1

THE GOSPEL OF HEALTH, WEALTH & PROSPERITY

Lars Wilhelmsson

2

CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 4
PREFACE 5-8
INTRODUCTION: A CORRECTIVE MOVEMENT 9-18
1. IS THERE A PLACE FOR TESTING DOCTRINE? 19-29
BLESSINGS AND DANGERS

2. MARKS OF CULTS 30-34
3. A CORRECTIVE MOVEMENT 35-41
4. THE THEOLOGICAL AND SPIRITUAL VACUUM OF 42-45
EVANGELICAL THEOLOGY: A DEFECTIVE THEOLOGY

5. ORIGINS AND VIEW OF THEOLOGY 46-49
6. FAULTY HERMENEUTICS (THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE) 50-61
7. THE MARGINALIZATION OF THE CROSS 62-66
8. THE DENIAL OF SUFFERING AND DEPRIVATION 67-73
9. A DEFECTIVE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT OF CHRIST 74-88
10. QUASI-GNOSTICISM 89-97
11. A MAGNIFIED VIEW OF MAN AND A DEFLATED VIEW OF GOD 98-112
12. AN OVEREMPHASIZED DOCTRINE OF HEALING 113-129
13. POSITIVE CONFESSION AND THE GOSPEL OF CONDEMNATION 130-144
14. A CONDITIONAL GOSPEL (SLOT-MACHINE RELIGION) 145-150
15. A FASCINATION WITH AUTHORITY AND POWER 151-153
16. HOLY LAUGHTER AND THE PRACTICE OF 154-160
"SLAYING PEOPLE IN THE SPIRIT"

17. THE PRESUMPTUOUS USE OF CLAIMS SUCH AS 161-164
"GOD TOLD ME . . ."


3

18. A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT 165-171
19. THE URGENT NEED FOR SOUND DOCTRINE 172=176
APPENDIX A 177-181
APPENDIX B 182-188
BIBLIOGRAPHY 189-194




















4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the writing of any book there is typically support from many others. I would like to
express appreciation especially to Guido Pasquarelli who awakened me to the serious nature of
the teachings of the Faith Movement and thus encouraged me to write this book. Without
Guido's deep concern about the dangers of this movement, I seriously doubt that I would ever
have written this book. Finally a word of thanks to Elio Cuccaro for his helpful critique and to
Warner Strube and Court Newton for their insightful suggestions and painstaking proofreading.




















5

PREFACE
Although this book is a warning to look out for cults of any stripe, the emphasis will be
on those cults or quasi-cults (orthodox for the most part with cultic tendencies) which emphasize
health, wealth, and prosperity. In broaching this subject, I am reminded of the young boy who
came home from the first day of school and was asked by his mother what he thought of his new
teacher. "She was mean but fair" he said. "What do you mean, mean but fair?" the mother asked.
Her son responded, "Mean to everybody."
While I do not intend to be "mean to everybody," I find there is no way to be fair but to
bring into criticism many factions of Christendom. There is no room for smugness. No one
should feel too comfortable since orthodox Christianity has failed to live up to what it claims to
embrace. The so-called Faith Movement arose in the context of a Christianity that has lost
much of her original message and practice. This must be recognized as true whether the church is
viewed from the traditionalist wing or the charismatic/Pentecostal wing of Christendom.
The Faith Movement is especially dangerous because it comes from the loins of historic,
orthodox Christianity. Unlike the New Age movement, which threatens the church from without,
the Faith Movement threatens from within.
Many Christians claim that there is no place for a book such as this, since the primary
task of the Christian church is to proclaim the gospel, not to fight the cults. Although it is true
that we are called foremost to be agents of reconciliation as we are urged to proclaim the Gospel,
it is also true that the very word gospel means "good news" which implies that there is also "bad
news." The bad news is, of course, the human condition, man's fallenness, his sinfulness. But any
teaching that confuses or minimizes such bad news and distorts the good news must be
challenged or the truth of Christianity will eventually be lost.
The American philosopher, theologian, and revivalist Jonathan Edwards noted that the
devil seeks to grab the wheel of any renewal movement and push its leaders off course, thus
attacking its credibility and breaking its force. Undetected spiritual pride and bad theology, he
added, are two ingredient that easily play into the devil's hands in this strategy.1
The Faith Movement embraces such orthodox notions as radical openness to the Holy
Spirit, emphasis on physical healing, and acceptance of prophecies and revelations. These very
strengths, however, can turn to weaknesses with overemphasis, leading to credulity and
subjectivism. Openness to the Spirit does not guarantee sound judgment. We see a biblical
illustration of this when the prophets correctly predicted Paul's arrest in Jerusalem, but drew the
wrong conclusion and tried to dissuade him from going (Ac 21:10-14).


6

In seeking to avoid a dead traditionalism by a distrust of education and theology, the
Faith Movement may have gained freshness and freedom, but at what price? In so doing, have
they lost the wisdom that comes from historical awareness of blind alleys? In their fascination
with what is novel, have they ended up with outlandish views? In their persistence in trying to
reinvent the wheel, have they fallen into error?
You will find this book steeped in Scripture to ensure that what is being written is sound.
The numerous scriptural references make it possible for the reader to continually check and see if
what is written is biblical.
The purpose of this book is threefold. First and foremost, the purpose is to present truth
accurately with the hope that this will lead to a more solid foundation of theology, a richer
worship of the one true God, and a deeper devotion to Him who alone is worthy of our worship
and service.
It is also the purpose of this book to unmask and thus expose falsehood "craftily decked
out in an attractive dress." Only then will the inexperienced realize that pseudo-Christianity is
not "more true than truth itself," but in fact heresy.
Finally it is the purpose of this book to equip the faithful in their apologetic task. The
typical church member is under-informed, not only in what other religions, cults and quasi-cults
believe, but also in biblical truth. A thorough knowledge of God's Word is essential if Christians
are to "contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3). This also
means that we as believers must "always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks us
to give the reason for the hope we have" (1 Pe 3:15).
As we shall see in this book, the Faith Movement, though it has its roots in evangelical
Christianity, has much in common with the mind "sciences" or the metaphysical cults such as
Christian Science and New Thought, Science of Mind, Unitarianism, Unity School, and the
Theosophical Society. In addition, it also finds several teachings in common with the New Age.
The Faith Movement, this fast-food American version of Christianity, which perceives
God as a means to an end rather than as the end, unapologetically uses God for its own means.
Yet it continues to grow at an alarming pace. Even though several books have been written and
many sermons preached in the last decade to combat this surreptitious "gospel," it continues to
infiltrate churches at an unprecedented speed.
The leaders of this movement have been ingenious in selling their wares through the use
of the latest technology and the slickest packaging of books and tapes. If in the early 1990's this
created a "Christianity in crisis," as Hank Hanegraaff claimed in his book by that name, how
much more is that claim true in the early third millennium!

7

We dare not sit back and give up the fight! Even though it looks as if this religious and
theological aberration has won the day, the battle is not over unless we roll over and give in.


















NOTE
1
Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 2 (Edinburgh: The Banner of
Truth, 1974), 150 cited in Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1993), 93-95 also cited in Jerry White, When The Spirit Comes
With Power (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 31-32.

8












"Error, indeed, is never set forth in its naked deformity, lest, being thus exposed,
it should at once be detected. But it is craftily decked out in an attractive dress,
so as, by its outward form, to make it appear to the inexperienced (ridiculous
as the expression may seem) more true than truth itself."1
--Irenaeus, Early Church Father (ca. A.D. 130-200)











9













INTRODUCTION












10

THE RELIGIOUS LANDSCAPE
There is a vicious battle going on for our minds! This should not surprise us since the
Bible states that

"What a man thinks, so is he" (Pr 23:7).

This battle for the mind, and thus the heart of man, is coming from all directions. It is
obvious everywhere:

Secular humanism with its agnostic mindset and emphasis on man and his
achievements (i.e. science and technology) has left a spiritual vacuum in our society.

Religious liberalism (modern theology) has undermined the authority of the Bible as
the Word of God and thus left people with nothing more than the shifting sand of human
opinion in which one's authority for truth is the latest "discovery" (theory) of truth.

Deconstructionism which holds that there is no objective truth, therefore past events or
writings have little, if any, intrinsic meaning. What matters is not what authors intended
in literature but what we think of what they wrote. Thus the past is freely revised to fit
current politically and religiously correct values.

Religious pluralism with its assumption that all religions are works of human
interpretation and that no one religion has "the truth" has undermined the claim of Jesus
who categorically stated, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to
the Father [God] except through Me" (Jn 14:6).

The great idol entertainment which has captivated the hearts of a people who are, as
sociologist Neil Postman entitled his book, Amusing Ourselves to Death.2

Four thousand cults with millions of adherents many of which are zealously and
fervently promulgating their narrow, authoritarian dogma.

The New Age movement, which is old Hinduism in new clothes and which reeks of the
occult, is outpacing all other cults in its rate of growth as it increasingly dominates the
spiritual consciousness" of our society.

The realm of the occult has ensnared millions in its satanic bondage. It is the aim of this
book to show that historic orthodox Christianity is the only viable alternative.
What we think about Jesus Christ is basic to everything in Christianity. If our thinking is
defective we are in danger of heresy, whether in the liberal camp of Christendom, or in the
innumerable cults that are taking over the religious landscape of America.




11

Even the Faith Movement (the Gospel of Health, Wealth, and Prosperity) whose roots
deeply embedded in evangelical, conservative theology, is weakened by a defective Christology.
The divine edge of Jesus has been blunted. The qualitative differencethe One who is Wholly
Otherhas in many cases been reduced to a quantitative difference. This means that Jesus
Christ, and those who believe in Him, are viewed as having the same nature, with Jesus being
merely more advanced in His spiritual attainment. Such teaching is nothing less than heresy. It is
the ancient Arian heresy in which Jesus is like or similar to God.

All of the heresies either distort or deny the biblical teaching concerning the Person of
Jesus Christ!

Today in America there are about 30 million adherents of cults, representing a
missionfield on our doorsteps. Our society and culture have also become fascinated with the
occult. This is seen most pronouncedly in the rapid pace of growth of the New Age movement.
There are millions of Americans practicing some aspect of the occult with many of checking
their horoscope every morning to see what their Zodiac sign says about how to live that day.

EARLY CHURCH HERESY: GNOSTICISM

The mind sciences and the Faith Movement owe much of their teachings to Gnosticism,
the intricately developed heresy that threatened the survival of the early church in the second and
third centuries. A basic understanding of Gnosticism, therefore, is necessary if we are to properly
understand the Faith Movement.

There is no doubt that Gnosticism was one of the most dangerous heresies of the first two
centuries of the church. Its influence is seen increasingly today. Its primary feature is that
redemption is found through mystical knowledge rather than faith. When combined with certain
elements from Christianity, Gnosticism proved extremely attractive.

Gnosticism became so widespread that by the beginning of the third century A.D. most of
the more educated Christian congregations throughout the Roman Empire were to some degree
affected by it. One historian referred to its growth in the second century as "the swiftness of an
epidemic over the Church from Syria to Gaul."3

Gnosticism was not originally a heresy in that it was not a perversion of Christian truth.
Rather it came from without. Only as it worked its way into the Christian Church did it become
intensely heretical.

This anti-Christian influence was not a homogeneous system of religion or philosophy.
But it was highly syncretistic. It was an attempt to found a universal religion based on
contributions from many sources and thus to adapt the Christian religion in a popular religious
trend of the day and to show it to be consistent with it and a fulfillment of it.4




12

Gnosticism embraced many widely diversified sects holding opinions drawn from a great
variety of sources such as Greek, Jewish, Parsic (Persia), Indian (India); philosophies (especially
Plato and Philo), religions, theosophies and mysteries. These schools of philosophy were oriental
in general character.

There were two primary features to the teachings of Gnosticism. One is that there is
redemption through Christ, but a redemption from matter rather than a redemption of mankind
from sin. The Gnostics taught a dualism between the world of the spirit and the world of matter.
The world of the spirit was entirely good and consisted of the heavenly realm which included the
mindthe psychic and spiritual aspects of man. The material world, however, was entirely evil
because it consisted of the earthly, that which belongs to the flesh, the body, etc.

The other primary feature was that this redemption was accomplished primarily through
knowledge, as the name denotes (Gnosticism comes from the Greek root gnosis which means
"knowledge"), rather than through faith. The knowledge essential to "salvation" was of a kind
that the ordinary believer was incapable of achieving. Only the "enlightened" could achieve it.
Thus Gnosticism was a movement of the intellectually and spiritually elite.

The Unbiblical Dualism Engendered Five Main Errors:

1. Man's body is evil since it is made of matter (earthly), in contrast to God, who is purely
spirit, therefore good.

2. Salvation or redemption is the escape from the physical evil of the flesh, and the
body. The human race is akin to the divine, being a spark of heavenly light imprisoned in a
material body. This escape and reunion with the One is made through a special knowledge rather
than faith in Christ.

3. Jesus Christ's true humanity was denied for two reasons:

The Docetists (from the Greek dokeo which means "to seem") taught that Christ only
seemed have a body, and (2) the Adoptionists, such as the Cerinthianists (named after its most
prominent spokesman, Cerinthius) taught that Christ (the Anointed One) came upon or joined the
man Jesus at baptism and left Him just before He died. Thus the Christ (or the logos) was neither
born as a man nor suffered as a man. While the man Jesus suffered and rose again, the Christ
remained impassible as a spiritual being.

In this way they solved the difficulty of the connection between the highest spiritual
agency (the Christ) and sinful corporeal matter (the human Jesus with a body), which was
involved in the doctrine of the Incarnation and Passion. This view inspired much of 1 John (1:1;
2:22; 4:2-3).





13

4. Since the body was considered evil, it was to be treated harshly (asceticism). This
ascetic wing of Gnosticism was espoused by the Marcions (who even forbid marriage) and
followers of Tatian. It was a form of Gnosticism and provides the background of part of the letter
to the Colossians (2:21-23).

5. This dualism of spirit (which is good) and matter (which is evil) paradoxically led
to licentiousness (libertinism) as well as asceticism. The reasoning was that, since matter was
considered evil, the breaking of God's law was of no moral and spiritual consequence. The
locus of sin was found in matter rather than in the breaking of God's holy law (1 Jn 3:4).
Carpocrations and Nicolaitans were libertines (Rev 2:15).

The Gnostics also taught that the Old and New Testaments were revelations of two
different deities. They regarded the God of the Jews as far inferior to the Supreme Being, whom
they called the Abyss. The God of the Old Testament was the creator of the world, often referred
to as the "demiurge." Many Gnostics (especially Marcion and his followers"Marcionites")
considered the God of the Old Testament to be merely great, rigorous, and harsh, and the God of
the New Testament to be wholly gooda God of love (a sentimental notion often parroted
simplistically by evangelicals). Some Gnostic sects considered the God of the Old Testament as
being totally alien from and opposed to the supreme God, a renegade demigod or demiurge;
others considered Him merely as a subordinate power, inferior but not hostile to the supreme
God and acting as His unconscious organ or agent.6

The Gnostics justified their beliefs by appealing to Christian and Jewish writings,
allegorically interpreted (many Jewish interpreters, and Church Fathers, and medieval
Christians also used allegorical interpretation). This school of interpretation was popularized
by Philo and the 2nd century influence of the Alexandrian Fathers (Pantaenus, Clement of
Alexandria and Origen).

Gnosticism also claimed to have authoritative gospels and epistles of its own. These were
based on the supposed teachings of Jesus never committed to writing, but handed down secretly
through oral tradition.

It is easy to see how this early form of heresy provided a powerful impetus for the
formation of the Apostolic Writings to distinguish between spurious and genuine Scriptures.
To the Gnostics, Jesus Christ was not the God-Man, wholly God and fully man, but an eon
(an emanation from the One), an angelic being, though the highest in order of all generations
of angelic beings. There were at least 30 orders of eons according to Valentius, the most
influential of all Gnostics. This makes Jesus Christ a very special person, but hardly the God-
Man of the New Testament.






14

The Apollinarians (4th century) denied the integrity of the human nature by saying that
the eternal Son, or Logos, supplied the place of human intelligence. Nestorius (5th century)
denied the unity of his person by separating the two natures into two personalities. Eutyches (5th
century), denied the essential integrity of both natures by confusing them, that is, running them
together, so as to produce a third nature separate and different from either the human or divine
nature.

Gnosticism lacked a well knit, unified organization. Gnostics were too divided and too
varied to be brought together. Some remained within the existing churches, teaching their
doctrines until they were expelled as heretics. Others formed separate congregations. These
congregations had special rites which resembled the mystery cults that were widespread in the
Roman Empire of that time.

Gnosticism strikes at the very root of Christianity. Thus the Gnostic spirit denied the
personality of God, the Godhead, the Trinity, the unity of the Old Testament and the New
Testament as Holy Scripture, the personality and free will of human beings, the existence of
moral evil, salvation by grace through faith alone, the incarnation of Jesus Christ, the redemption
of Christ, His resurrectionthe whole significance of His Person and work.

In addition to I John (1:1-6; 2:22; 4:1,6; 5:20), 2 Jn (7), and Colossians (2:21-23) there
are allusions to early Gnosticism in 1 Corinthians (8:1,7-11; 13:2), 1 Timothy (4:3; 6:20),
2 Timothy (3:2-6), Titus (1:16); 2 Peter (2:12-18), and Jude (4,8,11,19).

Modern Errors

The old dictum that "those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it is certainly
true when it comes to the history of heresy in the church. The table below lists present-day
heresies that emanate from heresies disputed long ago. This is also true of a quasi-cult like the
Faith Movement.
_____________________________________________________________________________

GNOSTIC PROTOTYPE ARIAN PROTOTYPE
_____________________________________________________________________________

Christian Science and Unity Jehovah's Witnesses
School of Christianity Mormonism
Mind & Healing Sciences Unification Church
Transcendental Meditation (TM) The Way International
New Age Movement
__________________________________________________________________

Modern errors regarding the natures in Christ center principally in denial that Christ is
actually God. Liberal theologians and others who deny the deity of Christ are merely reviving the
old Arian heresy of the third and fourth centuries.


15

Christian Science denies the deity of Jesus, teaching that Jesus was only a human and
that Christ is merely Truth, a spiritual or divine idea. They explain away Peter's great
affirmation,

"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God" as follows:

"The Messiah is what thou has declaredChrist, the spirit of God, of Truth,
Life, and Love, which heals mentally. . . . It was now evident to Peter that
divine Life, Truth, and Love, and not a human personality, was the healer of
the sick and a rock, a firm foundation in the realm of harmony."7

Mary Baker Eddy, in her book, Science and Health repeatedly claims that "the word
Christ is not properly a synonym for Jesus. Rather

"Jesus is the name of the man who, more than all other men, has represented
Christ, The true idea of God, healing the sick and the sinning and destroying
the power of death. Jesus is the human man, and Christ is the divine idea;
hence the duality of Jesus the Christ."8

Thus, while Jesus was born at Bethlehem, Christ was eternal. Although Jesus suffered,
Christ "never suffered." Though Jesus finally "disappeared," Christ "continues to exist in the
eternal order of divine Science."9

Their Christology is reduced to mere compliments to Jesus the man:

"Jesus of Nazareth was the most scientific man that ever trod the globe. Jesus
was 'the best Christian' on earth. As such, Jesus 'represented' Christ, 'the true
idea of God.' Jesus 'illustrates' the human blending with God that gives
dominion over all the earth. . . . 'Endowed with the Christ,' Jesus became the
'wayshower.'"10

Since Christian Scientists refuse to accept the reality of matter (and, thereby, the creation
account), they deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus as well.

The Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon views Jesus as a man no better than we
are. Jesus' value is no greater than that of any other man. He categorically has declared: "It is
plain that Jesus is not God Himself."11

According to the teachings of the Unification Church, Jesus' work and mission were a
failure. His death on a cross was disappointing. Although Jesus as Messiah set out to rule as a
religious and political ruler who would inaugurate the kingdom of God, His messianic goals
were thwarted when John the Baptist failed to convert his audience into a power bloc for Him.
Instead of admitting defeat, Jesus adopted a secondary mission which was not dependent
on popular support. Rather than introducing the kingdom of God, He simply secured spiritual
salvation for believers.

16

Because Jesus failed in His mission to secure physical salvation for His followers, the
messianic mission is unfinished and its completion awaits the leadership of another man. That
man is Sun Myung Moon. He claims that on Easter morning in 1936 Jesus appeared to him and
commissioned him to form a large following and the father perfect children, which would
complete his original mission. In the spring of 1980, when Moon's 12th child was conceived, the
goal was accomplished and salvation was secured.12

Moon has retired from active leadership by distributing authority to other Unification
leaders. He sees his task as complete. Although, like Jesus, he is simply a man, unlike Jesus,
he has not been thwarted by historical circumstances and thus his followers believe that the
second coming of Christ is fulfilled.

