity portrays it. Real Satanism is that little question ("did God really say"?).

[NewManLiving]

You have no clue as to how subtle the enemy is. You will defend anything as long as you can get the last word in. Most of what you say is right off the top of your own head, but you think you know the mind of God - specifically the Holy Spirit and even the mind of Satan. It's almost comical - you must be very young

[Drake]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

You have no clue as to how subtle the enemy is. You will defend anything as long as you can get the last word in. Most of what you say is right off the top of your own head, but you think you know the mind of God - specifically the Holy Spirit and even the mind of Satan. It's almost comical - you must be very young

Young or old Evangelical does an impressive job of making logical and compelling arguments.

Dr. Melton offered expert testimony in the depositions to refute false accusations concerning the orthodoxy of the local churches. He is a recognized expert in his field as his work testifies to. The time to discredit Melton, the witness, was in the courtroom decades ago. How did that turn out?

Drake

[UntoHim]

So on we go with the vampire expert? Sorry about this OnHisPath.

Maybe Drake has accidentally forgotten on purpose. The legal action the Local Church of Witness Lee took against the defendants had NOTHING to do with Christian/theological orthodoxy. It had to do with the Local Church of Witness Lee being linked to/compared to cults in which the members are psychologically and or physically harmed. No such link was ever proved by the attorneys for the Local Church. There was no need to discredit Melton in the courtroom because the action never went to trial. The defendant was driven to bankruptcy (a common tactic employed by serial filers of frivolous lawsuits) and the baseless complaints were simply read into the record.

The transcripts of the depositions are still floating around somewhere. I don't think Drake or Evangelical wants to get into those. It's lucky for Witness Lee that the thing really didn't go to a full on trial...he perjured himself big time during those depositions.
-

[NewManLiving]

Originally Posted by Drake

Young or old Evangelical does an impressive job of making logical and compelling arguments.

Dr. Melton offered expert testimony in the depositions to refute false accusations concerning the orthodoxy of the local churches. He is a recognized expert in his field as his work testifies to. The time to discredit Melton, the witness, was in the courtroom decades ago. How did that turn out?

Drake

Only in your mind Drake as you think like he does. He makes no compelling arguments but simply changes the subject or takes it in another mis-direction.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

You have no clue as to how subtle the enemy is. You will defend anything as long as you can get the last word in. Most of what you say is right off the top of your own head, but you think you know the mind of God - specifically the Holy Spirit and even the mind of Satan. It's almost comical - you must be very young

I think I know the difference between men who play dress ups in their spare time and what the bible defines as satanic. The Transylvanian Society of Dracula seems more of a historical scholarly pursuit. The Methodists seem okay with ordaining "Vlad the Impaler", so not sure why it's a big problem the LC consult his services. If he was a genuine Satan worshipper however that would be a different matter.

[least]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So on we go with the vampire expert? Sorry about this OnHisPath.

Maybe Drake has accidentally forgotten on purpose. The legal action the Local Church of Witness Lee took against the defendants had NOTHING to do with Christian/theological orthodoxy. It had to do with the Local Church of Witness Lee being linked to/compared to cults in which the members are psychologically and or physically harmed. No such link was ever proved by the attorneys for the Local Church. There was no need to discredit Melton in the courtroom because the action never went to trial. The defendant was driven to bankruptcy (a common tactic employed by serial filers of frivolous lawsuits) and the baseless complaints were simply read into the record.

The transcripts of the depositions are still floating around somewhere. I don't think Drake or Evangelical wants to get into those. It's lucky for Witness Lee that the thing really didn't go to a full on trial...he perjured himself big time during those depositions.
-

My apology to OnHisPath; had outburst onto a different subject in your thread.
I myself have heard enough. From LSMLCer mouth- cosplay vampire, play dress up reverend, scholarly Dracula president who is expert in his field of christian church orthodoxy.
NML post was the first time I knew the involvement of such a personal and I was shocked and shaking and lost sleep. No more. Afterall its none of my business.
Drake- can you finish counting how many 'orthodoxy experts' there are? The fact that this particular personal is employed to defend the LSM MOTA, tells me a lot about both the LSM MOTA and the dracula vampire orthodoxy expert.
Sorry again, forum owner for my unpleasant post. I'll control myself after this post.