The Way International teaches that Jesus is merely a man and that His existence began
at His conception: "Jesus Christ's existence began when he was conceived by God's creating the
Soul-life of Jesus in Mary."13 They explain how this was done: "God created, brought into
existence, a sperm in an ovum in Mary."14 Since flesh is flesh, and God is spirit, so Jesus is not
the divine man; He is simply a man. He was just like other human beings, except that His
"bloodline" was a little different. Therefore they claim that the trinitarian belief is "an invention"
of the Nicaean Council of A.D. 325.15

Yet they insist that the Bible accurately records the life of Jesus, and its words are
otherwise trustworthy. They believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior of all who believe in Him.
They teach that Jesus is the revealed word of God, the Logos. God foreknew that Jesus would
lead a perfect life and thus become a suitable sacrificial lamb. He gave His life to avert God's
judgment of humanity's sins and His substitutionary death and His resurrection from the dead
demonstrate God's power and grace.

The Way International cult believes that Christianity, as we have come to know it, is a
heretical institution that teaches unbiblical truths. It has robbed believers of many spiritual
benefits and thus prevented them from hearing the complete counsel of God. By raising up The
Way International Church, God is teaching truth once again after twenty centuries of heretical
and defective teaching.16

The New Age "Jesus" is divine in exactly the sense that all human beings are divine. He
is one of many great spiritual masters who have succeeded in tapping into their own godhood.
New Agers generally separate the man Jesus from "the Christ." When they refer to Jesus as "the
Christ," they do not think of Him as the only Messiah but as one of many manifestations of a
universal power that they call God.

Jesus then, is no more God than anyone else. The only difference between Jesus and the
rest of humanity is that Jesus more fully realized and demonstrated the divine potential that we
all have. Jesus' value to us is merely that of an example, and it is His desire that the rest of
humanity to become His equals, not to worship Him. Jesus' "Christhood" was the realization that
He was divine while in human life. All people can also attain to such Christhood.


17

Moreover, God is not simply in me, I am God. Shirley MacLaine, an ardent spokesperson
for the New Age, said the following in her book, Dancing in the Light:

"I know that I exist, therefore I AM. I know the God-source exists. Therefore IT IS.
Since I am part of that force, then I AM that I AM."17

In New Age parlance, Jesus is a mystic medium. He is a guide to self-actualization. He
is a channelone of many ancients who give New Age adherents a "glimpse" of the past.
Through previous incarnations, Jesus attained a level of purity that is achievable by all.
God is no longer the personal Jehovah of the Bible, who interacts with man and works His
will and purpose through history. Rather, God is an impersonal, nonfeeling, nonthinking god-
force, energy, consciousness, principle, or vibration, of which everything in the universe is a
part. It is possible to tap into that power without the restrictions imposed by morals, whereby we
can be the master of all nature, like Luke Skywalker in the Star Wars films in which he used the
"Force" to gain supernatural powers and win his battles.

The New Age is not new! It is merely Hinduism in a new garb. In the New Age, as in
much of Eastern mysticism and Greek philosophy, all is one: God is one, we are one, therefore
we are God. This is pantheism: the belief that God did not create the universe but that God is the
Universe. God is everything; the rocks, the trees, the sun, the wind, all are God and God is all.
Thus, the creation accountand the "big bang," for that matterare out the window,
denying both logic and human moral experience.
























18

NOTES

1
Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses (Against Heresies), I.2 cited in Johannes Quasten,
Patrology (Utrecht-Antwerp: Spectrum Publishers, 1950), Vol. I, 289 and D. R. McConnell, A
Different Gospel (Peabody: Hendricksen Publishers, 1988), 1.
2
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves To Death (N.Y.: Penguin Books, 1985), 23.
3
R. Law, The Tests of Life (1978) cited in Geoffrey Bromiley, The International Standard
Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. Two, E-J (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1982), 484.
4
Ibid.
5
The NIV Study Bible, New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible
Publishers, 1985), 1906.
6
Ibid.
7
Gordon R. Lewis & Neil Duddy, "Who Is This 'Other Jesus'?" Moody Magazine (April,
1984), 28 cited in Gordon R. Lewis, Confronting the Cults (Philipsburg: Presbyterian &
Reformed Publishing Company, n. d.), n. p.
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid., 28-29.
10
Ibid., 29.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
15
Ibid.
16
Ronald Enroth, Evangelizing the Cults (Ann Arbor: Servant Publications, 1973), 14-15.
17
Shirley MacLaine, Dancing in the Night (NY: Bantam Books, 1985), 133. See also her
most famous book, Out on a Limb (NY: Bantam Books, 1983), n. p.


19



























CHAPTER 1. IS THERE A PLACE FOR TESTING DOCTRINE?



















20

BLESSINGS AND DANGERS

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the
grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospelwhich is really no gospel
at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying
to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should
preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally
condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching
to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!"
(Galatians 1:6-9)

Numerous people in the Faith Movement are caught up in excessive emotionalism
(though this is not unique to the Faith Movement). Weird behavior and strange statements1 are
often found on television station TBN from many of today's well-known faith and prosperity
preachers who have their own programs telecast by this station.2 TBN provides a steady diet of
dramatic emotional outbursts that are embarrassing to many Christians. Excessive weeping and
dramatic shouts of agreement or authoritative statements or unnatural expressions of joy are
common. Outrageous antics are seen regularly. Benny Hinn's shows also emphasize the dramatic
as they draw attention to Hinn himself as the Healer. Many find such egocentricity distracting
from the message itself. One is often left with the impression that it is Hinn who is key to what
God is doing, rather than the Sovereign God "who works all things after the counsel of His will"
(Eph 1:11).

Infallible Leadership?

Followers of the Faith Movement have been taught by their leaders not to listen to
anyone who criticizes their movement, especially their leadership. At the World Charismatic
Conference on August 7, 1992 in Anaheim, California Benny Hinn made the following threats to
the staff members and their families of the Christian Research Institute (CRI):

"Now I'm pointing my finger with the mighty power of God on me. . . . You hear this:
There are men and women in southern California attacking me. I will tell you under
the anointing now, you'll reap it in your children unless you stop. . . . And your
children will suffer. You're attacking me on the radio every nightyou'll pay and
your children will. Hear this from the lips of God's servant. You are in danger.
Repent! Or God Almighty will move His hand. Touch not my Anointed. . . ."3

A few months later Hinn warned, "Those who attack confession are on the devil's side."4
Paul Crouch has issued this warning to his critics:

"To hell with you! Get out of my life! Get out of the way! . . . I say get out of
God's way. Quit blocking God's bridges, or God's gonna shoot you if I don't. . . .
I don't even want to talk to you or hear you! I don't want to see your ugly face!"5



21

The Faith Movement, like many other Christian groups or movements, has shown an
unwillingness to discuss theology and to attempt to reason together from Scripture.6
It is unrealistic to think that any one of us has all the answers. Not only are some fait h
teachers indifferent to their critics, they seem overly confident and unwilling to subject
themselves to peer evaluation. References to traditional teaching often are made in disdain as
they seem to attempt to recast the Christian tradition. Paul Crouch says that instead of judging
heresy we should let God "sort out all this doctrinal doo-doo."7 Then he added,

"'We can't have faith preaching.' You can't have confession stuff.' 'You can't do
this, you can do that.' Who cares? Who cares? Let Jesus sort that all out at the
judgment seat of Christ. We'll find out who was right and wrong doctrinally."8

He said of heresy hunters:

"I think they're damned and on their way to hell; and I don't think there's any
redemption for them."9

While it may be unfair to understand some of these words literally, it does indicate the
hostility of some in the Faith Movement toward their critics. No one understands the things of
God comprehensively. We all "see through a glass darkly" (1 Co 13:12). This may be less so at
the center of our Christian faith, much more so at the outer reaches of faith's understanding. Yet,
even at those peripheral edges, we find that Many of the faith teachers are overly confident. At
least when it comes to the peripheral elements of their practices, they should be willing to sit
down and talk and try to come to a fair understanding, but often they are not willing.

Some people always have an easy answer to a complicated problem, and it is typically
wrong. We must be willing to live with mystery and not force simplistic answers to all complex
questions and problems. For God's thoughts and ways are higher than ours (Isa 55:8-9; Ro
11:33).

In their thirst for power and authority, the faith teachers insist upon the infallibility of
Spirit-filled leadership. They manifest authoritarian leadership patterns where top leaders are
viewed as inspired by the Spirit and beyond question. Many of these leaders attempt to supersede
church government by the force of their personalities. This Lone Ranger style rules out any
system of checks and balances that could provide accountability. While Roman Catholics have
only one pope who is located in Rome, the Faith Movement seems to have one in every local
congregation, or at best one or several in its leadership.

Are teachers of the Faith Movement purveying erroneous doctrines to followers caught in
blind and uncritical allegiance? Are rank and file members fervently following authoritarian, and
often dictatorial leaders who pontificate a narrow and biblically unsound dogma? Do some
leaders claim to be the interpreter of God's mind and Word? Does their attitude often seem to be,
"I know what's best for you"?10



22

Throughout history, confident and arrogant claims have attracted confused and perplexed
people who are seeking certainty in an uncertain world. Fear and guilt have always been used
ingeniously and forcefully to dominate gullible followers. Sadly, allegiance to leaders and
movements typically becomes so pronounced that followers are ready to do anything to please
their leader (which to them equals pleasing God).

Scripture warns of false prophets and teachers:

"But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false
teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even
denying the sovereign Lord who brought thembringing swift destruction on
themselves" (2 Pe 2:1-2).

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and
Follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come
from hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared with a hot iron."
(1 Ti 4:1-2)

Deception

It is naive to think that just because the Holy Spirit will not deceive us, we as believers
are therefore safe from deception and falsehood. The Bible is clear: Satan is a deceiver who
blinds people:

"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot
see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."
(2 Co 4:4)

But unbelievers are not the only ones who can be deceived. David recognized how liable
he was to blindness when he prayed:

"Search me, O God, and know my heart;
Test me and know my anxious thoughts.
See if there is any offensive way in me,
And lead me in the way everlasting" (Ps 139:23-24).

If "the man after God's own heart" saw his need for God's searching eye, how much more
do we need to seek His truth about Himself and about us, so we can receive forgiveness and walk
in truth and the rich fellowship that is available in Him.

Since Satan himself "masquerades as an angel of light" (2 Co 11:14), he even
uses visions to deceive and ensnare. As he will slowly draw us into sin and unbelief, we must
judge any manifestation by its fruit (Mt 7:20). Expressions of emotion must be judged by
their end result. Thus any manifestation that does not lead toward holiness and fruitfulness is
suspect, no matter how impressive to the human imagination.

23

Satan is a master imitator. His most effective methodology is not opposition but
imitation. Like God, Satan uses imagery to deceive and ensnare. Therefore visions and dreams
can be messages from heaven or lures from hell. Such messages can release or bind. Since
everyone uses imagery, we must be on guard! None of us can even thing without employing
imagery since our brains function in such a way that we are dependent on visual, sensory and
even auditory imagery. Such imagery often bombards our consciousness when we dream and
colors our fantasies when we are awake. And memory is primarily a matter of imagery.

Dangers in Testing Doctrine

Although the Bible is clear that there is a necessity to test doctrine, this is not to deny a
place for responsible dialogue. There is nothing wrong with God's people taking different or
opposing positions on theological issues as long as they do not contradict the "fundamentals" of
the faith, the "faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3).

Some object that we as believers should not occupy our time criticizing each other since
our differences are peripheral. There is no doubt that an inordinate amount of time can be spent
on fringe issues that drain our time and energy. After all, we do have many important
responsibilities such as evangelism, missions, teaching on the deeper life, worship, healing,
prayer, spiritual warfare, praise etc. This objection is valid if the teachings of the Faith
Movement are merely peripheral. But are they?

The dangers of fundamentalism have been manifested in a faultfinding, critical spirit
that has too often characterized the conservative wing of Christendom. A. W. Tozer had much to
say about the dangers of fundamentalism as he saw in this movement more the spirit of
Phariseeism than the spirit of Jesus. Therefore, he had much more to say about such dangers than
about the threat of liberalism. It was the Pharisees (the conservatives or fundamentalists), not the
Sadducees (the liberals), who received the harshest rebukes from our Lord and Master (Mt 23).

It is a sad commentary on much of Christendom that we are often preoccupied with
trivial squabbles. As denominations become older they also become more institutional and
bureaucratic. When that happens, "getting or keeping control" of what happens in the trenches,
gets increasing priority; in fact, it often takes on a life of its own.

One way this manifests itself is by the increasing number of "heresy hunters" or
"religious bloodhounds" who come out of the woodwork. These "doctrinal detectives" with hot
heads and cold hearts gnash their teeth at every sniff of what they deem heresy. A hard,
censorious, critical, fault-finding, stern self-righteousness banishes the spirit of love. Such strict
orthodoxy costs too much when it bows before one's "biblical" opinion and theological precision
at the price of love.

Whenever we become aware of a movement that may seem suspect, we must guard
against quickly jumping to the most damaging impression of judgment rather than thoughtfully
weighing the evidence. Reckless haste violates Scripture which states that we must give people
the benefit of the doubt ("[love] always trusts"1 Co 13:7).
24

When spiritual vitality wanes people become increasingly "religious." They try to make
up through externals, such as man-made rules and regulations ("the tradition of the elders"
legalism), what is missing internally in their communion with God. When spiritual declension
takes place, the heart of spirituality is taken over by a critical, narrow spirit that boasts of its
"concern for truth." Like the church at Ephesus which "[could] not tolerate wicked men" and
tested false apostles, in the process "lost [their] first love" so fundamentalists in their hot pursuit
for "theological correctness" have lost their first love. They have sacrificed love at the shrine of
what they consider "truth."

With two billion people on this planet who have not heard the name of Christ, who are
lost, blind, deaf and on the road to a God-forsaken eternity in hell, what in God's name (speaking
reverently) are we doing, that we think we have the luxury to spend precious time squabbling
over fine details of doctrine (secondary matters)! What might happen if that same time and
energy were devoted to prayer?

Many Christians tell us not to expend our energies in unprofitable debates with each other
but instead to join minds and hearts in fighting the real enemy! As Paul warned:

"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the
authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces
of evil in the heavenly realms" (Eph 6:12).

Such caution is legitimate. However, if truth is at stake then part of our warfare is to
point out its falsehood since it is Satan who is "a liar and the Father of lies" (Jn 8:44). Falsehood,
though expressed by human beings, must be confronted lest Satan spreads his venomous lies.

The Call to Seek and Fight for the Truth

In our desperate spiritual warfare against the powers of darkness, it is imperative that we
arm ourselves for the battle. The apostle Paul warns us: "But I am afraid that just as Eve was
deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and
pure devotion to Christ" (2 Co 11:3).

With spiritual confusion the norm, Christians must raise the banner of truth above the
humanistic philosophies and bizarre teachings that permeate society. Jesus promised:

"You will know the truth and the truth will make you free" (Jn 8:32).

When leaders make errors, do we not need to forgive them, correct them, pray for them,
and restore them? Of course! If Jesus restored Peter, who denied Him, we should do no less.





25

There is no such thing as infallible leadership! Pentecostthe coming of the Holy Spirit
in His fullnessdid not confer infallibility upon God's leaders. Although Peter and the other
apostles operated with much greater power after they were filled with the Spirit, this did not
make them infallible. In fact, God had to use persecution (Ac 8:1) to get them to do their main
jobspread the gospel.

Paul was forced to publicly oppose Peter, the leader of the Christian church, because he
would not eat with the Gentiles (Gal 2:11-13). Peter and other Spirit-filled leaders were
caught teaching that all who believed the gospel must live under Levitical law and adopt Jewish
culture. Even though the New Testament presents a church that is filled with the Spirit to a
much greater degree than we see in our own, her leaders were as fallible as ours.

The Balance of Truth

The balance of truth only comes when we listen to many leaders who are genuinely
trying to proclaim "the whole counsel of God" (Ac 20:27; see also Pr 11:14; 15:22). In
ignoring the counsel of church historyits creeds, confessions, and writingstheologyare not
Faith Movement leaders courting danger? If church history teaches anything, it points to the vital
necessity of having every leader or movement come under scrutiny. To teach otherwise is to
fly in the face of historical awareness, common sense, and sacred Scripture.

Is It Wrong To Judge?

Many Christians have come to believe that it is wrong to judge. For many this is based on
Jesus' warning:

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others,
you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
(Mt 7:1-2)

Jesus does not mean however, that it is always wrong to judge people under any
circumstances. If so, then why did He tell us five verses later not to give sacred things to "dogs"
and pearls to "swine"? How can we decide who is a dog or who is a swine unless we judge? This
injunction calls upon us to be discriminating and avoid hypocrisy. Jesus is warning us that the
measuring stick we use to judge others will be used for us.

A little later in this same chapter Jesus states,

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly
they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them" (Mt 7:16).

How can we "watch out" for false prophets if we are not to judge? These people come in
"sheep's clothing" claiming to be Christians, knowing how to use Christian terminology, and
behaving in loving and nice ways. But we must not be taken in by the mere veneer of such
claims and behavior.

26

Jesus' statement, "By their fruit you will recognize them" (Mt 7:16) cannot be taken
seriously if we are not to be discerning? It is true that we are never to judge in the sense of
condemning someone, for only God knows all the facts and only He truly knows the motives and
the heart of any person. While we can judge what people do and say, we cannot judge why they
say what they say and do what they do. Paul reminds us: "God will judge the secrets of men
through Christ Jesus" (Ro 2:16).

Moreover, we are not to adopt and cultivate a censorious spirit. "Don't judge" or "Stop
judging" is, in the Greek present tense, demanding that we stop making this a habit or practice of
life. We are not to go around looking for the bad, magnifying the evil when we find it in the lives
of others. We must not practice "fault-finding and flaw-picking."

Judging others was a common sin in Jesus' day. Remember Nathaniel's question? "Can
any good come out of Nazareth?" (Jn 1:46).

The question reflected a prejudice of Orthodox Judaism that Nazareth lay outside the
realm of God's blessings (compare Jn 7:52). The Pharisees considered themselves to be
"righteous" and they "scorned others" (Lk 18:9). Their censorious judgment categorized Jesus
as "the friend of publicans and sinners" (5:30).

Although we are not to be judgmental and condemning, we are to judge in the sense of
being discerning or discriminating, and even then it must be done in humility (Gal 6:1-5).
Without such discrimination there would be no church discipline (Mt 18:15-20; 1 Co 5:1-13; 2
Co 7:8-13; 2 Th 3:6-15) or any semblance of order in the body of Christ. A right use of judging
will manifest itself in loving our brother enough to correct him and our God's truth enough to
stand up for it and confess it before people.

It is not wrong to listen carefully to what is said from the pulpit. Paul encouraged this:

"Two or three prophets should speak and others should weigh carefully what
is said" (1 Co 14:29).

To those who argue that this principle only applies to prophecy, Luke replies:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for
they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true" (Ac 17:11).

Truth seekers are considered "noble" by God. These are people who so love the truth
that they will not automatically receive something as truth just because someone said it, no
matter how good a reputation the person may have (Paul was considered a solid leader and
teacher).



27

These passages make clear that even prophets, apostles, and teachers err or go beyond
God's revelation. This is why the community of believers is so important. God has made us the
responsible to test everything:

"Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are
from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 Jn 4:10).

"Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil (1 Th 5:21).

Testing Manifestations

Since many messages given in the Christian community are subjective by nature, it is
vital that we continually test the messages we receive. We do this subjectively by the Holy Spirit
who testifies to our spirit (Ro 8:14-16) and objectively by God's Word to see whether or
not they are of God.

Philosopher, theologian, and revivalist Jonathan Edwards gave five signs to determine
whether a work is or is not of the Holy Spirit. All the rules he gives (based upon an exposition of
I John 4) have to do with the eventual effects of the work in the person's life:

1. Giving more honor to the historic Jesus, the Son of God and the Savior of the world;

2. Opposing Satan's kingdom by discouraging sin, lust and the world (the lust of the
flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life);

3. Holding Scripture in high esteem;

4. Increasingly realizing that life is short, that there is another world, that they have
immortal souls and must give an account of themselves to God that they are sinful by
nature and practice, and that they are helpless to overcome this without Christ; and

5. Expressing love for Christ and for others, especially toward fellow Christians which
should not be characterized by hostility."11

Edwards also points out that we have greater assurance of the authenticity of a
manifestion when it is observed in many people, of many different types of people, and in
various places. The more widespread and varied a movement is, the more seriously it must be
taken.

Is It Ever Legitimate to Name Names?

While false teaching is to be identified and exposed does that mean that it is ever
legitimate to name names? Paul provides an example for us in that in some cases he chose not to
mention the names of false teachers (1 Ti 1:3). In other cases, however, he gives their names. He
28

warns Timothy of Hymenaeus and Alexander (v. 20) and mentions Hymenaeus again along with
Philetus (2 Ti 2:17). John identifies Diotrephes "who loves to be first among them, [and] does
not accept" (2 Jn 9) what John and his companions taught.

What benefit can there be in naming a person who is teaching erroneous doctrine? For
one, if false doctrines are spoken of in generalities, which is often the case, people will often
deny that their teachers are responsible for those doctrines. In many cases people refuse to
believe that their favorite teachers are exposing false doctrine unless exact quotes are produced
from their writings or sermons documenting the errors.

Another benefit to naming names is church discipline when such a person is unrepentant.
Paul made this clear to Titus:

"Reject a factious man after a first and second warning, knowing that such a
man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned" (Titus 3:10-11).

Harsh, yet words inspired by God! Since people who create factions by teaching
erroneous doctrine are to be disciplined (i.e. either restored or rejected by the church), if that
rejection or excommunication is to be in effect throughout the church, false teachers need to be
publicly exposed.

Counterfeiters know how to use religious terminology. They appropriate all the right
phrases and cliches and thus sound very pious. They ply such words as faith, knowledge,
revelation, salvation, resurrection, judgment, prayer, healing, etc. only to depart from historic
Christianity, and dress up their deception to convince others that their "interpretation" is right.
Paul indicated that the believers of Galatia were seduced:

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the
grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospelwhich is really not gospel
at all" (Gal 1:6-7).

The professing Christian Church as the end of the twenty-first century includes much
sectarian error under its big tent. Part of evangelicalism is passively witnessing, to its shame, the
tragic infection of right doctrine with counterfeit claims that amount to "another gospel." It is
vital that we reclaim and restore the truth of God and expose and reject every error that is leading
people astray. Only then can the cause of God and the hope of people prosper.










29

NOTES

1
An example would be when Benny Hinn was on "Praise the Lord" program October 23,
1992 when Paul Crouch said to him: "You have been attacked on some statements that you have
made concerning the Trinity and the members of the Godhead." To which Hinn replied,
"Especially on that one, yes." They both stated that they agreed that there are three members of
the Trinity. Then Crouch said, "Not nine." At that point Hinn laughed and said, "No, goodness
sake!" to which Crouch asked, "Where did they get that silly idea anyway?" Hinn, of course, is
the one who had taught that previously (recorded on tape on TBN October 13, 1990). But Hinn
conveniently ignored Crouch's question. Cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 412-413.
2
Such as Kenneth Copeland, Frederick Price, Benny Hinn, Marilyn Hickey, John
Avanzini, Dwight Thompson, T. L. Osborn, and Oral and Richard Roberts.
3
Benny Hinn, presentation at World Charismatic Conference, Melodyland Christian
Center, Anaheim, California (7 August 1992), CRI audiotape cited in Hanegraaff, 344, 413.
4
"Benny Hinn" program on TBN (8 June 1992) cited in Hanegraaff, 345, 413.
5
Paul Crouch, "Praise-a-thon program on TBN (2 April 1991) cited in Hanegraaff, 360.
6
I have personally on many occasions offered to sit down with people of the Faith
Movement to examine theological issues but they have typically refused to do so. I have also
provided literature with opposing viewpoints which they either did not read at all, or they read
with little, if any, comprehension. This became evident when I would ask them about the
rationale of the argumentation of such literature. I have spoken with many other pastors in my
own denomination (The Christian and Missionary Alliance) and other denominations who have
had similar experiences with those involved in faith heresy.
7
Paul Crouch, "Praise-a-Thon" program on TBN (2 April 1991) cited in Hanegraaff, 360.
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid. See also Mark I. Pinsky, "He Wished Death on Foes--Theologians Fault Prayer by
Crouch," Los Angeles Times (Orange County ed.) (16 February 1989), Sec. 2, page 1, Sec. 2,
page 10 cited in Hanegraaff, 360.
10
These rhetorical questions are answered throughout the remainder of this book.
11
Jonathan Edwards, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 2 (Edinburgh: The Banner of
Truth, 1974), 150 cited in Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House, 1993), 93-95 also cited in Jerry White, When the Spirit Comes
With Power (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 32-33.


30


























CHAPTER 2. MARKS OF CULTS




















31

Cults have certain common features or characteristics. We find many of these
characteristics in the Faith Movement. It is therefore vital that we first sketch out what
characteristics to look for. Instead of presenting illustrations of these characteristics of the Faith
Movement in this chapter, such illustrations will be provided throughout the rest of the book.

1. Defective Christology. Cults are founded on doctrinal perversions which commonly
deny the deity or the humanity of Jesus. By this denial and their denial of Jesus' bodily
resurrection, they render Jesus' death and resurrection meaningless.

2. Extra Biblical Revelation. To the Bible is added the authority of some book or
teacher. Their view is "We have a special message from God." They thrive on biblical illiterates
and religious newcomers enamored with supposed special revelation, deeper truths, and better
methods. Cultists profess to have a corner on God's revelation. As a rule they claim to have a
book or letter that is the "key" to understanding the Bible. Some say that only their translation of
the Bible is inspired. Jehovah's Witnesses are an example of this as they indoctrinate their
followers to believe that the New World Translation is the only accurate translation. Many faith
teachers claim that the King James Version is the only authoritative source and that all other
translations are suspect.

Others believe their leader alone has God's final message for the world in these last days.
Their attitude is "Yes, we need the Bible but . . ." Mormons make the claim that The Book of
Mormon is as essential, if not more so, than the Bible.

3. Defective Pneumatology. Their defective Christology leads to an erroneous view of
the Holy Spirit. Instead of recognizing the Holy Spirit as the third member of the Trinity and
therefore a Person, they look upon Him as merely an impersonal force or power.

4. Exclusive Salvation. Because they accept a leader who alone has God's final message
they believe God can accomplish His ultimate purpose only through them--"our group" since
they alone are God's people and understand His message. Like the Novationists of the third
century, they truly believe that they alone are saved while all others are lost. If their movement
fails, then they reason, God has failed. If they let God down, then His work will never be
accomplished.

5. Presumptious Messianic Leadership. The leaders of cults are frequently men and
women who claim that they in some unique way represent God to their disciples. Some claim to
be a "messiah," if not outright "the Messiah." Others claim to be "the interpreter" of God's mind
and Word. Their attitude is "I know what's best for you." Such arrogant and confident claims
attract confused and anxious seekers after certainty.

6. Blind Allegiance to Leadership. Followers are taught that any kind of questioning is
disloyalty to the leaders and to the group. All disagreement is viewed as a threat to the "purity"
of the movement. Uncritical devotion to leadership is the result. Allegiance to the leader and the
cult may become so pronounced that followers are ready to die to show their loyalty, as in the
case of Jim Jones' followers. This blind allegiance is also seen in that decades and even centuries
32

after a leader has died the devoted followers still try to prove that their founder was true or that
his long past date for the Second Coming of Christ is still legitimate, as in the case of Charles
Russell, the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses.

7. A False Basis of Salvation. Instead of accepting "the finished work" of Jesus Christ
who died to obtain man's salvation, cults add to that work. This is in the form of meritorious
effortrules and regulations closely adhered to. Witnessing door-to-door is a fundamental
requirement for those who hope to attain salvation among the Jehovah's Witnesses. Among many
cults certain religious observances are added that take on crucial importance. When any human
activity is added to the work accomplished by Jesus on the cross, the Gospel of grace is
perverted. Their attitude is "Jesus died for our sins, but . . ."

8. Uncertain Hope. Despite the claim of exclusive salvation, the common experience of
a
cultist is that he never has the full assurance of salvation. When pressed he will admit that he is
not sure that he will enter heaven, but strives to work a little harder to make that hope more
certain. With meritorious work as the basis of salvation, it is no wonder that the cultist is
tragically and understandably left in a limbo of uncertainty. Those who belong to the Bahai faith,
for instance, will make it clear that no one can be sure of salvation for no one is "perfect or holy
enough to merit" the paradise of God; and those who so claim to have attained this exalted
position are in the eyes of the Bahai faith "presumptuous," to say the very least. Yet the devoted
Bahai follower hopes that this will be the case when they die.

9. Doctrinal Ambiguity. Cults constantly change their views to fit the changing values
and ideas of society. An example of this is the position of the Mormons toward blacks. It was
only a few years ago that they allowed African-Americans into the priesthood. Before that they
were considered an inferior race. They believed that Cain, the first murderer, was the progenitor
of the black race, his black skin being the result of a curse by the gods. In the case of some cults,
then, changes are made to tailor their message to fit whatever is currently attracting followers.

10. Selective Hermeneutics (Interpretation). The cultist is very selective in his
treatment of the Bible. He uses a cafeteria style of interpretation in which he picks and chooses
certain verses here and there without regard to their context. It is proof-texting: portions of
Scripture are cited out of context to prove a particular point of doctrine. He builds his beliefs out
of bits and pieces of the Bible. This is why cult members are so extremely lacking in general
biblical knowledge. They focus all their learning on certain portions and are totally in the dark if
asked about the rest of the Bible.

11. Exclusive Eschatology. Because cult members believe that they alone are the people
of God and that they have the only true message of God, their view of Christ's coming is "Christ
is coming only for us."





33

12. Persecution Complex. Their exclusivistic view of salvation gives rise to a per
Persecution complex that feeds their paranoia. Since they are the only ones who are God's
people, they interpret opposition to them as unjust persecution. They tend to believe that people
hate them because they are different. Their attitude is, "The world is against us because we have
the truth!"

13. Denunciation of Other Churches. This often takes the form of black-listing all other
churches and denominations as being apostate while claiming their group to be the only true
representation of the Church. Often they see themselves as the restoration of primitive or
apostolic Christian faith. Their attitude is "All the churches are wrong but ours."

14. Authoritarianism. Leaders intrude into the most minute details of the lives of their
followers. People are often told what to eat, when to go to bed, who to marry (dating is often
forbidden and considered "worldly"), how many children to have, how to discipline, where to
live (if they are not in a communal setting), what kind of work they engage in, etc. In order to
assure uniformity or "purity," followers are discouraged from thinking for themselves. Fear and
guilt are ingeniously and even forcefully used to dominate the lives of its followers.

The mass wedding ceremony of The Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon is an
example of authoritarianism as there is a random pairing of thousands of couples by Moon
himself, the vast majority being made up of different national origins to overcome international
barriers "to create one world of the heart and a blessed race for the future."1

15. Anti-Intellectualism. This does not mean that cult leaders or followers are not
intelligent; it means that they have a general disdain for education as offered by our society and
religious institutions. The cultist takes pride in his lack of formal education, often making fun of
seminaries by referring to them as "cemeteries." Cult leaders are for the most part "self-taught,"
deciding for themselves what is important and what is not important to study. If they do have
some formal or semiformal education, it is often at a school that is not accredited by an
accrediting association.

Such lack of formal education without the willingness to be subject to the judgment of
others, easily leads to heresy since a person is not given the broad spectrum of education,
whether secular or theological.

I'm reminded of the young and enthusiastic evangelist who told John Wesley, "God
doesn't need your education." Wesley responded, "Nor does God need your ignorance."
Wesley understood that to bypass the accumulated knowledge and wisdom of people
throughout the ages by selecting a narrow path, if a path at all, of intellectual pursuit, is the
height of intellectual and religious snobbery.

16. Syncretism. Often cults mix views and interpretations from various sources
(biblical and extrabiblical) or groups such as the British Israel theory of eschatological
interpretation, Seventh Day Adventism (viewed as somewhat aberrant in their theology, but
not considered a cult by many), Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. Various views are blended together in
a simplistic inclusivism to appeal to the naive and the uninformed.
34

17. Financial Exploitation. As seen earlier, false prophets are usually motivated by
greed. Their love of money, which is the root of all evil, makes them seek huge sums of money
from their followers so they can live in the lap of luxury. Luxurious living is often used as

evidence of God's blessing in their life and ministry. Wealth is a sign of God's approval and the
faith of the leader. The more faith, the more money. All kinds of manipulative techniques are
brought to bear on gullible followers to extract their hard-earned money.

The Watershed: Christology

The first of these characteristics of cultsChristologyis the most typical aberration of
the traditional teachings of Christianity. It is here that we will see the Faith Movement make its
gravest departure.

Throughout church history orthodox Christianity has adhered to the statements of the
creeds of Nicea (A.D. 323), Constantinople (A.D. 381) and Chalcedon (A.D. 451). Even the
division between the Eastern and Western churches in 1054 did not alter this as both church
bodies retained the Christology of the Early Church. The Reformation, with its major division
of the Western church, also left the creedal confessions unchanged. All major Reformation
churches (Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican) accepted the ancient creeds.

It was not until the 18th century that serious opposition arose from the new liberal
theology. But even then individual congregations, at least officially, retained the old
Christological dogma. None of the historic denominations ever officially abandoned it.
Throughout this entire period, as well as our own century, adherents to the ancient creeds have
distinguished historic Christian orthodoxy from liberalism by the application of the creeds'
Christological standards.















NOTE
1
Ruth A. Tucker, Another Gospel (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989), 256.

35























CHAPTER 3. A CORRECTIVE MOVEMENT























36

The Introduction and Chapter 1 provide the historical and theological context for what
has come to be referred to by many as "The Faith Movement," the focus of the rest of this book
will be upon this movement. The reason is its similarity to historic orthodox Christianity. Its
similarity is what blinds many to its differences, which are sometimes obvious and sometimes
subtle.

I have called the Faith Movement a "quasi-cult" rather than a cult since it aligns itself so
closely with evangelical Christianity. It is a quasi-cult in that most of its doctrine is orthodox
while some of it is not.

While it must be acknowledged that modern faith teachers vary in their interpretations of
Scripture, sometimes even contradicting one another, nevertheless, taken as a whole, the Faith
Movement presents a distorted gospel. Its gospel of health, wealth, and prosperity sells well in a
prosperous country like the United States (as well as other prosperous countries). Its
triumphalistic (optimistic) gospel appeals to the poor and wealthy alike in that it reinforces the
greed of the wealthy and gives (false) hope to the desperate and unsuspecting poor.

We must keep in mind, however, that this modern "Christian" movement sprung up as a
corrective to a diluted and thus defective Christianity. As we shall see, the Faith Movement has
helped to bring back some correctives that much of Christendom has long ignored or
deemphasized, such as

Taking Faith seriously

Giving a Legitimate Place to the Supernatural

Acknowledging a Rightful Place to Experience

Focusing on the Positive

Emphasizing Praise

Emphasizing Joy

Faith

Although not all faith pleases God, without faith it is impossible to please Him (Heb
11:6). There is no denying that faith has fallen on difficult times in orthodox Christianity.
Christendom has been taken in by scientism in which our world is explained and understood by
scientific observation. It is a sad commentary on the church that science and technology is more
often appealed to than the God of all truth. When Christians get sick, many only turn to God in
prayer after the doctor tells them there is no cure. Thus God has become the last resort.




37

Intellect and Emotions

Fundamentalism and evangelicalism, have as a whole, drifted to two polesthose who
trust the human intellect to the point of sheer rationalism, and those who are shy of everything
intellectual and are convinced that thinking is a waste of the Christian's time.

Both are wrong!

While intellectualism is wrong, thinking is not wrong. After all, it seems that God gave
most major revelation in the Scriptures to a man of superior intelligence.

Yet thinking apart from the inward illumination of the Holy Spirit is not only futile, but
dangerous. The Scriptures, to be understood, must be read under the guidance of the same Spirit
that originally inspired them. Since the human intellect is fallen, it can no more find its way
through the broad expanse of truth, half-truth and error than a ship can find its way over the
ocean without a compass. Since God has given us the Holy Spirit to illumine our minds, He is
our eyes and our understanding.

Emotions

Fundamentalism and evangelicalism have also divided radically over the role of
emotions. On the one side are those (mostly in the charismatic/Pentecostal camp) who give
undue place to the emotions on the other are the traditionalists who are guilty of anti-
emotionalism or stoicism as they shy away from everything that has to do with the emotions.

The irony is that people who argue against the free expression of emotions often do so
emotionally. They argue against the use of the emotions in religion with tremendous emotional
output and thus belie their intentions as they contradict the very thing they fight.

Nowhere in Scripture are feelings and faith at odds with each other. The emotions are
neither to be feared nor despised since they are a normal part of what God made. Without
emotions, human life would not be possible. In Jesus we feel the combination of intellect, feeling
and will: "When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, He had compassion on them and healed
their sick" (Mt 14:14).

Intellectual knowledge of the suffering of the people so stirred Jesus emotionally that His
compassion moved Him to will to heal them.

Much of conservative Christianity has tried to rationally explain everything and thus
"reduced worship to the level of the intellect and introduced the rationalistic spirit into the
wonders of religion."1 (Emphasis added)





38

The Rightful Place of Experience

While conservative Christianity has emphasized doctrine, the Faith Movement has
emphasized experience. The truth is that the two are inseparably intertwined. Yet it seems to be
our nature to desire a dichotomy. Typically we try to back God into an either/or situation. Just as
a pilot is not given a choice of one wing as opposed to another, God has not given us the choice
between doctrine and experience. Both are a must!

Integration

The need of Christianity is to integrate the theology of the Word with the theology of
experience. While conservative Christianity has sometimes led us to worship doctrines and
creeds that are true, the Charismatic and Faith Movements have pointed us in the direction of
worshiping the true and living God. It is the God of doctrinenot doctrine itselfthat must be
worshiped.

Our hope then is not only in the written Word, but in the Living Word. Our lives are
changed only as we experience Jesus for ourselves. What the church needs is a theology of the
Word that leads to experience. Without sound doctrine we will never know whether we really
know God since it is Scripture that testifies about Him. But without experience we may know
about God, but we will never know Him personally.

Focusing on the Positive

It is easy to so focus on the positive that the negative is overlooked, but it is better to
focus on the positive than on the negative. This the Faith Movement has done.

Much of historic orthodox Christianity has gotten mired in the negative with its emphasis
on the fall of man, the fallen creation, the depravity of man, sin, guilt, suffering, and hell. To her
credit the Faith Movement, along with her cousin the charismatic movement, has rejected such
negativism. The Faith Movement, like the charismatic movement, has brought a corrective to this
unbiblical, and possibly neurotic, tendency.

A dark and dying world needs more than the bad news of man's sinfulness and creation's
fallenness. It needs to hear of the love of God which made possible the Christian Gospelthe
good news of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Co 15:1-3).

True Prosperity

Faith teachers, though I believe they have overemphasized health, wealth, and prosperity,
nevertheless have provided hope for Christians who often are only told to "grin and bear it."
Although the Bible clearly teaches that self-denial, sacrifice and suffering are to characterize the
follower of Christ (Lk 5:1-11,27-28; 9:23-26,57-62; 14:25-35; 18:18-30) and asserts that
contentment is "great gain" (Php 4:11-13), this is not the whole story. God also wants us to
believe Him for blessings which may include health, wealth, and prosperity.

39

In the Old Testament prosperity connotes the realization of goals (Gn 24:21,40,42,
56), success in labor (Gn 39:3,23; 2 Ch 32:30), living in peace and safety (Dt 23:6; 1 Ch 14:7; La
3:17), enjoying the benefits of familial relationships (Ruth 4:11; Job 1:1-5), as well as acquiring
and possessing material goods (Dt 28:11; 1 Kgs 10:7; 1 Ch 29:23; Job 21:23f.; Pr 10:4,15,22:
14:23). More important to the Hebrews were the spiritual and ethical dimensions of prosperity.
True prosperity was linked to the blessings of covenantal obedience before God (Dt 28:29; 29:9;
1 Kgs 2:3; 1 Ch 22:13). It is God who bestows prosperity on those who keep and do the words of
the Mosaic (and subsequent) covenants (Dt 28:11; 29:9; 30:9; Ne 2:20; Ps 68:6).

The material and spiritual blessings tied to covenant-keeping are rewards for the
righteous, those who fear the Lord (Ps 1:3; 25:13; 37:11). Similarly, prosperity is one of the
rewards of godly wisdom. That is, the wise receive effective instruction and practice
righteousness, justice, and equity (Pr 1:3-5,33; 2:8; 3:2-4; 13:21; 19:8).

Those who refuse to acknowledge God in their prosperity (Hebrews 10:21; 22:21) and to
share their abundance with the poor and needy (Ezekiel 16:49) forfeit the blessings associated
with covenant-keeping; instead they are subject to the curses connected with covenant-breaking
(Dt 28:11,29; 29:9; 30; Pr 3:9f.).

The Old Testament also recognizes clear and frequent exceptions to the prosperity
doctrine, especially references to the fact that the wicked often prosper as much or more than the
righteous (Ps 37:35; 73:3; Ecc 7:15). Jeremiah, a righteous man who lived in constant adversity,
framed the question this way:

"You are always righteous, O Lord, when I bring a case before You. Yet I would
speak with You about Your justice: Why does the way of the wicked prosper?
Why do all the faithless live at ease? (Jer 12:1)

If material wealth and achievement is an automatic indication of God's approval and
reward then God is unjust since history is replete with successful madmen and prosperous
despots. Is God really on the side of wealthy cultists, dishonest business executives, immoral
rock stars, and ruthless loan sharks?

Yet Isaiah prophesies that the Servant of God will prosper, be exalted and prolong His
time, and that the will of God shall "prosper in His hand" (Isaiah 52:13; 53:10). This was
fulfilled in the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth.