Me too. I'm losing sleep over this too. I never heard any of this vampire stuff before either. At first I was hilariously laughing because of how a post expressing thankfulness wound up at vampires and unicorns. In all seriousness though, OnHisPath was thanking everyone about how this forum was very helpful for the last 8 years to show that she was not going crazy and just perceptive about a dysfunctional group. Just seeing where her original post of mere gratitude finally ended up at vampires and dirty laundry and dress up is just sickening and dysfunctional. A thread stating gratefulness should have stayed that way.... just stating the obvious. This is very disturbing. Give it a rest. I thought I was going crazy in the LC. I'm going crazy just reading this thread! Unreal. Me too forum owner, sorry for expressing negativity here.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So on we go with the vampire expert? Sorry about this OnHisPath.

Maybe Drake has accidentally forgotten on purpose. The legal action the Local Church of Witness Lee took against the defendants had NOTHING to do with Christian/theological orthodoxy. It had to do with the Local Church of Witness Lee being linked to/compared to cults in which the members are psychologically and or physically harmed. No such link was ever proved by the attorneys for the Local Church. There was no need to discredit Melton in the courtroom because the action never went to trial. The defendant was driven to bankruptcy (a common tactic employed by serial filers of frivolous lawsuits) and the baseless complaints were simply read into the record.

The transcripts of the depositions are still floating around somewhere. I don't think Drake or Evangelical wants to get into those. It's lucky for Witness Lee that the thing really didn't go to a full on trial...he perjured himself big time during those depositions.
-

Accusations of unorthodoxy, being a cult were all part of the lawsuit. Duddy, with his sloppy research, brought disrepute upon an otherwise seemingly reputable organization (SCP).

Melton's expertise in the field was a stake in the heart to that shoddy work. Tragically, not before believers were arrested and murdered because of it.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Accusations of unorthodoxy, being a cult were all part of the lawsuit. Duddy, with his sloppy research, brought disrepute upon an otherwise seemingly reputable organization (SCP).

Melton's expertise in the field was a stake in the heart to that shoddy work. Tragically, not before believers were arrested and murdered because of it.

Drake

"Arrested and murdered?" Care to substantiate?

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Drake

Melton's expertise in the field was a stake in the heart to that shoddy work. Tragically, not before believers were arrested and murdered because of it.

Wow, I guess nobody wants to give up on this vampire theme no matter what.

Drake, I'm not sure who's more washed up here, you or the long-ago-discredited J. Gordon Melton. Of course the truth about Witness Lee/Local Church defenders is like water off a duck's back....but here goes anyway.

Nobody was arrested, much less murdered because some Christian apologist exposed Witness Lee as a false teacher and criticized some of the most questionable teachings and practices of the religious sect he invented. This was a myth perpetrated by the Local Church lackeys to draw attention away from the fact that groups like "The Shouters" were a direct result of the extreme teachings and practices established by Witness Lee and his followers.

Getting back to Melton - He has been exposed time and time again to be nothing more then a gun-for-hire by any and all aberrational/unorthodox/cultic groups who have the cash to line his pockets. Although these groups hold him up to be some world class theologian/apologist, he doesn't even make this claim for himself. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact:

Here's an applicable quote from Melton himself:

"And I have, not being a theologian -- and I make no claim to be one --
a difficult task in sorting through doctrinal questions to do
an adequate theological analysis of most groups' beliefs.
I'm a church historian with most of my theological work in historical theology, not systematics.
That's part of where I'm coming from. I also have another problem...
I have a problem as to where to draw the line --
what's heresy and what's evangelically kosher.
What is acceptable doctrinal deviation?"