As the Servant-Messiah, Jesus prospered in that He always did the will of the Father
(Jn 6:35-40; 10:1-18,31-39). Prosperity is seen in that He reconciled Israel and the Gentile
nations to God through His redemptive work (Ro 5:1-11,15-17; 11:11-32; 2 Co 5:16-21), He has
been exalted highly and now sits at the right hand of God (Php 2:9-11; Heb 8:1-7), and He will
come again in majesty with power and great glory (Mt 24:29-31).




40

Although prosperity may prove to be a snare to spiritual development because it tends to
foster an attitude of self-sufficiency (Dt 8:7-18; Mt 6:24; 19:23-26; Lk 12:13-21; 18:18-30; 1 Ti
6:8-10; Rev 3:17), it need not be that way. After all, many of God's people such as Abraham,
Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Job, David, Solomon, Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, Barnabas, Paul,
etc. prospered without ill effects. Paul himself instructed the Corinthians to give to the Jerusalem
church "in proportion to their measure of prosperity" (1 Co 16:2).

Prosperity is also one of the fruits of the revival and restoration to be prompted by
implementation of the new covenant in the eschaton (the future or the endPs 106:5; Isa
48:15; 66:12; Jer 33:6,9; 44:17; Zec 1:17; 8:12).

Emphasizing Praise

Although the Faith Movement at times views praise as a fetish (something that has
inherent power in and of itself) and as a panacea (the solution to virtually every ill), it is to be
commended for its emphasis on praise. After all, the Bible mentions praise more often than
prayer (about 500 times as opposed to some 400 times).

The praise of God is vital since it is a characteristic feature of biblical piety. Its
importance in Hebrew worship is abundantly evident in the book of Psalms. The expression,
"Praise the Lord!" occurs twenty-four times in the Psalter as a call to praise. The New Testament,
likewise, resounds with outbursts of praise (e.g., most powerfully expressed in the doxologies of
the book of Revelation4:8; 5:9-14; 15:3; 19:1-8).

Praise not only brings us closer to God in this life, but in the life to come where it will be
the characteristic note of our worship in heaven. While our prayers will have been answered, our
praise will continue throughout the eons of eternity.

With such an emphasis on praise in Scripture, why has historic Christianity, at least in the
last half century, not given due weight to something so important to God? The faith teachers
remind us that we need to give more attention to this vital ingredient.

Emphasizing Joy

Historic orthodox Christianity has at times become so serious that it has lost its joy. Since
the Bible is a journal of joy, an overly serious approach to the Christian faith is unbiblical.
That the Bible is a journal of joy is evident everywhere Gods angels shouted for joy at
the creation (Job 38:7). They announced Jesus' incarnation as "good tidings of great joy . . . to
all people" (Lk 2:10). Jesus promised His disciples a "fullness of joy" that no person could take
away from them (Jn 15:11; 16:22,24). In His high priestly prayer He said His words were
spoken that His disciples might have His joy (17:13). God Himself plans to present us
"before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy" (Jude 24).




41

God majors in joy, but some of his servants seem to major in misery! The words
happiness, gladness, rejoicing, joy, and their cognates occur more than 650 times in the Bible,
and beyond them are thousands of references to blessing, singing, praising, exulting!

The New Testament may center on a cross, the fires of persecution, and the blood of
martyrs, but its note from beginning to end is one of triumphant joy, beginning with an angel
chorus and ending with praise around the throne of God. The gospel is both a message of joy and
an invitation to begin living a life of joy.

Giving a Legitimate Place to the Supernatural

The Faith Movement, like the charismatic movement, has also given a legitimate place to
the supernatural. The entire next chapter discusses this emphasis since it has been such a
controversial subject in the history of the church. Because of these movements, God's people
have been actively encouraged to seek the power of God in their lives and thus have come to
experience such power in an atmosphere of faith and expectancy.

For these contributions, historic orthodox Christianity must pay tribute to the Faith
Movement






















NOTES

1
A. W. Tozer, The Root of the Righteous (Harrisburg: Christian Publications, 1955), 79.

42
























CHAPTER 4 THE THEOLOGICAL AND SPIRITUAL VACUUM
OF EVANGELICAL THEOLOGY: A DEFECTIVE THEOLOGY





















43

Much of evangelical Christianity (cessationism) does not believe in God's immediate
intervention. Although God is given credit for the ordinary things in our lives, when it comes to
the miraculous, not much is expected, if anything at all. Dispensational and much of Reformed
theology has relegated the numerous texts promising the miraculous to the apostolic age.
However, teaching that signs and wonders were peculiar to the apostolic band and not bestowed
generally, and that miracles have ceased since the apostolic era, has no clear basis in Scripture.

Are Miracles For Today?

Belief that the day of miracles is pastthat the "supernatural" or "sign" gifts are not for
todayis argued from both a theological and historical perspective. I believe Scripture, history,
reason and experience show the validity of the miraculous, that "sign" or "supernatural" gifts are
for today.

While it would be unfair and unkind to brand those who take such a dispensational stance
as being theologically liberal (though such an arbitrary method of doing away with portions of
Scripture is certainly liberal), they are clearly treading on dangerous ground when they arbitrarily
snip out certain passages of the New Testament (e.g. parts of 1 Co 14 as well as the Sermon on
the Mount) and pontificate that such passages are no longer applicable today.

While their intent is not the same as that of the liberals, their result is. While they are
themselves critical of the liberals who take their critical scissors and remove from the
sacred text material they regard as mythical or as a product of the later church (tradition), they
too use critical scissors in removing from the sacred text material they regard as belonging
only to the early apostolic church. Such a method is careless at best, arrogant and heretical at
worst, unless there is extremely strong biblical and theological warrant for such a method of
interpretation.

The following points are made to summarize the rationale for the belief that God is still a
miracle-working God. For a fuller explanation refer to Appendix A and B in the back of this
book or to my unpublished manuscript entitled, Quasignostic Christianity, which deals with this
issue at length.

The argument that there were only two periods of miracles in the Old Testament is
fallacious. This is contradicted by Jeremiah who claimed:

"You performed miraculous signs and wonders in Egypt and have continued
them to this day, both in Israel and among all mankind, and have gained the
renown that is still yours" (Jer 32:20).

The claim by the cessationists (term for those who believe the so-called "supernatural
gifts" ceased with the completion of the canon of Scripture) that there is a difference between
"natural" and "supernatural" gifts is spurious. The Bible nowhere makes such an artificial
distinction.


44

Paul's teaching about the church as a body undermines the notion that some gifts are
temporary. If Paul had intended to prepare believers for the phasing out of certain gifts, it is
in this context of the church as a body that we would expect him to do so. Instead, he emphasizes
the importance of each gift and carefully and methodically instructs the new Christian
community in the proper use of prophecy and tongues.

The cessation theory is based on the belief that the word "perfection" in 1 Corinthians
13:10 where Paul says, ". . . but when perfection [teleion] comes, the imperfect disappears"
means the completed canon of Scripture (the New Testament). Biblical scholar F. F. Bruce,
along with most evangelical biblical theologians, convincingly argues that the most plausible
interpretation of "perfection" is the second coming of Christ which ushers in our eternal state.1

The cessation view also narrows the function of the gifts to the few apostles and prophets
through whom inspired Scripture was written. Paul, however, teaches a wider purpose for these--
continually building up the body of Christ. Sign gifts such as prophecy, tongues and word of
knowledge, as well as the others, are given as long as the Church has not reached her maturity in
Christ (Eph 4:7-13). If cessation theology were true, we must view as a nonsensical
statement Paul's challenge to the church to "Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual
gifts, especially the gift of prophecy" (1 Co 14:1).

I believe that one of the strongest arguments for the validity of the "supernatural" gifts for
today is God's name. The name Yahweh is compounded with seven names. One of those is:

"Yahweh (Jehovah)-rapha, The Lord who heals" (Ex 15:26).

God's name does not change. Names in the Bible always represent the nature and
character of the person. This is also true of God. It is, therefore, God's very nature to heal. To
argue that the day of miracles is past is then to fly in the face of God's name.

Our Western world view, I believe, has also had a tremendous impact on our
understanding of theology in general, and our understanding of the miraculous specifically. Since
our Western world is basically scientific (rationalistic), our approach to all matters in life is
heavily scientific and thus highly anti-supernatural. It is therefore crucial that we discover the
world view of Jesus in which things were seen in the context of the kingdoms of light and
darkness. Unlike many of His contemporaries whose world view was primarily magical and
mystical, Jesus was realistic in that He embraced both the material and the spiritual. Like Him,
we need to acknowledge both the natural and the supernatural.

Church history shows us that miracles never ceased. Biblical theologian Geoffrey
Bromiley in his article, "The Charismata in Christian History" has carefully and painstakingly
shown that there never was a time when miracles ceased, especially on the frontiers where the
gospel of the Kingdom was proclaimed to new people (see Appendix B).

The kingdom of Christ is meant to have miracles as a normative part of church life.


45

"The God Who Was"

In jettisoning the miraculous to the distant past, much of evangelical Christianity has
come to worship and serve the "God who was" rather than the "God who is" (Exodus 3:15).
Even evangelicals who pray, "If it be Your will, please heal so-and-so," would probably be
in shock if God actually answered their prayer. The God of evangelicalism is a God that can help
us in ordinary situations, but is not much help when we "really" need help. In such circumstances
we quickly head for the medical profession.

The Faith Movement, like any movement, has kernels of truth. Its stubborn insistence on
believing a God who still can be trusted for the supernatural, as well as the natural, is biblically
correct. Its emphasis on faith, though skewed, is helpful. Although they "over-believe," the rest
of evangelicalism, for the most part, "under-believe." The Faith Movement, in providing a
corrective, stepped out beyond the borders of legitimate concerns and ended up in some heretical
teachings. In correcting one fault they committed many faults, some of which are very serious, as
they affect core teachings of historic orthodox Christianity.

























NOTES

1
F. F. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary (London: Oliphants, 1979), 128.

46
























CHAPTER 5 ORIGINS AND VIEW OF THE THEOLOGY
OF THE FAITH MOVEMENT





















47

"People frequently credit my father, Kenneth E. Hagin, with being the 'father' of
the so-called faith movement. However, as he points out, it's nothing new; it's
just the preaching of the simple ageless gospel. But he has had a great effect on
many of the well-known faith ministers of today. Almost every major faith
ministry of the United States has been influenced by his ministry."1
--Kenneth Hagin, Jr.

The Faith Movement, with its theology of health and prosperity, is an expanding world-
wide movement with such teachers as Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, Frederick Price, Morris
Cerullo, Jerry Savelle, Paul and Jan Crouch, John Avanzini, R. W. Shambach, Marilyn Hickey,
Charles Capps, Robert Tilton, Lester Sumrall, Ed Dufresne, Charles Cowan, Casey Treat, Norvel
Hayes, Ken Stewart, Roy Hicks, Don Gossett, Buddy Harrison, and others.

Plagiarization?

Although the founder and mentor of the Faith Movement is Kenneth Hagin, the author of
the teachings of this movement, however, is Essek W. Kenyon who began his public ministry in
1867 in the Methodist Church. In the early 1900's Kenyon founded the Bethel Bible Institute but
later resigned as superintendent of the school under a cloud of controversy. Kenyon pioneered
religious broadcasting as he started a radio program in 1931 called "Kenyon's Church of the Air."
It was the taped transcripts of this broadcast which eventually became the basis for many of his
writings.

Several phrases coined by Kenyon have been popularized by present-day faith teachers,
such as

"What I confess, I possess."2

Kenyon died in 1948 and Kenneth Hagin seems to have directly plagiarized his writings.

Ruth Kenyon Houseworth, daughter of Kenyon, stated:

"They've [the Faith teachers] all copied from my Dad [E. W. Kenyon]. They've
changed it a little bit and added their own touch . . . but they couldn't change the
wording. The Lord gave him [Kenyon] words and phrases. He coined them. They
can't put it in any other words . . . It's very difficult for some people to be big
enough to give credit to somebody else.3

The historical roots of this movement show a word-for-word uniformity in the teachings
of the two men. Is Hagin's repeated and extensive word-for-word citing of Kenyon's works a
mere coincidence?4 There seems to be doctrinal and even verbal dependency of Hagin upon
Kenyon's works.5




48

The True Source of Hagin's Teaching

Since Hagin claims that his teachings have their origin in revelation and visionsdivine
visitationshow does that square with his extensive dependency upon the works of Kenyon? In
fact, the majority of his teaching is from Kenyon. His word-for-word dependency of much of
Kenyon's works can hardly be attributed to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit!

The ironic thing is that E. W. Kenyon was not a Pentecostal. His theology was influenced
by the metaphysical cults (e.g. New Thought) which were popular around the end of the century.

Although much of Kenyon's theology came from Keswick and Higher Life teachers like
A. B. Simpson, A. J. Gordon, R. A. Torrey and others, and though he claimed he spoke out
against certain aspects of metaphysical cults, Ern Baxter remembers that Kenyon spoke very
positively of Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy (the mother of Christian Science),
stating that there was much we could learn from her.6

Kenyon saw himself as redressing an antisupernatural tendency of Christianity which led
some to join such people as Mary Baker Eddy. Therefore he attempted to establish a teaching
which included all the benefits of the metaphysical cults while remaining within the confines of
the Christian faith. One of the results of such teaching was prosperity theology, the theology of
the Faith Movement.

Three movements that have influenced Hagin's theology the most are: the Keswick
movement through the influence of Kenyon, the charismatic movement, and Pentecostalism. The
Higher Life and Keswick teachers such as F. F. Bosworth and T. J. McCrossan (who like
Kenyon did not accept tongues as the evidence of the filling of the Spirit) have been influential
in Hagin's theology through the ideas of Kenyon (books by Bosworth, McCrossan, Simpson, and
Andrew Murray are used in Hagin's Rhema Bible Training center classes). However, the
charismatic movement and Pentecostalism have played the major role in the formation of the
Faith Movement because many of its leaders spent their earlier years in these movements,
especially Pentecostalism.

It is ironic that while the Faith Movement teaches that speaking in tongues is the
necessary sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, Kenyon taught that tongues was too subjective
an experience and thus rejected it. It seems that while the doctrines for the most part stem from
Kenyon, the practices are those found in Pentecostalism.

Minimizes the Importance of Theology

The Faith Movement as a whole minimizes the importance of theology. There seems to
be little concern for precise views of doctrine or a systematic handling of biblical truth. A
statement such as "Theology is not important, it's experience that counts" is often proclaimed by
faith teachers. Such statements display ignorance since theology means "our ideas or thoughts
about God." Everyone has a theology. The only question is whether it is good (biblical) theology
or bad (unbiblical) theology.

49

Another statement often heard among some followers of the Faith Movement is "The
only way we can know whether something is true or not is by experience." Thus the Bible as "the
rule of faith and practice" is for all practical purposes jettisoned, and the immediate voice of the
Spirit and/or mystical experiences becomes the test for truth.

This reminds us of the early church heresy of Gnosticism, which emphasized experience,
especially mystical experience, above the canon of Scripture. Historic Christianity, however, has
always maintained that the Bible is our test for truth, not personal experience.

It is ironic that the faith teachers who insist that theology is not important turn around and
impose their own theology on their pupils. And their theology is typically unquestioned.

Experience may confirm and assure us of biblical teaching but it cannot establish right
doctrine.












NOTES

1
Kenneth Hagin, Jr., "Trend Toward the Faith Movement," Charisma (Aug., 1985), p. 67
cited in McConnell, A Different Gospel: The Cultic Nature of the Modern Faith Movement, 3.
2
John Kennington, "E. W. Kenyon and the Metaphysics of Christian Science,"
unpublished statement (Portland, OR., July 8, 1986) cited in McConnell, A Different Gospel,
331.
3
Ruth Kenyoin Houseworthy, taped interview (Lynnwood, Wash., Feb. 19, 1982) cited in
McConnell, A Different Gospel, 3.
4
D. R. McConnell, A Different Gospel: The Cultic Nature of the Modern Faith Movement
(a manuscript presented to Hendrickson for publication in 1988), 8-12.
5
Lars Wilhelmsson, Quasi-Gnosticism (Unpublished manuscript), 1998.
6
D. R. McConnell, A Different Gospel, 331.

50

























CHAPTER 6 FAULTY HERMENEUTICS





















51

"Who is like the wise man? Who knows the interpretation of things?"
--Ecclesiastes 8:1

All of us would like to think that we are reasonable and objective in our search for
truth. But the truth is that all too often we use our brains to justify what we already believe.
Although we would like to believe that we do not live by our experience but by the Word of
God, is this so?

Reasons Why People Believe What They Believe

There are many reasons why people who believe the Bible to be the Word of God come
up with so many different interpretations:

Lack of Knowledgea failure to comprehensively study the Scriptures

Lack of following the simple rules of Hermeneutics (the science of biblical
interpretation)

Traditionbelief because others taught it

Experience or lack of Experience

Prejudice

Often cherished positions are based more on prejudice and personal experience or a lack
of personal experience than on the Bible. It is also true that people generally tend to hold the
positions of the people they respect. Few Christians can defend their positions theologically.

They believe because the people they believe in believe. This is true whether it has to
do with those Christians who hold basically conservative or traditional viewpoints or those who
are charismatic and hold viewpoints that are more nontraditional or progressive

It is ironic that people who disdain "the traditions of men" demand unquestioning
conformity to their own "biblical" viewpoints. Adults are told to "just accept God's Word for
what it says" (that is, for what they, the teachers, say it says).

There are plenty of rationalistic orthodox theologians who in their fancied virtual
omniscience presume to know all the answers contained in Scripture and to solve all the difficult
questions with which people wrestle. Thus God's Word is abused as Christians, while mocking
papal infallibility, treat their own tradition of interpretation as infallible.

Throughout most of Western Christendom it has been lack of experience that has colored
much of theology. In the case of the Faith Movement, however, it has been experience, lack of
biblical knowledge, a faulty hermeneutic, and a lack of respect for tradition that have contributed
to much of their theological viewpoints.

52

Church Tradition

Lack of respect for tradition is also evident among various groups which claim to be
Christian. The Bible is clear that God interprets His Word to His church. The interpretation of
the Bible is not a purely human activity, but a divine activity in that it is the churchthe people
of God (including Israel in the Old Testament)which God addresses throughout the Scriptures.
God reveals His Word to His children through Jesus (Lk 24:13-29) and through His Spirit (1 Co
2:6-16; 2 Co 3:6). The Holy Spirit inspired the writing of the Scriptures within the church in
order to give true expression to the church's faith experience. It is, therefore, only within the
church, the community of faith, that the Scriptures can be fully and properly understood and
interpreted:

"Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that,
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's
household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of
the truth" (1 Ti 3:15; see also Ps 147:19-20; Eph 3:10).

It is the church, and only the church (the assembly or people of Godthe remnant of the
Old Testament) that is the bulwark, the pillar and foundation, of truth. The Bible had its origin
within the total faith tradition of the church and must be interpreted in the light of that same faith
tradition in the church today.

It is Scripture that enables the church to judge, interpret, clarify, and purify church
tradition. To be outside the tradition of the church, therefore, is to court danger as it leaves us
severed from the wisdom of God's people through the ages.

Faith teachers, like many others within the independent movement of Christianity
(typically fundamentalists and some evangelicals), court trouble as they show disdain for church
tradition of the church. A statement like, "I know what I'm going to say will shock some of you
since this is not the usual stuff you hear in the dead tradition of the church1 is sometimes heard
from the proud lips of faith teachers who imply that what they are about to reveal is superior to
the tradition of the wisdom of the church throughout the ages.

Yet if it were not for the church, there would be no Bible nor other significant books that
have shaped human history and church history in particular. It was the church that provided the
scholars who were sufficiently acquainted with history, geography, archeology, literature and
linguistics and languages in particular: Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, etc. to be able to provide
for mankind, God's Word in written form. Without their painstaking scholarship and passionate
desire to see God's Word preserved in written form there would be no Bible today.

It was also the scholars who provided the theological arguments and formulations (e.g.
creeds and confessions) to keep the fledgling Christian movement from falling into such early
church heresies as Gnosticism and Arianism, which literally threatened the very survival of
orthodox Christianity. Thus to discard scholars and theologians as irrelevant is to be either
ignorant and/or arrogant.

53

Subjective and Arbitrary Interpretation

Any cursory reading of articles and books by faith teachers quickly reveal their subjective
and arbitrary way of interpreting biblical texts. Undue weight is given to experience as though
automatically validates a certain position. While faith teachers speak of giving the "plain
meaning" of the text, which must be the rule and goal of all valid interpretation, this is the very
thing they do not do.2

The "plain meaning" has to do with the author's original intent as it concerns what would
have been plain to those to whom the words were originally addressed. This is quite different
than hearing by a suburbanized white American culture of the late 20th century through the
distorted language of the early 17th century (King James translationmost often used by
teachers of the Faith Movement).

Unless Scripture can be interpreted in a literal way there is no basis for controlanyone
can interpret it any way one prefers. The literal method acknowledges the importance of the
basic meaning of words and follows regular rules of grammar.

The following principles of interpretation have been kept in mind in broaching this
subject of what is right and wrong about the Faith Movement.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION

Obviously the Bible alone does not interpret itself. Anyone who has talked with other
believers or so-called "believers" knows how true this is! Therefore what should guide us in our
interpretation?