(all emphasis mine)

Why Cults Succeed: Where the Church Fails

No wonder the Local Church of Witness Lee picked this fellow as their main defender - Witness Lee was no theologian, had an obvious problem with sorting through doctrinal questions, was decidedly lacking in theological analysis, and was virtually clueless on where to draw the line between what's heresy and what is not. This guy was a dream come true for the Local Church...and well worth the money! (Hank Hanegraaff may have topped Melton)
-

[least]

Hank Hanegraaff - his three little words soooo precious to LSMLCs should be 'I was wrong' then 'we were wrong'?
Who are the 'we' he refers to?

Why does everybody get distracted by the fact this guy happens to have an interest in vampires? It's like distracted by the shiny.

From here, http://home.snafu.de/tilman/faq-you/cult.apologists.txt

JGM on Jonestown:
-----------------

"The tragedy at Jonestown ... in spite of having little relationship to
nonconventional religions in general, was transformed by the anti-cult
movement and the media into the definitive cult horror story."
(Chicago Tribune, 25.11.1988)

"The People's Temple was a congregation in a Christian denomination
recognized by the National Council of Churches," he said. "This wasn't
a cult. This was a respectable, mainline Christian group."
(Milwaukee Journal, 3.12.1988)

"Jones became a cult leader and the Peoples Temple became a cult,
literally overnight. And what was forgotten was that this was actually a
church in a mainstream religion.... He was about as mainstream as you
could get." (The Sacramento Bee, 15.11.1998)

From wikipedia

In May 1995, in the early stages of investigations into the sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway, Melton, fellow scholar James R. Lewis and religious freedom lawyer Barry Fisher flew to Japan to voice concern that police behaviour, including mass detentions without charge and the removal of practitioners' children from the group, might be infringing the civil rights of Aum Shinrikyo members.[21][22] They had travelled to Japan at the invitation and expense of Aum Shinrikyo after they had contacted the group to express concern over developments, and met with officials over a period of three days.[21] While not having been given access to the group's chemical laboratories, they held press conferences in Japan stating their belief, based on the documentation they had been given by the group,[23] that the group did not have the ability to produce sarin and was being scapegoated.[21][22] Melton revised his judgment shortly after, concluding that the group had in fact been responsible for the attack and other crimes.[22] Some felt that the scholars' defense of Aum Shinrikyo led to a crisis of confidence in religious scholarship when the group's culpability was proven.[22]

From

https://www.amazon.com/Slander-Salva.../dp/0963950126

He has written a book defending the Children of God/The Family. I.E. the guy is a cult apologist, who has been on the record defending actual cults. One would think this is more relevant than whether or not he likes to dress up as Dracula.

[Ohio]

Unregistered,

We have had numerous discussions about the (lack of) credibility of JGM on this forum, both his defense of cults and his vampire obsession.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Unregistered,

We have had numerous discussions about the (lack of) credibility of JGM on this forum, both his defense of cults and his vampire obsession.

He is a distinguished professor.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

He is a distinguished professor.

So is Nigel Tomes, yet LSM has no respect for him because of his critical scholarship.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So is Nigel Tomes, yet LSM has no respect for him because of his critical scholarship.

I don't think he has credentials as a scholar . Not like Melton anyway.

[UntoHim]

J. Gordon Melton was one of the original "since every group has some kind unorthodox or theologically off base teaching or practice, then every group is a cult, and since every group is a cult then nobody's a cult" guys. Actually biblical orthodoxy means absolutely nothing to this man. This is why he could declare Witness Lee as a sound, biblical teacher, and the Local Church as a "genuine expression of biblical Christianity". He paved the way for people like Hank Hanegrraaf to give groups like the Local Church a clean bill of theological health. Of course this kind of caving in to unorthodox groups has earned both of these men a well-deserved trip to the "experts to be avoided" zone.
-

[Evangelical]

Obviously Hank didn't think anyone else was Orthodox enough for him so he joined the Orthodox church.