Our theology is supposed to be based upon principles of biblical interpretation
(hermeneutics). Too often the reverse is true. People who claim to believe the Bible read their
deviant theologies into the text rather than allowing the text to speak for itself. Knowing the
history of interpretation is integral to knowing the principles of interpretation, in that it helps us
spot deviant teachings. As the old maxim states:

"There are no new heresies, only old ones in new wrappers."

It is the purpose of hermeneutics to provide the student of Scripture with basic guidelines
and rules for "correctly handling the word of truth" (2 Ti 2:15). The Greek word for the English
"correctly handling" or "correctly interpreting" is orthotomeo which literally means "to cut a
straight line" or "to guide the word of truth along a straight line." A cardinal sin of false
ministers is that they abuse, they adulterate (kapeleuo) the Word of God (2 Co 2:17).

Sound hermeneutics can help us to make sure we read the Bible to learn what it really
says, what it means and how it applies to our lives.



54

Difficult Texts

Whereas some people argue that the reason they do not read and study the Bible is
because it is too difficult to understand, the Faith teachers are very clear that the interpretation of
Scripture is rather easy. Unlike Peter who referred to some of Paul's teaching as "hard to
understand" (2 Pe 3:16), they have simple answer to everything.

Although some of Paul's teachings are difficult to understand, Peter did point out that the
primary problem in misunderstanding was due to the ignorance and unstable character of the
people who read Paul's teachings: "ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other
Scriptures, to their own destruction" (v. 16). Every reader of the Bible makes decisions
consciously or unconsciouslyabout how to understand and respond to it. All such judgments
are interpretative judgments. Therefore how we ought to read the Bible in order to read it
correctly becomes crucial.

General Approach

It is vital that the Scriptures are interpreted according to their purpose and context in
reverent obedience to the God who speaks through them with power.

The first assumption is that although the Scriptures were written for all mankind, they are
specifically addressed to particular historical situations, and therefore they must be interpreted
according to their purpose and context. The second assumption is that since the Scriptures are
God's

Word to us, they communicate His thoughts and feelings with power and thus are to
be interpreted in "reverent obedience."

The Golden Rule of Interpretation

Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart point out in their book, How to Read the Bible for All Its
Worth:

"The most important ingredient one brings to that task [of interpretation] is
enlightened common sense. The test of good interpretation is that it makes
good sense of the text."3 (Emphasis added)

The dictum: "The plain thing is the main thing, and the main thing is the plain
thing" goes to the heart of the issue of interpretation. For it is the aim of interpretation to know
the plain meaning of the text. What is obvious and straightforward in the text is the most
significant point for the reader to grasp.





55

Therefore The Golden Rule of Interpretation is

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense.
Therefore take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless
The facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and
fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise."4 (Emphasis added)

This rule of interpretation is called the "literal-historical," "literary-historical" or
"grammatical-historical" method. This rule is based on the premise that God, in revealing
His Word, did not intend that the reader be confused. Rather, like any other teacher or parent, He
uses the obvious meanings of words to convey His thoughts with the greatest clarity to His
children. Otherwise the meaning of Scripture would only be available to the expert (biblical
scholar).

Metaphysical cults, theosophical cults, divine science cults, pantheistic cults (New Age
Movement) all base their interpretation of Holy Scripture on the theory that the meaning of
Scripture is plural. The first meaning is the ordinary historical or grammatical one; the second
meaning is the one the cultist brings to Scripture from the particular metaphysical system or
religious system which he is pushing.

The emphasis on the unity of the sense of Scripture puts an end to this cultic abuse of
Scripture. Unless Scripture can be interpreted in a literal way there is no basis for control--
anyone can interpret it any way one prefers. The literal method acknowledges the importance of
the basic meaning of words and follows regular rules of grammar.

Principles of Interpretation

1. The Priority of the Original Languages. The Scriptures were written in Hebrew (Old
Testament), Aramaic (Old Testament), and Greek (New Testament). Until the appearance of
vernacular translations in the sixteenth century, few people, whether then or now--could have
read it to learn what it says. Even now, when we read translations of the Bible, we are reading
someone's interpretation of what the Hebrew and Greek says.

All Bible study must take into consideration the difficulty in translation, and all
translations are subservient to the original languages. Kenneth Copeland claims that God is "A
being that is very uncanny the way He's very much like you and me. A being that stands
somewhere around 6'- 2", 6'-3", that weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple of
hundred pounds, little better, [and] has a [hand] span of nine inches across."5

How did Copeland come to such an absurd conclusion? By the Word of God which,
according to Copeland, states that God "measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, and
meted out heaven with the span . . ." (Isa 40:12 KJV). Since a "span" is approximately nine
inches, reasons Copeland, this means God's hand is about that size.



56

Such strange interpretation comes about when we neglect what is called
"anthropomorphism" which language depicts God in human terms or as having the
characteristics of man.

Anthropomorphism is very common in the Bible. In Genesis 1 God is represented as
speaking (v. 3) and then as seeing (v. 4). He walks in the garden in the cool of the day (3:8).
Elsewhere we read of the human form of God (Nu 12:8), of the feet of God (Ex 24:10), of the
hand of God (Isa 50:11), and of the heart of God (Hos 11:8). Because man is man and not God,
man must not reduce God to human categories, but it also means that he has none but human
categories in which to speak of God.

2. The Accommodation of Revelation. In order for God's truth to be understood by the
human mind, God had to put His truth in human language which has its limitations. His truth
therefore, is always greater than any language about Him. John Calvin refers to God "lisping to
us" in the same way that parents speak to infants (baby language).6

3. Progressive Revelation. The Bible sets forth the movement of God along a historical
line which has a certain character to it. The most obvious division of the line is its division into
the Old Testament period and the New Testament period. This sees God working in history, with
the initiative coming from Him and in which God brings man up from the infancy of the Old
Testament through the maturity of the New Testament. This does not mean that the New
Testament is superior to the Old Testament; it means that the revelation begun in the Old
Testament finds its completion or fulfillment in the New Testament. Even in the New Testament,
there is division between the events prior to Pentecost and those after Pentecost. This progression
in Scripture is an important principle in clearly understanding the message of Scripture.

4. Observation. We must discover what the passage is saying, not make it say what we
wants it to say. We must read things "out of" the text (exegesis), and not read things "into" the
text (eisegesis). We must come to discover, not prove.

Lack of observation often leads to strange interpretations. The main point--the message--
of this parable is something far less specific in that all it says is that human beings should be
prepared at any time to meet God or to witness the Second Coming of Christ.

5. Historical Setting. The Bible was written to specific people at a specific time. It is
therefore vital to take into account the history and culture of that time. Jesus' statement, "It is
finished" (tetelestai) in John 19:30 meant more than the end of the crucifixion. That phrase was
written across tax receipts to indicate that full payment had been received. It was also a term
used by military leaders who had just won a battle. Therefore Jesus' statement from the cross was
a shout of triumph and victory and not merely a whisper of endurance.

In studying historical context, knowledge of the Greco-Roman world and Judaism of the
first century can provide indispensable information in interpreting and understanding texts in the
New Testament.


57

6. Clearest Interpretation. Obscure and difficult passages must always be understood in
the light of passages that are obvious and clear. We must never interpret the other way around.
When two or more equally probable interpretations exist, the simplest and clearest
interpretation must have the preference.

7. Ignorance. No one understands everything in the Bible. Some truth is beyond our
human capacity to grasp. Some passages are extremely difficult to interpret. This is especially
true of prophecy. Therefore it is all right to say, "I don't know" or "I don't understand."

8. Checking Other Sources. Since we all have blind spots and prejudices, we need to
check our interpretation with biblical studies of the past (the history of interpretation) and
present.

Why should we not take advantage of the painstaking research of some of the most gifted
scholars throughout church history? Do we really think that our quick and superficial "study" of
a text is necessarily superior to that of those who have given their entire lives to studying the
Holy Scripture? It is arrogance that would keep us from using the tools God has made available
to us.

9. Differentiating Between Interpretation and Application. The interpretation of a
passage is one; the application is many. Any passage has only one meaning though it often may
have many applications.

We must be careful in applying Scripture to life so that we do not fling objectivity aside
and that we base our application mainly on feelings, ideology, immediate life need, or echo (a
word or idea in the text which reminds a person of something contemporary or familiar). Even
though Scripture addresses each of these areas, the question is: "Does this text actually address
that need?" Here is where the objective and subjective need to be linked.

The first critical question is: "What was the application the author intended?" Once this is
clear the second question is, "What is the modern parallel to that application?" This is where the
subjective aspect plays the major role as we struggle with a similar problem or situation to that
found in the text. Therefore we see that there are objective boundaries to the subjective
application process.

10. Objective Truth, Not subjective Experience. We must interpret experience in the
light of Scripture, not vice versa. Scripture, rightly interpreted, is true primarily because God
says it is true.

The approach, "It must be true because I have experienced it" does not take into
consideration the fact that Satan is a master counterfeiter (2 Co 11:12-15), and his deceptions
include many experiences. Also, just because some experience is true and valid for you, does not
mean that it would be for someone else. Scripture, rightly interpreted, is true primarily because
God says it is true.


58

11. Context. What location is to real estate, context is to the reading of the Bible. In
interpretation, there are three rules: "context, context, and context!"

There are three dimensions to context. The first is the general historical context which
includes all of the historical, religious, cultural, social, and linguistic factors that influenced and
shaped its production. The second is the specific historical context for which a document was
written. The third is the literary context of a particular passage in a document. All three contexts
can be helpful in understanding any text more thoroughly and thus more accurately.

A Coherent and Unified Message

If the argument regarding canonicity and divine inspiration of the 66 books constituting
the Bible is valid, a necessary corollary is that the Bible sets forth a coherent or unified message.
God's spokesmen, who came later in history, not only provided new material, but they
reemphasized facets of earlier revelations as part of the whole counsel of God.

Paul, as one of the last revelatory spokesmen, regards anyone who teaches a message
contrary to what has already been given, as worthy of hell (eternal damnationGal 1:8f.).

Paul also considered the teaching which he gave as being so in line with the message of
the earlier spokesmen that he used quotations from these earlier sources of revelation to affirm
his point (Ro 3:9) that all the people of the earth are under sin (vv. 10-18). Later revelatory
spokesmen also viewed their interpretation of contemporary revelatory events to reflect so
accurately God's moving of redemptive history toward its final climax, that they could view an
event, whose occurrence and meaning they reported, to be a partial or typological fulfillment of
prophecy uttered by an earlier revelatory spokesman (e.g. Ac 2:16-21; Joel 2:28-32 [Mt 3:1-5]).

In establishing the unity of the Bible, each literary unit of the Bible must be allowed to
contribute its teaching to every other literary unit. Instead of pressing Scripture to fit our own
preconceived ideas or opinions, there are times when we must humbly bow before Him whose
Word is much greater than our understanding of it. We dare not come to conclusions that
contradict Scripture since God, who inspired Scripture, does not contradict Himself. In
this sense we must allow Scripture to interpret Scripture!

The Role of the Holy Spirit as Interpreter

What, if any place, does the Holy Spirit play in this issue of interpretation? Since it is the
Spirit of God who gave Scripture, He speaks in and through it. This is indispensable to sound
understanding. The Spirit does not replace the task of interpretation. After all, He speaks through
the text of Scripture. Knowledge of the text and its natural sense is thus demanded. Yet it is
possible to have this and still miss understanding in the deeper sense. This is where the help and
guidance of the Spirit are needed.




59

The Spirit is God's Spirit bearing witness to God's word and work in Jesus Christ. He
takes the word of Scripture and makes it clear to the heart, the mind and the willthe whole
manin its total reach and dimension. God is His own interpreter, and He will make it plain.

A Humble Response

A certain condition, therefore, is necessary in order to have an authentic, deep and fruitful
experience with the Word of God. The condition is our humble yielding to the enlightening of
the Holy Spirit. The Bible protects itself from presumption and scholarly unspirituality as its
deeper truths are luminous only to the illuminated (1 Co 2:14-15), those intent to reverently
obey. The same Spirit who inspired its writers now waits to illumine its readers. This is a
challenge to study it prayerfully in a spirit of teachableness which leads to Spirit-given
enlightenment when we do (Jn 14:26; Eph 1:18).

We all need illumination from the Holy Spirit. Even the best-intentioned among us can
slip easily into a prideful, self-sufficient attitude in our learning the Bible which results in
information and knowledge without wisdom and insight.

The Necessity for Definite Views of Doctrine

Definite views of doctrine are a necessity for the church. Such a need for definition and
classification arises from the fact that God Himself, who is infinite, is rational and thus self-
consistent.

Therefore He has communicated His revelationHis truthto finite yet rational and
logical human beings.

This does not mean that God's truth can be fully comprehended. For God's thoughts and
ways are higher than ours. But it does mean that we can learn the truths we need to know so we
can live a life of godliness (2 Pe 1:3). Where divine revelation is not clear we must be cautious
so we do not fall into the trap of speculative philosophy and end up becoming "wise fools"
(Ro 1:22).

The problem with the Faith Movement is both in speculation, faulty emphasis, and
application. Just as speculation can lead to heretical teaching, so can an overemphasis on one
truth to the exclusion of another. And even if truth is attained but misapplied it can still do great
harm.









60

NOTES
1
An example of such an attitude is Benny Hinn who has spoken of revelations that have
never been heard before and asks sarcastically, "Well you think you're in this church to hear
things you've heard for the last 50 years?" (Emphasis added) Benny Hinn, "Benny Hinn,"
program on TBN (3 October 1990) cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 124.
Similarly Kenneth Copeland said, "Here's where we're gonna depart company from
ordinary church . . ." Kenneth Copeland, Our Covenant with God (Fort Worth, TX: KCP
Publications, 1987), 8-11 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 142.
Another example is Copeland's statement in one of his taped messages on the atonement,
"It's very little talked about, almost nonexistent in the traditional church teaching, and I'll
never understand why. I guess because it's been covered up and hidden in tradition." Kenneth
Copeland, "Authority of the Believer IV" (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1987),
audiotape #01-0304, side 1 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 153.
2
An example would be John Avanzini who interprets the word "poverty" in Mark 12:44 to
mean "want," not in the natural meaning of "poverty" which the context makes clear, but in the
sense of "desire." Therefore Avenzini claims that the widow with the mite gave "because she
wanted something from her God." That is, she gave to get. This he says, is the "deeper meaning"
of the text which the church has missed throughout the ages. John Avenzini, "Praise-a-Thon
program on TBN (5 November 1990) cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 222. For
further illustrations of such esoteric interpretations see Ron Rhodes, "Esotericism and Biblical
Interpretation," Christian Research Journal 14, 3 (Winter 1992): 28-30.
Neglect of historical context is evidenced by Oral and Evelyn Roberts' interpretation of
3 John 2 in which they agreed that it provides a basis for the belief that material prosperity is
"God's highest wish for us." Roberts, A Daily Guide to Miracles (Tulsa, OK: Pinoak Press,
1975), 36-38 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 223. This is to ignore the fact that this
opening remark in John's letter to his friend Gaius is "the standard form of greeting in a personal
letter in antiquity" as New Testament scholar Gordon Fee points out. Therefore, to see this as
referring to financial and material prosperity for all Christians is to miss the obvious intent of the
text. It also misses the Greek meaning of the word "prosper" since it means "to go well with
someone." Such meaning then is much broader than mere material prosperity. Gordon D. Fee,
The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospel (Beverly, MA: Frontline Publishing, 1985), cited
in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 224.
3
Gordon D. Fee & Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan Publishing company, 1982), 16.
4
Tim LaHaye, How To Study The Bible For Yourself (Eugene, OR: Harvest House
Publishers, 1976), 122.
5
Kenneth Copeland, Spirit, Soul & Body (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries,
1985), audiotape #01-0601, side 1 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 121. As Hanegraaff
points out, "Some have suggested that Copeland may have simply been referring to Jesus in this
statement. However, this creates yet another huge problem--namely, that Jesus had a body prior

61

to His incarnation. Although Jesus appeared in the Old Testament in what are appropriately
referred to as theophanies (appearances of God). He always did so for the purpose of
communicating with men; and in the context of Copeland's sermon, men had not yet been
created" (393).
6
John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion Edited by John T. McNeill (Philadelphia:
The Westminster Press), Vol. I, 40.







































62


























CHAPTER 7 THE MARGINALIZATION OF THE CROSS




















63

One of the most serious errors of the Faith Movement is that in its teachings the cross has
been marginalized.

Some use statements such as "We need to move beyond the cross now that Pentecost has
come" as though there is a higher or superior Christian life than that which is centered in the
cross. Pentecost took place fifty days after Calvary (ca. A.D. 29) but the gospels, epistles, and the
book of Revelation were written many years after Pentecost (ca. A.D. 46 - A.D. 90), that is,
seventeen to sixty years after Pentecost. If Pentecost were to take the place of, or at least
overshadow, the cross, why is that not reflected in the writings of the New Testament? Why does
the cross form such a central part of the messages contained in the New Testament if Pentecost
was supposed to supplant or overshadow it?

Any movement that is not centered on the bedrock of the cross is doomed to quickly fall
into the quicksand of heresy!

The doctrine of the cross of Christ is the central truth of Christianity (1 Co 1:17- 2:3).
Paul uses the phrase, "word [or message] of the cross" (v. 18) to summarize the Gospel. It is the
cross that speaks so simply, yet eloquently, of God's saving act. A theology which focuses
disproportionately on the resurrection or the exaltation of Christ too easily becomes triumphal-
ism"a theology of glory" in which mystical knowledge becomes more important than love,
where external power is more important than internal purity, and happiness is more important
than holiness.

"Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ
crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those
whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the
wisdom of God" (vv. 22-24).

The theology of "health, wealth and prosperity" is a cul-de-sac theology in that the
message of the cross is not central. This is due in part because the cross has not remained central
in the teaching and preaching ministry of the Church of Jesus Christ as a whole, and the Faith
Movement in particular.

The wisdom and power of God is demonstrated not primarily in God's superabundant
material blessings or in His awesome force displayed in nature, but at the cross on Golgotha's
hill.

The genius of God is found not in His display of power, but in His willingness to suffer
and even die. The genius of Christianity is found not in a conquering hero, but a suffering
Servant.

A theology of God's power that minimizes His weakness is defective. A theology of
God's blessings that bypasses His suffering is heresy. A theology of God's resurrection that
minimizes His death is empty optimism. A theology of God's exaltation that depreciates His
humiliation is fantasy.

64

The cross always precedes the crown. And it is the cross that gives significance to
everything else. As P. T. Forsyth has pointed out:

"A Christianity that is not cross-centered is not Christianity at all."1

The cross is central, pivotal, not only because it meets human need, but also because it
meets divine necessity. The cross provides not only the forgiveness of sin, but provides it in such
a way that God does not compromise with evil and thus remains just, holy, and righteous. The
message of the cross is thus consistent with God's nature or character. While it magnifies His
love it also vindicates His holiness. Thus God is both a Savior and a Judge.

Its Central Place

What the sun is to light, the cross is to Christianity. The Christian religion revolves
around the cross. It is empowered by and lives by the cross. It holds a pivotal place in the
teachings of Holy Scripture.

THE OLD TESTAMENT

In His postresurrection conversations with the disciples, Jesus said:

"This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled
that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms" (Lk 24:44).

The ultimate meaning of all the types, sacrifices, ceremonies, promises of the law in the
Old Testament is found in the death of Christ. His death is foreshadowed by Abraham offering
his son, Isaac. The serpent of brass lifted up for healing in Israel's camp prefigures the lifting up
of Jesus on the cross of Golgotha. The paschal lamb finds its true significance in the person of
Jesus Christ as the Lamb of God.

THE NEW TESTAMENT

The cross is marked on virtually every page of the New Testament. Mark, in his gospel of
action, moves swiftly from one scene to another until he comes within sight of Calvary. Here he
stays taking 5 of his 16 chapters (nearly a third) to describe the events of the trial and crucifixion
of our Lord. Had Mark narrated the entire life of Jesus on the same scale that he narrates His
death, his gospel would have contained a thousand chapters instead of the 16 chapters that
comprise the entire book.

Matthew devotes 7 of his 28 chapters (a fourth) to that last week in the life of our Lord.
Luke, the physician, spends 4 1/2 of his 24 chapters (almost a fifth) to the events of those last
hours, and John gives a full 8 of his 21 chapters (more than a third) to describe the events of holy
week. Out of a total of 89 chapters, the evangelists devote 25 to the week of the Passion. This



65

amounts to nearly a third of their gospels. Had they portrayed the entire life and ministry of Jesus
with as much detail as they did his last week, the gospels alone would be larger than our entire
Bible.

The gospels make it obvious that the events clustering around the cross are the all
essential element of the gospel of salvation.

In the apostolic preaching and teaching of the church in the book of Acts, we find the
same universal emphasis of the cross. In each one of the four great sermons in the book of Acts
(2:14-39; 3:12-26; 4:8-12; 10:36-43) and in Stephen's message of defense we find the theme of
the cross, the death of Christ, central. Peter, Philip, Paul, Apollosall are heralds of the cross.

The epistles with their numerous theological themes always find their source in the
message of the cross. Truth is built upon the firm foundation of Calvary. The book of Revelation,
the last book of the Bible, no less than 28 times presents Jesus as the glorified Christ in the figure
of the Lamb enthroned in the midst of the multitudes by His blood.

In the lives of the great men of history death is treated merely as just an incident at the
end of a glorious career. Not so with the biographies of Jesus as penned by the four evangelists!

Why? Because the death of Jesus on the cross is not a part, even an important part, of the
gospel; it is the gospel. Paul put it:

"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died
for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised
on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Co 15:3-4).

"Of first importance!"

SAINTS OF ALL AGES

In the teaching of Jesus, in the preaching of the apostles, in the appeals of the epistles, in
the visions of the apocalypse (book of revelation), the topic which eclipses every other topic is t
the cross and its redeeming sacrifice. The great saints who have risked their godly lives for Jesus'
sake have all knelt at the cross as they have lived under its shadow.

BLOODY RELIGION

God has stitched His Word together with a scarlet seam which makes it a crimson Book.
The mark of the cross is upon every doctrine of the faith of the Christian religion to show that it
belongs to the crucified Christ. Cut the Bible anywhere and it will bleedbleed with the blood
of Jesus.




66

SACRAMENTS

The sacraments of the church are a constant reminder of the centrality of the cross. For
baptism signifies union with Christ in His death and resurrection, and cleansing from sin by his
blood. The Lord's Supper, with its broken bread and poured out wine, etches afresh in our minds
each time we observe it the figure of a suffering Savior crucified for sinners.

Both sacraments, in their continual observance, are Christ's own reminders to His church
that it was born in blood and continues to live by that cleansing blood.

All prophecy point to the cross on Calvary. The incarnation was preparatory to Calvary.
The obedient, selfless, and sacrificial life of Jesus led to Calvary. The resurrection authenticated
the message of Calvary. Pentecost was the fruit of Calvary.

Is it any wonder that Paul claims:

"For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and
Him crucified . . . May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ . . ."
(1 Co 2:2; Gal 6:14)

Although Copeland, Hagin and others do make reference to the Cross, Atonement, and
the Blood of Christ, they do not emphasize it as it is emphasized in Scripture and they do not
understand and teach "the cross life" or "the crucified life." This is more clearly seen in the
following chapter.















NOTES

1
P. T. Forsyth, The Justification of God (London: Duckworth, 1916), 32,124-125; see
also The Cruciality of the Cross (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1906) and The Work of Christ
(London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1918).

67


























CHAPTER 8 THE DENIAL OF SUFFERING AND DEPRIVATION




















68

The Promise of Suffering and Deprivation

"But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship . . ." (2 Timothy 4:5).

The Faith Movement plays right into the spirit of this age as it promises the very thing the
world does: fun, success, health, and wealth. Is it any wonder why it is so popular? It appeals to
and feeds sinful human nature.

To a generation which has become too soft to scale great spiritual heights, the Faith
Movement comes and promises more softness. By teaching that the proper exercise of faith
renders suffering irrelevant, salvation is interpreted as meaning deliverance from unpleasant
things.

But can God bless a person greatly until He has hurt him deeply? Is it possible to be a
person of depth unless such a person has been tested in the crucible of suffering? Could it be that
the reason the Faith Movement is so shallow in its message is because it has left out the very
method God has ordained to bring spiritual depth: suffering?

A Suffering Messiah

After Peter recognized Jesus for who He really was, Jesus told Him and the other
disciples the kind of Messiah He would be:

"The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief
priests and teachers of the law, and He must be killed and on the third day be
raised to life" (Lk 9:22).

A suffering Messiah!

Discipleship

Here Jesus explains what kind of disciples they were to be:

"Then He said to them all: 'If anyone would come after Me, he must deny himself
and take up his cross daily and follow Me'" (v. 23).

Self-denying disciples! Complete dedication and willing obedience was required in
following Jesus. The saying, "Whoever loses his life for Me" is found in all four gospels and in
two gospels more than once (Mt 10:38-39; 16:24-25; Mk 8:34-35; Lk 14:26-27; 17:33; and, in
slightly different form, Jn 12:25). No other saying of Jesus is given such emphasis.

The disciples were promised suffering and deprivation. After Jesus had let the Rich
Young Ruler go because he would not give up his riches (his idol) to follow Him, Jesus said:



69

"And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother
or children or fields for My sake will receive a hundred times as much and
will inherit eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and many who
are last will be first" (Mt 19:27-28).

The Conditions of Discipleship

The conditions of discipleship are clear:

"Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them He said: 'If
anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and
children, his brothers and sistersyes, even his own lifehe cannot be
My disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow Me
Cannot be My disciple. . . . In the same way, any of you who does not
give up everything he has cannot be My disciple'" (Lk 14:25-27,33).

Jesus does not want blind, naive commitment that expects only blessings. As a builder
estimates costs or a king evaluates military strength, so a person must consider what Jesus
expects of His followers. The cost, Jesus warned, is complete surrender to Him. Thus self-denial,
sacrifice and suffering are ingredients in Christian discipleship.

Suffering for the Gospel

Similarly Paul said:

"For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on Him,
but also to suffer for Him" (Php 1:29).

According to Scripture, Christian suffering, as well as faith, is a blessing! (Mt 5:11-
12; 1 Pe 4:14) Paul called upon Timothy to join him in his suffering:

"So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord, or ashamed of me His prisoner.
But join me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God . . . In fact,
everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted."
(2 Ti 1:8; 3:12)

Paul's counsel to Timothy "to keep his head in all situations and to endure hardship" (2 Ti
4:5) would be meaningless if there will be no difficult situations or hardships to endure. This
principle of suffering is repeated several times in the New Testament (Mt 10:22; Mk 8:31; Ac
14:22; 28:5; 2 Ti 2:3; 1 Pe 4:12).

Not only are the disciples called to suffer, but they actually rejoiced in being counted
"worthy" to suffer for Him (Ac 5:41).



70

Glory and Suffering

In fact, there is no sharing in Christ's glory apart from sharing in His suffering
(Ro 8:17). Suffering is a necessary prelude to reigning with Christ. Suffering is endemic to
our calling to follow Christ (Ac 9:15-16).

According to some of the faith teachers, Jesus should have told him how delightful things
were going to be now that he is a follower of Jesus. By following His formulas he can experience
health, wealth and prosperity.

Stephen was the first Christian martyr to die for Christ (7:55-60). Should he have
saved his life instead? If so, why was Stephen the only person to have received the honor of a
standing welcome by Jesus (vv. 55-56)? Had not Jesus learned yet, even in heaven, that
suffering is unnecessary?

According to some faith teachers (a la Frederick Price and T. L. Osborn), when Jesus
called people He said something like:

"If any one comes after me, let him ask for a Cadillac, Mercedes or Lexus, even
better, a Rolls Royce, and diamonds and furs, since according to his faith, be it
unto him."1

The popular saying in health and wealth circles, "Live like a King's kid," hardly fits the
lifestyle of Jesus, God the Father's "Kid" (referred to by John as the "one and only Son"Jn
3:16). Born in lowly Bethlehem, reared in despised Nazareth, part of a pious but poor family
which offered two doves because they were too poor to afford a lamb (Lev 12:6-8; Lk 2:24).
Jesus wandered the countryside dependent on others to open their homes since He did not
have His own home. And even as He was buried, He was buried in a borrowed tomb.

The Servant Model

The prosperity gospel turns Jesus' servant model upside down. It sees as our model the
ascended heavenly Lord rather than the descended earthly Servant. But Jesus warned His
disciples not to follow a lordship model, but His own servant model (Mk 10:42-45). In this life
we are to share in His cross. It is in the next lifein eternitythat we will share in His crown
(2 Ti 2:12).

The suffering Servant promised persecution, betrayal, flogging, and the opportunity to be
dragged before courts and tried for our faith (Mt 10:16-20) as He warned that "trouble"
would be ours in this life (Jn 6:33).

Is it any wonder that when James and John, with their mother, requested that they would
be placed in a position of honor beside Jesus in the coming kingdom they were only promised
suffering (Mt 11:35-45)?


71

The suffering that Jesus and Paul present in these passages is not the natural suffering
that is the lot of every human. The suffering to which Jesus calls us is elective, the inevitable
result of a life devoted to waling in His footsteps.

Redemptive

The good news about suffering is that it is often redemptive as it brings us into a more
intimate relationship with Almighty God:

"My ears had heard of You but now my eyes have seen You" (Job 42:5).

Suffering is also redemptive in that it can build perseverance character and hope (Ps
119:67; Ro 5:3-5). Peter assures us that although there are different kinds of suffering. Christ in
His suffering is the example to be followed. He tells us that is something to which we
specifically and precisely are called (1 Pe 2:19-21). Furthermore, Peter finds in suffering three
values that it establishes in Christians: it makes us strong, firm, and steadfast (5:10).

Discipleship is one of the central themes of Scripture (Mt 12:24-27; Lk 4:26-33; 9:23-24;
Jn 12:24,26). Yet most, if not all, faith teachers claim that the proper exercise of faith renders
human suffering irrelevant.

For the Benefit of Others

The Cross teaches us that suffering can accomplish benefits for others (Ex 6:9; 32;
Nu 12,14; Heb 11:24-26). Rejection, abandonment, lonelinessthey are all are part and
parcel of what it meant to serve God.

Joshua suffered that he might lead his people into freedom in the Promised Land. David
suffered that he might be able to establish a righteous kingdom in Israel. The prophets suffered
that they might deliver God's truth to a sinning nation.

Paul was thrown into jail, but converted the jailer (Ac 16:16-34). When they stoned him
in Lystra and left him for dead, the power of God enabled him to go right back to finish his
sermon (14:19-22). When Caesar put Paul in jail, he began converting Caesar's household (Php
4:22).

Mary, though privileged to give birth to Jesus, the MessiahGod's Son (Galatians 4:4)
and "blessed among women" (Lk 1:42), she suffered false accusations as she lived in poverty
(2:24) and lived under the shadow of the cross (Lk 1:19). Jesus suffered that He might "save His
people from their sins" (Mt 1:21; see also Jn 15:13).

Peter, in reflecting upon Jesus' life of suffering, points to Him as the supreme example of
suffering evil for doing good:

"To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example,
that you should follow in His steps" (1 Pe 2:21).
72

The patient endurance of injustice is part of God's plan for the Christian. It was an
important feature of the true grace of God experienced by the readers (5:12). Jesus' experience as
the suffering Servant-Savior transforms the sufferings of His followers from misery into
privilege.

A Life of Faith

Hebrews 11 is the chapter of faith in which the heroes of faith are paraded before us. The
list begins: Adam, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah . . . (Heb 11:4-31).

Conquered by Faith

Some, like Sarah and Abraham, experienced great wealth in their lifetime. Others had
great authority, like Joseph who was second only to Pharaoh at a time when Egypt was a world
power. Moses, though he suffered greatly, was granted fame, a reputation that remains to this
day. Others listed here, on the other hand, might be laughed at, as Noah was in his own day.

Then there is a break in the narrative. Until verse 31, the author has been moving through
Israel's history chronologically and has come to the conquest of Jericho. Then he breaks off the
annotated list and speeds up the pace (vv. 32-35). These were men and women of faith
who performed spectacular achievements. They were men and women who conquered by faith.

This is the stuff of which heroes are maderouting armies, people being resurrected
from the dead, escaping death, bringing justice.

Conquered by Perseverance

But the passage does not end here. The writer goes on:

"Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better
resurrection. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained
and put in prison. They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to
death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute,
persecuted and mistreatedthe world was not worthy of them. They wandered
in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground" (Heb 11:35-38).

These heroes of faith seemed like failures: being stoned to death, destitute, tortured, even
sawed in two. Such misfortunes came to people who were "commended for their faith." These
heroes of the faith conquered by perseverance. This is clear from the writer's final statement in
the chapter:

"These were all commended for their faith" (vv. 32-39).




73

Fortunes and misfortunes took place in the lives of those who lived by faith. Therefore it
is unbiblical to maintain that those who have faith will always receive the material benefits of
success. This passage also is a corrective to those who insist that everyone should live simply.
Wealth, fame and power are not evil, per se. It is unbiblical to believe that people of faith will
never be granted such things. But their faith did not guarantee heroic accomplishments or escape
from negative circumstances. Living by faith means living moment by moment as if God exists
and His Word is true.

Cheap Grace

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who willingly suffered and died at the hands of the Nazis because of
his allegiance to Jesus Christ, warned, "When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die."2

To maintain an assent to Christianity without a willingness to pay the pricethe cost of
faithful obedienceis contradictory and is nothing less than "cheap grace." To remove the
radical nature of Jesus' call to suffering servanthood is to lose the very nature of that call. Such a
gospel is a watered down, diluted Christianity that appeals to the masses, but is not true to
historic orthodox faith. The gospel of the Faith Movement is an indulgent, painless, costless,
crossless Gospel!





















NOTES

1
Paraphrase of chapter 17 "Cultural Conformity" in Christianity in Crisis by Hanegraaff,
185-192.

74

























CHAPTER 9 A DEFECTIVE DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT OF CHRIST





















75

As Christians we confess that our salvation is based solely on what Christ did on the
cross. We appropriate by faith what He has accomplished for us (Ro 3:21-4:5; Eph 2:8-10; 2 Ti
1:8-11; Titus 3:4-7). Such faith then is based not only on who Jesus is, but on His finished work
on the cross. How we view the atonement, therefore, is crucial to our understanding of
Christianity as a whole since the cross is central to all other doctrines.

A Summary Statement

Robert M. Bowman Jr. provides an accurate summary of the teachings of the faith
teachers especially as it relates to the atonement. He writes as follows:

"God created man in 'God's class,' as 'little gods,' with the potential to exercise the
'God kind of faith' in calling things into existence and living in prosperity and
success as sovereign beings. We forfeited this opportunity, however, by rebelling
against God in the Garden and taking upon ourselves Satan's nature. To correct
this situation, Jesus Christ became a man, died spiritually (thus taking upon
Himself Satan's nature), went to Hell, was 'born again,' rose from the dead with
God's nature again, and then sent the Holy Spirit so that the Incarnation could be
duplicated in believers, thus fulfilling their calling to be little gods. Since we are
called to experience this kind of life now, we should be successful in every area
of our lives. To be in debt, then, or be sick, or (as is often taught) be left by one's
spouse, and not to have these problems go away by 'claiming' God's promises,
shows a lack of faith."1

Even though there may be some differences among the Faith teachers, they are minor for
the most part.

Spiritual Death

Faith teachers claim that Jesus "died spiritually" and therefore He had to be "born-again."
What do they mean by "spiritual death"?

"Spiritual death means separation from God. The moment Adam sinned, he
was separated from God. Spiritual death means something more than separation
from God.2

Spiritual death means having Satan's nature3just as receiving Eternal Life means
we have the nature of God in us. When Adam and Eve listened to the devil, the devil became
their spiritual father and they had the devil's nature in their spirits. That is spiritual death. . . .
Man is now united with the devil.4

When Adam committed high treason against God and bowed his knee to Satan, spiritual
deaththe nature of Satanwas lodged in his heart. Actually, Adam was the first person to
be born again. He was born from life unto death, from spiritual life unto spiritual death.5


76

God was speaking of spiritual death, the sin nature. That day in the garden first
Eve, then Adam, changed gods. The sin nature of their new god, Satan, took
possession of their once righteous spirits. They died spiritually. The very
nature of man was changed from one of righteousness or eternal life into one
of spiritual deathfrom the nature of God to the nature of Satan."6 (Emphasis added)

According to some faith teachers, spiritual death is not merely separation from God, but a
distinct change of nature as it includes receiving "Satan's nature." Is such "spiritual death"
what Christ suffered for? It is according to the theology of the

Faith Movement

"He [Jesus] paid the price for Adam's sin. He suffered in His own body, and more
important, in His spirit. Jesus experienced the same spiritual death that entered
man in the garden of Eden.7

He [Jesus] had taken upon Himself not our sins, necessarily, but He was made to be our
sinour sin naturespiritual death. He died spiritually.8

The Bible says in 2 Corinthians 5:21 that He who knew no sin was made to be sin for us
that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. He who knew no sin was made to be
sin. He did the same thing that Adam did in the Garden of Eden. He made Himself obedient to
death and put Himself into the hands of God's enemy, Satan. Only He did it, He committed this
act, not by treason but by choice. He did it in order to pay the price for Adam's treason. See, He
put Himself, He made Himself obedient unto death and the same thing happened to Him that
happened to Adam: spiritual death."9 (Emphasis added)

Some faith teachers claim that Jesus suffered the same kind of spiritual death that Adam
suffered. Jesus' nature changed as He took our sin nature and thus Satan's nature as His own.

What are the implications of such a spiritual death? The faith teachers claim that:

". . . in 1 Timothy 3:16: God was manifested in the flesh and justified in the spirit.
Now you can't get somebody justified and made righteous in the spirit if it [sic]
wasn't first unrighteous. The righteousness of God was made to be sin. He
[Jesus] accepted the sin nature of Satan in His own spirit and at the moment
that He did that He cried, 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?' You
don't know what happened at the cross. Why do you think Moses, obeying the
instruction of God, hung the serpent up on the pole instead of a lamb? That used
to bug me. I said, 'Why in the world would you want to put a snake up there
the sign of Satan? Why didn't you put a lamb on that pole.' And the Lord said,
'Because, it was the sign of Satan that was hanging on the cross.' He said, 'I
accepted in my own spirit spiritual death and the light was turned off.' Jesus
became sin. His Spirit was separated from God. And He went down into hell
in our place.10 (Emphasis added)

77

Jesus died as our Substitute. He who knew no sin was made to be sin. He took
upon Himself our sin nature. And He diedHe was separated and cut off from
God. He went down into the prison house of suffering in our place. He was
there three days and nights.11

There is no more sacrifice beyond this [the cross] because that God has given
Himself. There's not any further that God can go cause that is part of Himself
hanging on that cross. And the very inside of God, hanging on that cross, is
severed from Him and in that moment of severing, the spirit of Jesus accepting
that sin and making it to be sin, He's separated from His God and in that moment
He's a mortal man; capable of failure, capable of death. Not only that, but He's
fixing on being ushered into the very jaws of hell. And if Satan is capable of
overpowering Him there, he'll win the universe and mankind is doomed."12
(Emphasis added)

Does Jesus' Have Two Natures?

Does the Bible teach that Jesus' nature was radically altered on the cross? Faith teachers
appeal to such Scriptures as 2 Corinthians 5:21 to support such a view: "He made Him who
knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

However, biblical scholars believe that since the word "sin" is used as an abstract noun
that the expression "to be sin" must be metonymical. A metonym is "a figure of speech
consisting of the use of the name of one thing for that of another of which it is an attribute or
with which it is associated" (e.g. "lands belonging to the crown").13 Thus the most probable
meaning is that Christ was "made sin for us" in the sense that he was divinely appointed to be
our sin-offering, to bear the burden or to suffer the penal or judicial consequences of our sins.
Jesus became sin for us in that, as the prophet Isaiah puts it:

"He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities, the
punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His wounds we are
healed, and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isaiah 53:5-6).

In the Hebrew language there are two words that mean "to bear." When combined with
"sin" they convey the idea of carrying the burden or penalty of that sin. Lamentations 5:7 states,

"Our fathers sinned, and are no more, and we bear their punishment."

Obviously this cannot mean anything else than that they bore the penalty or consequences
of their fathers' sins (Lev 5:17-18; Nu 30:15).






78

Similarly, when Isaiah speaks of the Messiah saying, ". . . My righteous servant will
justify many, and He will bear their iniquities" (Isa 53:11) he is affirming that Christ will
suffer the penalty of the consequences of the sins of others. Scripture is clear: Christ took the
place of sinners and, on their behalf, bore the punishment their sins required, He bore the full
discharge of God's wrath against sin that was due us (e.g. Ro 4:25; 1 Co 15:3; Gal 1:4; 1 Pe
2:24).

Another passage that faith teachers appeal to is Galatians 3:13:

"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it
is written: cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree."

Christ became a curse for us in the sense that He bore the effects of God's judgment (the
curse) against sin that was due us. Jesus, instead of literally becoming a curse, was loved for
laying down His life (Jn 10:17). He remained God's "beloved Son."

Some faith teachers also appeal to Matthew 27:46 to support their belief that Jesus took
on Satan's and man's sin nature and thus became mere mortal man as He suffered spiritual death:
"About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, 'Eloi, eloi, lama sabachtani
which means, 'My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?' (Mt 27:46)

Some faith teachers claim that He who was God the Son was severed from God the
Father, and thus Christ ceased to be God and became a mere man. But it was the Lord of glory
Himself who was crucified for the sins of mankind (1 Co 2:8). Paul states that it was God who
purchased the church with His own blood (Ac 20:28). Christ, therefore, was not less than God
when He offered Himself as "a ransom for many."

Because Jesus became a sin-substitute He suffered God-forsakenness: the judgment, the
wrath of God, was unleashed on Him. In that moment the Father, who cannot look upon sin,
turned away from the Son and fellowship was broken. The Son, though He was still one
substance with the Father, was thus treated as a sinner because He was standing in our place.

However, Jesus' cry of desolation in no way necessitates a change in nature where there
is a dissolution of the essential or ontological union (that which is essentially existent, that is, the
union in nature shared by the Son and the Father).

Although historic Christianity teaches that Jesus was incarnated as a mortal man, it
cannot follow that He ceased to be eternal God. Thus His assumption of a true human nature
(in Mary's womb) and His death on the cross did not annul His continuous participation in the
divine nature.






79

Jesus' Alleged Descent into Hell

Does the Bible teach that Jesus was ushered into hell to suffer for three days and nights?
Nowhere in Scripture is there evidence that Jesus went into hell to suffer and fight Satan for
three days and nights.

Various Scriptures are used to make this case. In Acts 2:24-32 Peter quotes a prophetic
Psalm (16:10-11) and explains that Christ was "not abandoned to the grave" (2:27,31). The
King James Version uses the word "Hades" which in Hebrew is Sheol. These words merely mean
"the underworld" or "the realm of the dead." This is why the New International Version uses the
word "grave." In all probability all that Peter meant by Jesus not being abandoned was merely
that God would not allow Jesus' physical body to decompose in the grave.

The Jews believed that a body began to decompose on the fourth day. That is why they
required burial of a corpse by the third day.

Paul also quotes from Deuteronomy (30:12-13) in reference to Jesus "descent into hell"
(Ro 10:6-7). Most scholars believe this merely alludes to Christs death. While the King
James Version uses the word "abyss," the New International Version uses the word "the deep"
and "the dead" meaning "the place of the dead." Paul is here referring to Christ's death and
resurrection. What he is referring to is Christ going down into the abyss of death and the grave
and being brought up from the dead in His glorious resurrection.

The purpose of the Old Testament quotations is to explain the nature of the righteousness
that is by faith. It does not require heroic feats such as bringing Christ down from heaven or up
from the grave. Rather than referring to a three-day visit to hell, Paul is here merely referring to
Christ's death.

Ephesians 4:9-10 is also cited in support for this view:

"(What does 'He ascended' mean except that He also descended to the lower,
earthly regions? He who descended is the very One who ascended higher than
all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)"

What does Paul mean by "the lower, earthly regions"? Most scholars believe that Paul's
quotation from the Old Testament (Ps 68:18) does not teach that Christ descended into hell,
but rather it is an introduction of the idea of the "gifts to men." He takes opportunity to remind
his readers of Christ's coming to earth (His incarnation) and His subsequent resurrection and
ascension. Here Paul contrasts the lowliness of earth (Isa 44:23) to the height and glory of
Jesus rightful home. This passage hardly teaches that Jesus Christ descended to hell as a mortal
man to be tortured by the devil.

1 Peter 3:18-20 is usually appealed to for this teaching:



80

"He [Jesus] was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through
whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long
ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being
built."

Biblical scholars have wrestled with three primary views14 (eighteen in all) of this
passage (see my unpublished manuscript for a treatment of these views). Although every one of
the three views have their problems, no serious theologian has asserted that these verses, or any
other verses of Scripture, teach that Jesus went into hell to suffer, get beat up, and eventually
come out victorious in his battle with Satan.

Biblical theologian Alexander Bruce puts it:

"The writer of the Epistle of Hebrews, when he would commend Jesus as the
pattern of patience, says of Him simply, that He 'endured the cross, despising its
shame.' Paul, when he would exhibit the humility of Christ in its utmost depth
of self-abasement, indicates the limit of descent by the phrase, 'obedient unto
death, even the death of the cross.' It did not occur to him to say, 'even spiritual
death,' or 'even death eternal,' or 'even death of the damned.' It may safely be
concluded that such extreme phrases are not required for a correct statement of
the true doctrine, and that it will suffice to say in general terms that Christ
suffered in body and soul all that it was possible for a holy Being to suffer."15

Jesus as a Born Again Mortal

Such aberrant teaching of the Faith Movement leads to the conclusion that Jesus as mere
mortal man is born again:

"After Jesus was made sin, He had to be born again. . . . Once again, he was the
righteousness of God, and once again, eternal life was His nature.16

Not only was He physically resurrectedHis body resurrectedbut His spirit was
made alive unto God again. He had died spiritually. He took upon Himself spiritual deathfor
us. And He is the first one who was ever born again. His new birth is our new birth.17

See, you have to realize that He [Jesus] died; you have to realize that He went into
the pit of hell as a mortal man made sin. But He didn't stay there, thank God. He was reborn in
the pit of hell and resurrected.18

It is important for us to realize that a born-again man defeated Satan . . . Colossians 1:18
refers to Jesus as the firstborn from the dead. . . . He was the first man to be reborn under the new
covenant."19 (Emphasis added)




81

According to some faith teachers, as Jesus took upon Himself Satan's sin nature and our
sin nature, that part of Him which is divine was severed from God as He became mortal man. As
a man with our sinful nature He went into hell and was left in the hands of Satan. After three
days and nights, He was born again in hell and resurrected as an immortal, reborn man.

Scripture is clear, however, that Jesus never lost His divine nature. In Philippians 2:5-11
Paul traces Christ's life from eternity past, when He was in the form of God and equal to God,
through the events of His earthly life to eternity future, where He once again is glorified with the
Father. In this passage Paul points out that Jesus Christ, though equal with God, "emptied
Himself":

Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

Who, being in very form God, did not consider equality with God something
to be grasped, but made Himself nothing, taking the very form of a servant, being
made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled
Himself and became obedient to deatheven death on a cross!" (Php 2:5-8).

When Paul says that Jesus' being was of the same essence as God, yet He "emptied
Himself" does he mean that Jesus gave up His divine nature? No! It means that He laid aside His
glory:

"And now, Father, glorify Me in Your presence with the glory I had with You
before the world began" (Jn 17:5).

It also means that He submitted to the humiliation of becoming man:

"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet
for your sakes He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become
rich" (2 Co 8:9).

Thus He emptied Himself, not of deity itself, but of its prerogativesthe high position
and glory of deity. But, being of the same essence as God, He "emptied Himself." The very
notion of "emptying" inevitably suggests deprivation or lessening, the loss of something that was
possessed before. When Jesus "emptied Himself," therefore, did He diminish Himself, and if so,
in what way?

The verb "to empty" (kenoo) in every other New Testament instance means "to deprive
something of its proper place and use." As John Calvin points out, "Christ, indeed, could not
divest Himself of Godhead; but He kept it concealed for a time . . . He laid aside His glory in the
view of men, not by lessening it, but by concealing it."20 He did this in voluntary subjection or
subordination to God the Father.




82

God is of such a nature that acceptance of the limitations of a human life does not make
Him unlike Himself. He is free to be our God without ceasing to be God the Lord. Jesus
remained God in the voluntary self-deprivation of the exercise of Lordship. He willingly set
aside the glory, majesty and honor that only belong to absolute divinity. By submitting Himself
to the Father, Jesus did not become inferior to the Father since submission has to do with roles
rather than substance or essence.

When John talks about God the Father being "greater" than Jesus (Jn 5:19; 14:28) he is
referring to the submission of the Son to the Father and not in any way implying that the Son is
inherently inferior to the Father. Biblical submission simply does not imply inferiority. It only
points out the humble placing of people in the order of God's plan, purpose, and program.

When Paul refers to God as "head of Christ" (1 Co 11:3) and that Christ will be subject to
God that God may be "all in all" (15:28) he is not saying that Jesus is inferior. This merely has to
do with the order or rank of authority.

Christ came to put down all rule, authority, and power not authorized by His Father
(14:23-26), and to demonstrate to the universe His absolute lordship (Php 2:8-11). But this
lordship in a kingdom service was not to be gained by the raw expression of divine power any
more than rightful human leadership is to be established by violence. Rather it was granted by
His moral and spiritual worthiness (Heb 2:9-18; 3:1-6; Rev 5).

Thus Christ, as a lawful and true representative of the Father, triumphed in the power of
the Father, opening the way not only to salvation from sin and death, but to the rights and
privileges of the kingdom of heaven for all who follow Him.

As a true representative of the human race and as a wholly obedient Son of God the
Father, Jesus never acted independently during His earthly ministry. Everything Jesus did He
drew from His Father's power (Jn 5:19-20; 14:10-12), wisdom (7:16; 8:26-28,40), and in
perfect harmony with His Father's will (Mk 14:35-39; Jn 6:38; 8:29; Heb 10:5-9).

In this voluntary limitation of dependence, He lived (as His followers must live) by faith
(Mt 3:14-15; Heb 2:9-18; 3:1-2), died in faith (5:7-9; Col 1:18-23; Php 2:8-11), and rose again
by faith (Mt 16:21; Eph 1:17-23).

Just as one cannot rightfully conclude that Jesus did not become less than man because
He chose to become man's servant (Mk 10:45), so no one should conclude that Jesus was less
than God because He subjected Himself to the Father while on earth. Jesus did not treat His
equality with God as an excuse for self-assertion or self-aggrandizement. Instead He treated it as
an occasion for renouncing every advantage or privilege that might have accrued to Him and saw
it as an opportunity for self-impoverishment self-sacrifice.

The world "being" (hyparchon) literally means "remaining" or "not ceasing to be." This
means that Jesus never ceased to be God. Rather He remained in His basic nature. The phrase
"held onto" or the word "retained" more clearly gives us the sense of the point Paul is making.

83

The meaning of the words "grasped" or "seized" only becomes clear when we carefully
look at the intent and flow of the passage.

Just as "form of a servant" (Php 2:7) means that Christ truly was a servant, so
"form of God" (v. 6) means that Christ really is God. These two parallels of humility
between Christians and Jesus, and of form between Christ's deity and humanity, are undeniable.

Far from denying the deity of Christ, the Philippian passage (vv. 1-11) clearly and
forcefully affirms the full and absolute deity of Christ who is our supreme model of humility in
the face of equality.

This passage powerfully points us to the enormous contrast between Adam and Christ.
Adam, who was made in the image of God "snatched" at a false and illusory equality ("you will
be like God, knowing good and evil"Gn 3:5). Christ, on the other hand, who already enjoyed
true equality with God, refused to derive any advantage from it in becoming man.

Whereas Adam forfeited his lordship (over creation) through his "snatching," Christ
achieved or reclaimed universal lordship through His renunciation of His divine prerogatives.
When divine honors are thus paid to the humiliated and exalted Jesus, "the glory of God the
Father" (Php 2:11) is not diminished but enhanced. When the Son is honored, the Father is
glorified: no one can bestow on the Son higher honors than the Father Himself has bestowed.

The passage then teaches that, before becoming human, the One who possessed divine
qualities did not regard that status as something to take advantage of or something to exploit.
Instead, He used it as an opportunity to be obedient even to humiliation and death. God the
Father acknowledged the rectitude and accomplishment of this attitude by exalting Him to share
His own divine glorythe glory that had always been His by nature (Jn 17:5,24).

A Call to Imitation

Paul used this passage to fulfill the role of his developing argument that Jesus' example is
one that Christians are to imitate. Just as God acknowledged Christ's self-emptying as the true
self-expression of divine equality, so He will acknowledge Christian self-abnegation (Php 2:1-4,
12-18) in the same way (3:2,11,21).

Jesus' never ceased to be God! (Mk 9:31; Ac 2:22-24; 1 Co 15:1-4; *Php 2:6-11). Jesus'
emptying (kenosisv. 7) did not mean self-extinction or the metamorphosis of a divine being
into a mere man. He who emptied Himself was the same One who humbled Himself. Jesus'
divine nature did not change. Jesus "emptied" Himself, not by giving up deity, but by laying
aside His glory (Jn 17:5) and submitting to the humiliation of becoming man (2 Co 8:9). Jesus
remains truly God and truly man as He emptied Himself, not of deity itself, but of its
prerogativesthe high position and glory of deity.




84

Resurrected with God's Nature Again

Some faith teachers, however, hold that Jesus lost His divine nature when He took upon
Himself Satan's and our sin nature, but rose from the dead with God's nature again. He then sent
the Holy Spirit so that the incarnation could be duplicated in believers, thus fulfilling their
calling to be what the faith teachers call little gods.

"His [God's] purpose was to put Jesus through all the torments of hell. He bore our
sins, our sickness, our disease, our griefs, our sorrow, and our pain. Then, at the
command of God the Father the Spirit of God came blasting down through the
eons of time and injected the very 'zoe' life, light, and glory of God into Jesus' spirit
and He came out of that place victoriously!21

Now you can see His [Jesus'] inauguration in the first chapter of Hebrews and it
begins to mean something when God turns to a reborn, resurrected man and calls Him God. 'And
He said to the Son,

Thy throne O God, is forever and ever.' God has successfully brought a man
from the depths of hell, from being made sin, to the highest position that
exists in the universe, and Satan said He couldn't do it. But He did. He turned
to a man and called Him God. He is in a higher position now than He was
before He headed to the cross. I don't know how He could be any higher, but
God said He was. So that's enough for me."22 (Emphasis added)

Copeland describes Jesus' victory in hell and thus His rebirth there.

"In hell He [Jesus] suffered for you and for me. The Bible says hell was made
for Satan and his angels. It was not made for men. Satan was holding the Son
of God there illegally . . . The trap was set for Satan and Jesus was the bait.23
(Emphasis added)

Satan blew it on a technicality, according to some faith teachers, because Satan dragged
Jesus into hell illegally. As Copeland put it:

"The Devil forgot to take into consideration that Jesus hadn't sinned but, rather,
had merely become sin as a result of the sin of others."24

According to Copeland, as Hanegraaff summarizes it, "Satan and every demon in hell
tortured Christ's emaciated, poured out, little, wormy spirit without legal right. And this was the
exact opening that God had been looking for. Seizing the moment, He spoke His 'faith-filled'
words into the bowels of the earth, and suddenly"25

"that Word of the living God went down into that pit of destruction and charged
the spirit of Jesus with resurrection power! Suddenly the twisted, deathwracked
spirit began to fill out and come back to life. He began to look like

85

something the devil had never seen before. He was literally being reborn before
the devil's very eyes. He began to flex His spiritual muscles . . . Jesus was born
againthe first-born from the dead."26 (Emphasis added)

Benny Hinn put it:

"My, you know, whoosh! The Holy Ghost is just showing me some stuff. I'm
getting dizzy! I'm telling you the truthit's just heavy right now on me . . .
He's (referring to Jesus] in the underworld now. God isn't there, and the Bible
says He was begotten?

Do you know what the word begotten means. It means reborn. Do you want a
shocker? So was He. Don't let anyone deceive you. Jesus was reborn. You say,
'What are you talking about? . . . he was reborn. He had to be reborn . . . If He
was not reborn, I could not be reborn, I would never be reborn. How can I
face Jesus and say, 'Jesus, You went through everything I've gone through,
except the new birth?'"27 (Emphasis added)

As Benny Hinn said, "Do you want a shocker?" Such blatant disregard for the meaning of
words (e.g. "begotten") as well as theology is what is shocking! What hermeneutical gymnastics!

The Meaning of "Begotten"

The faith teachers' notion that Jesus was "born again" in hell is based on their erroneous
understanding of the word "begotten." John 1:14 states that Jesus is the "only begotten from the
Father" and Colossians 1:15 says that He is the "firstborn of all creation." The Arians used these
statements to prove that Christ was a created being and not coeternal with the Father.

The Greek word for "begotten" or "firstborn" is prototokos which comes from protos
meaning "first" and tikto meaning "to bear" or "to bring forth." It means firstborn in terms of
time.

Prototokos is applied particularly to the firstborn of a father or mother (Mt 1:25; Lk 2:7)
but also included the firstborn of animals (Heb 11:28). It is further the designation of Christ
as the Son of God before the creation (Col 1:15-16; Heb 1:5-6).

The Greek word prototokos may also denote preeminence. The nation Israel was the
firstborn, yet we know that he was not the oldest son of Jesse (Ps 89:27). Even though
Ephraim was the firstborn in God's sight, he was not the child born first to Joseph (Jer 31:9). In
the same way, as God the Father's firstborn Jesus is the preeminent one (see my unpublished
manuscript for a fuller treatment of this argument).





86

Incomplete Redemption on the Cross?

Not only is Jesus born again but some of these faith teachers also claim that Jesus' death
on the cross was not complete. Their interpretation of Jesus words from the cross, It is
finished" (Jn 19:30) is as follows:

"Now here's the part I want you to get. When He said, 'It is finished,' on that cross he
Was not speaking of the plan of redemptionthe plan of redemption had just
begun. There were still three days and three nights to be gone through before He
went to the throne.28

When Jesus cried 'It is finished,' He was not speaking of the plan of redemption . . .
Jesus' death on the cross was only the beginning of the complete work of
redemption."29

According to these teachers, Jesus' atoning work on the cross was not completed until He
had suffered for three days and nights in hell had been born again. But the purpose of Jesus'
coming was to die on the cross (Mk 10:45; Jn 10:14-18), not suffer in hell and be born again.
Paul shows how Christ triumphed over the devil and his cohorts on the cross (Col 2:13-15).

The picture here is of conquered soldiers stripped of their clothes as well as their
weapons to symbolize their total defeat. And this defeat was "by the cross," not by the fighting
that supposedly took place in hell for three days and nights. Jesus cry, "It is finished" is not a cry
of despair, but of accomplishment. In fact, it was used by soldiers when they had won a victory
in battle. Thus it marked the completion of the mission which Jesus came to finish. Moments
after Jesus' cry of desolation, He simply said, "I thirst." This indicated that His spiritual agony
was agony was over as He now expressed physical agony. Thus Jesus appeared to be conscious
of the end of His redemptive suffering. Jesus' conscious fellowship with the Father also seems to
have been restored at about this time since shortly thereafter He expressed, "Father, into Your
hands I commit My spirit" (Lk 23:46).

Any teaching that has been expressly set down in the Scriptures, or concluded necessary
by logical deduction from them, should be accepted as biblical. This certainly would be true as
well for these teachings of the Faith Movement. Their doctrines however have not been
expressly set down in the Scriptures.

Why is our correct understanding of the Atonement so crucial? Because it affects so
pervasively how we view other doctrines of Christianity such as the hypostatic union (the union
of the two natures of Jesus Christ, the human and the divine), the biblical concept of sacrifice,
the moral attributes of God, etc.all related to salvation.

Although faith teachers (and to a lesser degree Kenyon) do tend to be gnostic in that they
are elitist, this does not mean that they have a gnostic view of redemption. Yet they have strange
and inconsistent views such as their aberrant teaching on the Atonement which runs the risk of
being "another gospel" (2 Co 11:4).

87

NOTES

1
Robert M. Bowman, Jr., "Positive Confession and the 'Faith' Teaching," Christian
Research Journal 9 (Nov. 17, 1987): 36.
2
Kenneth Hagin, The Name of Jesus (Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries, 1981), 31.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid.
6
Ibid.
7
Price, Identification #3 (Inglewood, CA: Ever Increasing Faith Ministries, 1980), tape
#FP 545, side 1 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 395.
8
Copeland, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth
Copeland Ministries, 1990), audiotape #02-0017, side 2 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in
Crisis, 395.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
Brian Onken, "The Atonement of Christ and the Faith Movement, Forward 7, I (1984):
11-12 cited in Hanegraaff, 159.
14
New International Study Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985), 1893.
15
Alexander Bruce, The Humiliation of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1955), 344-345
cited in Onken, FORWARD, Periodical of the Christian Research Institute (Vol. 7, No. 1), 11.
16
Hagin, "Made Alive," The Word of Faith (April 1982), p. 3 cited in Onken, 10.
17
Ibid.
18 Copeland, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth
Copeland Ministries, n.d.) side 2 cited in Onken, "The Atonement of Christ and the Faith
Movement, FORWARD, 10.

88

19
Copeland, "Jesus: Our Lord of Glory," Believer's Voice or Victim (April 1982): 3 cited in
Onken, FORWARD, 10.
20
John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and
Thessalonians, translated by J. Pringle, 1551 (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1957), 82.
21
Copeland, "Jesus: Our Lord of Glory," 3 cited in Onken, FORWARD, 11.
22
__________, "Absolute Life," Believer's Voice of Victory program on TBN (September
1981)), 6 cited in Onken, FORWARD, 11.
23
__________, "Walking in the Realm of the Miraculous (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth
Copeland Ministries, 1979), 77 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 169.
24
__________, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne," op. cit. cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 170.
25
__________, "Believer's Voice of Victory" program on TBN (21 April 1991) cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 170.
26
__________, "The Price of It All," Believer's Voice of Victory, 19, 9 (September1991):4-
6 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 170.
27
Benny Hinn, "Our Position 'In Christ,' Part 1" (Orlando Christian Center, 1991),
videotape #TV=254 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 173.
28
Copeland, "What Happened from the Cross to the throne," side two, op. cit. cited in
Onken, FORWARD, 14.
29
Hagin, The Name of Jesus (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1981), 29 cited in Hanegraaff,
Christianity in Crisis, 164.













89

























CHAPTER 10 QUASI-GNOSTICISM





















90

DUALISM

The Faith Movement, like Gnosticism, holds to mutually exclusive realmsthe spiritual
and the material. The spiritual is the superior of the two as it comes under the governance of
God.

The spirit is entirely good and matter is evil. The material world is ruled by its own God
and thus is in eternal conflict with the world of the spirit.

Frederick Price stated:

"Satan is the God of the world, which includes everything in the sense realm. If
you allow your faith to be affected by your senses, you will be defeated in every
encounter of life."1

This is similar to the Gnostic teaching of the demiurge. Price is wrong when he says
unconditionally that Satan is "the God of this world." He is the god only in the sense that he is
"the prince." The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the God of this world as He created it,
sustains it, and one day will redeem it (Ro 8:18-22). Satan did not create it, he simply enslaved it.
And although he rules the world, he does so only as long as God chooses to let him.

It is God who orders the seasons as He, and He alone, has control over the rain which
falls on the righteous and unrighteous alike. Like the Gnostics, the faith teachers hold that man is
trapped in a physical body. Frederick Price puts it: "You are spirit but you live in a physical
body."2

Similarly Kenneth Hagin says:

"The real man is the spirit. The spirit operates through the soul: the intellect,
sensibilities, and will. And the soul operates through the body. The real you
(your spirit) and your soul live in a physical body."3

The implications can be fatal if all diseases are merely physical manifestations of
spiritual ailments since the diseases can remain after the physical manifestations have been dealt
with.

Therefore Price writes:

"Remember you are healed by faith, and not by sight. Faith is the evidence of
healingnot the fact that the cancer has left your body. Your confession,
between the time that you pray and claim your healing until it is seen in
your body, is what causes it to come. . . . Now your body may scream louder
than ever that you are sick. Fever, pain, nausea, lumps, etc. This is where your



91

confession comes in. YOU MUST CONFESS THE WORD OF GOD IN THE
FACE OF EVERY SYMPTOM AND EVERY PAIN. This is faith versus
sense knowledge."4 (Emphasis added)

Bryn Jones similarly states it:

"Someone may feel ill, seek and receive prayer for healing, but because they
still feel ill conclude that God has not worked on their behalf. Faith is not
acting in conjunction with feeling. Faith acts in obedience to what God has
said."5

Denying physical symptoms in the belief that this will demonstrate the kind of faith that
heals can be deadly as we shall see later in the chapter on Positive Confession.

Revelation Knowledge

The early church heresy called Gnosticism wears many faces. It comes in may different
forms as it has erected its ugly head in many different eras throughout church history. While
there are many different aspects to the heresy, it always focuses on knowledge. It is also typically
applied to movements that are somehow related to Christianity. Although some gnostic systems
emphasize intellectual demands, others focus more on ascetics, even others are libertine or
licentious in their emphasis. Yet all offer "special" knowledge only available to the initiated.

The Faith Movement is gnostic in that it emphasizes "Revelation," as "direct," "directed,"
"higher," or "special" knowledge. Kenyon taught that such knowledge is simply the knowledge
that "deals with things that the senses cannot discover or know without assistance from
Revelation Knowledge. It is a Revelation of God as a Father, and of this Father, God as a God of
love. Revelation Knowledge or Faith Knowledge is the realm above sense knowledge."6

Kenyon uses such knowledge as spiritual knowledge that distinguishes a Christian's real
knowledge of God as opposed to the theoretical knowledge used by non-Christians to try to
know God. Thus Kenyon uses such a category for apologetic purposes as he appeals to sinners to
gain a true knowledge of God.

Some faith teachers, however, use this term to distinguish between carnal knowledge and
spiritual knowledge, that is, the knowledge and faith of the ordinary, run-of-the-mill Christian
and the superior knowledge and faith of the elite, dedicated Christian.

Since they view revelation knowledge as knowledge revealed directly by Goda direct
pipelineit becomes the hermeneutical principle by which the teachings of Scripture are tested.

A "higher" interpretation is used to justify bizarre, outlandish teachings unknown to
previous generations. Thus Revelation Knowledge is placed above the Scriptures.



92

When a person had written a letter in Logos, the denominational paper of the Assemblies
of God, one of the editors responded, "These men apparently have no revelation knowledge of
the Bible . . ."7 Thus traditional orthodox biblical themes such as suffering, cross bearing, self-
sacrifice, voluntary poverty, and martyrdom are viewed with disdain.

There are two Greek words used by the New Testament writers for "knowledge": the
word gnosis or "knowledge" and epignosis and its corresponding verb epignosko. Some faith
teachers hold that epignosis means "a knowledge that comes from above, an exact knowledge"
which is equivalent to "revelation from God." This is held to be a mysterious esoteric knowledge
which they call "Revelation Knowledge." Like the Gnostics, some even suggest that such
knowledge is not available to "ordinary" Christians, but only to a dedicated few.

Is the distinction between gnosis and epignosis made by some faith teachers legitimate?

According to Greek scholars Arndt and Gingrich, epignosis means "knowledge" or
"recognition" usually limited to religious and moral things. It is also used as knowledge of the
truth. In some cases it refers to consciousness of sin (Ro 3:10), knowledge of God (Pr 2:5; Hos
4:1); knowledge of God and Christ (2 Pe 1:27) and that which is in accordance with (real)
knowledge.8

Nowhere does this word bear the sense of "Revelation Knowledge." Furthermore no one
in Scripture is challenged to make a special commitment beyond salvation (the gnostic formula:
faith plus knowledge) in order to gain access to this special esoteric knowledge. In no way is

Peter singling out some superior knowledge for super Christians when he states:

"Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge (epignosis) of God
and of Jesus our Lord" (2 Pe 1:2).

Peter is addressing all believers as he enjoins them to have real knowledge of Christ (see
also 1 Co 2:12,14).

Supposed revelation knowledge has made many faith teachers arrogant as they have
claimed an exclusive communication link with God. Since they are privy to a more rarified
stream of knowledge, why exhort their followers to settle for ordinary knowledge? The result is a
form of a cloning, as "the faithful" walk in lock and step with the teachings of their heroes.

Does this mean that godly men such as Charles Spurgeon, Andrew Murray, F. B. Meyer,
A. B. Simpson, Oswald Chambers, and A. W. Tozer were also guilty of gnostic thinking as they
referred to knowledge of God as "revelation knowledge"? A careful reading of these statements
show they are simply talking about "revelation," that is, knowledge revealed by God and only
ascertained by faith. The term "special revelation" (as opposed to general revelation, e.g. the
Trinity, salvation by grace, the church, etc.) is often used by theologians to refer to knowledge



93

that we cannot get at by our common sense approach (human wisdom). "Faith," as Tozer points
out, "is an organ of knowledge."9 The concept of "sense knowledge" and "revelation knowledge"
in and of itself is not gnostic though it can be interpreted and applied in gnostic fashion.

Theologian Clement of Alexandria, as early as the second century, writes in support of
the concept of revelation knowledge among Christians, while at the same time arguing against
Gnosticism. In refuting Gnosticism, Clement distinguishes between knowledge by reasoning or
the senses and knowledge by revelation in an excerpt entitled "First Principles of Faith":

"This type of reasoning knowledge is dependent upon our sensesthat is, our
abilities to see, feel, hear, touch, and taste. Through sensing we are led to
reasoning and understanding. From understanding, to knowledge. And then we
form our opinions.

But far above this way of knowing are the first principles of our knowledge--the
knowledge of God, given to us by revelation. For the principles of our faith were
revealed to us by God, from above, by the Spirit. . . . For whatever your human
senses insist that you believe must be brought under the spirit."10

In light of the present situation in which this concept has been abused and misused, it
would be wiser for us evangelicals to use the term revealed knowledge rather than revelation
knowledge" so that we are not as easily identified with teachings of the Faith Movement.

Prophecy Supersedes Scripture

The Faith Movement also repeats the error of the Montanists in the early church who
believed their prophecy superseded Scripture. As George Olsen has pointed out:

"The most solid criticism leveled at the Montanist movement (eventually
resulting in the declaration of heresy) was that Montanism taught the oracles
of the new prophecy improves on, and is even greater than that in the
Scriptures."11

Too often prophecies are tested by whether they produce pleasant sensations instead of
whether or not they are in line with Scripture.

Kenyon in his book, Two Kinds of Faith, espouses revelation knowledge which he
teaches is believing something to be true and acting on it. It therefore emphasizes a right
confession and action based on that confession. Therefore if I confess healing, I act as though I
am healed, for I am since I confessed it:

"It is not good taste to ask Him to heal us, for He has already done it. He declared
that we are healed; therefore we are."12 (Emphasis added)

"Signing the package" is a popular term used by faith teachers. Kenyon explains:

94


"Your acknowledgment of the disease is like signing for a package that the
express company has left you. Satan then has the receipt for your disease.
You have accepted it."13 (Emphasis added)

Kenyon further explains revelation faith:

"In revelation faith the Word holds first place. It is not dependent upon
physical evidence. Revelation faith believes that no word from God is
void of power and rests in quiet confidence in what God has stated."14
(Emphasis added)

No Need for Evidence

According to Kenyon, the fact that there may not be any physical evidence to indicate
healing makes no difference. How then is there any way of knowing whether a person is healed?
If there is no physical evidence, how can anyone be sure of his healing? If there is not evidence
of a changed life, can we be sure of salvation (2 Pe 1:5-11)? How do we know we are not
simply living in a make-believe world? How do we know that we are not living in self-denial?
How do we know that our confession is not vacuous?

This denying of the senses is rooted in the ancient Roman Catholic belief in trans-
substantiation in the Holy Eucharist. Cyril of Jerusalem writes regarding the elements of Holy
Communion:

"So do not think of them just of bread and wine. As the Lord Himself has
declared, they are body and blood. And if your senses suggest otherwise, then
let your faith reassure you. Do not decide the question on the basis of taste,
but on the basis of faith, and be assured beyond a doubt that you have received
the boy and blood of Christ."15

Thomas Aquinas goes beyond denying senses to saying that senses deceive:

"It is obvious to our senses that after consecration the accidents of bread and wine
remain. And by divine providence, there is a good reason for this. First, because
it is not normal for people to eat human flesh and blood set before us to be taken
under the appearance of those things which are of frequent use, namely bread and
wine."16

We also see the denial of the senses taught by Christian Science. A. B. Simpson carefully
guides us in warning against trusting our senses, yet he never advises us to deny our senses.
Rather he counsels us to acknowledge reality but also to transcend it:




95

"That headache is real. Take Him into it, and He will be as real as the headache,
and a good deal more, for He will be there when the headache is gone. That trial
is real; it has burned itself into your life; God will be more so."17

At no time in the biblical record are we asked to deny our senses. Is it any wonder that
Jesus followed the Jewish tradition of going to a priest for verification when there was a healing
(Lev 14:2-32)? Therefore at times He would command people who had been healed to "go
and show themselves to the priest" to verify or provide further proof for the actual healing
(Mt 8:4; Lk 5:14).

Claims can be easily made by religious hucksters as well as by the most sincere believers.
This is why we are repeatedly warned against the dangers of false claims (Mt 7:21-23).
Was it not Jesus who said, "By their fruits you will recognize them" (v. 20)?

Commanding Angels

We see the gnostic tendencies concerning the matter of commanding angels as well.
Kenyon, again, is the source of such biblical distortion as he claimed that we have the very
angelic forces to do our bidding. Such a notion is a misinterpretation of the purpose of angels.
The writer to the Hebrew Christians put it:

"Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit
salvation" (Heb 1:14).

"Ministering spirits" means that angels minister as those sent by God to serve us. They
are not sent by us to serve us. In fact, the very name angelos means "sent one" or "messenger."
The angels are not created by God to do our bidding; they do only the bidding of God. Although
God sends angels on behalf of His saints, there is not one single prayer or command from a saint
to angels in Scripture.

Kingdom Blessings

It is the belief of the Faith Movement that by the blessings of Abraham, they nullify the
curse of Adam and thereby enter into virtually all of the Kingdom benefits as they believe in the
fullness of the Kingdom in this life. Pleasures and its satisfactions thus overshadow the prospect
of heaven.

The teachings of the Faith Movement, though unbiblical, are lucrative. This is especially
for the some of the faith teachers who drive around in their luxurious cars and clothed in the
most expensive suits, while the well-intentioned but naive follower, barely eeks out a living. No
one has benefited so much from their own preaching as the preachers themselves.





96

Some faith teachers, by going beyond the biblical usage of knowledge, hold that such
knowledge transcends mere ordinary Christianity and opens up the windows of health, wealth,
and prosperity. Such perversion of truth is a form of hedonistic Gnosticism that panders to the
flesh. Thus Almighty God is reduced to a celestial Genie who does our bidding.

































NOTES

1
Frederick Price, Is Healing For All? (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1976), 122 cited in
Robert Jackson, "Prosperity Theology and the Faith Movement" (Article, n. d.), 5.
2
__________. High FinanceGod's Financial Plan (Harrison House, 1984), 55 cited
in Jackson, "Prosperity Theology and the Faith Movement," (Article, n. d.), 5.

97

3
Kenneth Hagin, Redeemed From Poverty, Sickness, and Death (Rhema Bible Class,
AKA Kenneth Hagin Ministries, 1983), 25 cited in Jackson, "Prosperity Theology and the Faith
Movement," 5.
4
Price, Is Healing For All, 122 cited in Jackson, "Prosperity Theology and the Faith
Movement," 5.
5
Bryn Jones, According To Your Faith, School of the Word Study Series (Harvestime,
1985), 21 cited in Jackson, "Prosperity Theology and the Faith Movement," 5.
6
E. W. Kenyon, The Two Kinds of Life (Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society, 1971), 81
cited in Jackson, "Prosperity Theology and the Faith Movement," 5.
7
Logos (July-August, 1981), 9.
8
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Christian Literature.
Revised Edition. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 291.
9
A. W. Tozer, Man: The Dwelling Place of God, Camp Hill, PA: Christians Publications,
1966), 24.
10
"First Principles of Faith," You Give Me New Life, edited by David Hazard, 36-38 cited in
Paul King, "Faith and Revelation and Sense Knowledge," (Unpublished paper), 2-3.
11
George Olsen, The Charismatic Church (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, n. d.), 63.
12
Kenyon, The Two Kinds of Faith, 22.
13
Kenyon, In His Presence, 63.
14
Ibid.
15
The Christian Theology Reader, edited by Alister E. McGrath (London: Blackwell
Publishers, 1995, 193) cited in Paul King, "Faith and Revelation and Sense Knowledge,"
(Unpublished paper, 1).
16
Ibid., 301 cited in Paul King, Faith and Revelation and Sense Knowledge (Unpublished
paper), 2.
17
Paul King, "Faith and Revelation and Sense Knowledge, 1.





98




























CHAPTER 11 A MAGNIFIED VIEW OF MAN AND A DEVALUED VIEW OF GOD


















99

Man is magnified and thus God is devalued in Faith Movement theology. It caters to
man's selfishness and sense of self-importance. But since God is the Sovereign One, we are
ultimately dependent upon Him. It is unchristian, therefore, to treat Him as some celestial
bellhop.

We are here to serve Him, not vice versa!

Man as a God

Several leaders in the Faith Movement have gone beyond biblical revelation and demoted
God the Father and Jesus Christ. The following stupendous statements show the deification of
man and the devaluation of God:

"Man . . . was created on terms of equality with God, and he could stand in God's
presence without any consciousness of inferiority. . . . God has made us as
much like Himself as possible. . . . He made us the same class of being that he is
Himself. . . Man lived in the realm of God. He lived on terms equal with God. . . .
The believer is called Christ that's who we are; we're Christ!"1 (Emphasis added)
--Kenneth Hagin

"You don't have a god in you, you are one."2 (Emphasis added)
--Paul Crouch

"I am a little god! Critics be gone!"3 (Emphasis added)
--Paul Crouch

"God came from heaven, became a man, made man into little gods, went back
to heaven as a man. He faces the Father as a man. I face devils as the son of
God . . . Quit your nonsense! What else are you? If you say, I am, you're
saying I'm a part of Him, right? Is he God? Are you His offspring? Are you
His children?"4 (Emphasis added)
--Benny Hinn

How did these faith teachers come to such an outlandish teaching? Like many cultists,
some leaders of the Faith Movement have twisted the meaning of a verse in which John seems t
be saying that we human beings are gods:

"You are gods" (Jn 10:35).

This bold statement must be seen in its larger context. The full text is:

"Jesus answered them [the Jews], 'Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said
you are gods,' to whom the word of God came--and the Scripture cannot
be brokenwhat about the One whom the Father set apart [sanctified] as
his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse Me of
blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son?'" (vv. 34-36).
100

Jehovah's Witnesses and others claim that these verses identify Jesus as one human being
among other human beings and show that His claims to divinity are not to be taken seriously.
Admittedly the argument before us is a difficult one since it is a rabbinic form of argumentation
based upon distinctions which were of great importance to the rabbis but which do not seem so
important to people of our day.

What is confusing, at first, is that Jesus heads in the opposite direction of what He has
been saying up to now: that He claimed to be God in a unique and absolute sense. But in these
verses He seems to be watering down this claim to mean no more by this than what the Old
Testament means when it uses the word "god" to apply to men.

What are we to make of such an argument?

The point Jesus is making is that since there is some sense in which human beings can be
spoken of as "gods," how much more may the term be used appropriately of Him whom the
Father set apart and sent!

The recipients of "the word of God" were the judges of Israel with whom God was angry
because they had perverted justice. Yet these very men are called "gods" in Psalm 82. In the light
of this Scripture, Jesus sarcastically inquires whether the Jewish leaders of His day can rightfully
say that He blasphemes when He calls Himself "the son of God" (Jn 10:36). But notice that His
argument is not: "Psalm 82 speaks of men as gods; therefore in common with other men may use
the term to Myself." Rather the sense of the passage is: "Since the truth of Scripture requires a
sense that "gods" applies to sinful man, rather than rashly throwing stones, should we not weigh
carefully how it may apply to whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world?"

A Judge is god in that He Acts like God

This 82nd psalm that Jesus quotes is a psalm that warns unjust judges to stop their
unscrupulous ways and defend the poor and the innocent. The psalmist concludes the warning
with the words: "I say, 'You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you'" (v. 6).

The judge is called a "god" because there is a sense in which he acts as God since he has
been entrusted with the oracles of God as part of a divine call or commission to judge Israel.
After all, judgment is a prerogative that belongs to God. In a limited way, therefore, judges play
the role of God (Ex 21:6; 22:8-9,28).

Jesus' Use of Comparative Logic

Instead of classifying Himself among men, Jesus calls Himself

"Him, whom the Father set apart as His very own [sanctified] and sent into the
world" (Jn 10:36).



101

By so doing He was separating and distinguishing Himself from men. He uses
comparative logic: "How much more?"

This is the first time in the New Testament that Jesus identifies Himself as the "Son of
God." Previously He has spoken of Himself as "the Son" and referred to God as His Father in
such a way as to leave no doubt that He claims a special and unique relationship. This is His way
of accepting the charge made against Him previously: "We are not stoning You for any of these,
but for blasphemy, because You, a mere man, claimed to be God" (v. 33).

While He does not deny the charge, He denies that the Jews are right in their
understanding of the situation. They thought He was making Himself God. He was saying that
He was not making Himself anything. He was what He was, and it was the Father, who in the
first place, sent Him into the world, and secondly, who testified of Him" (John 5:37).

Partaker of the Divine Nature

In what sense then can we speak of human beings as being "gods"? Certainly not in the
sense that Jesus is--coequality, cosubstantialitybut only in the sense that man is a "partaker of
the divine nature" (2 Pe 1:4). Man is a "participant" in God's divine nature only as he is indwelt
by God's Spirit. And this indwelling is possible only because he was made in God's image and
because he acknowledges by faith God's saving work in the Person of Jesus Christ on the cross.
When we become partakers of His divine nature we become "sons" or "children" of God.

This is the sense in which Martin Luther and C. S. Lewis spoke of Christians as "little
christs." After all, the word "Christian" means "Christ one" or "one of Christ's." But while we are
"sons of God" by adoption, Jesus, and He alone, is "the Son of God" by His very nature.

Exact Duplicate

The Faith movement compromises the deity of the Lord Jesus by placing Adam on the
same level and by seeing man's purpose as that of duplicating God rather than glorifying God.

"God's reason for creating Adam was His desire to reproduce Himself. . . .
He was not a little like God. He was not almost like God. He was not
subordinate to God even."5 (Emphasis added)
--Kenneth Copeland

"Did you know that from the beginning of time the whole purpose of God
was to reproduce Himself? . . . Who are you? Come on, who are you? Come
on, say it: 'Sons of God'! Come on, say it! And what does work inside us,
brother, is that manifestation of the expression of all that God is and all that
God has. And when we stand up here, brother, you're not looking at
Morris Cerullo; you're looking at God. You're looking at Jesus."6 (Emphasis added)
--Morris Cerullo


102

"God has to be given permission to work in this earth realm on behalf of man. . . .
Yes! You are in control! So, if man has control, who no longer has it? God."7
(Emphasis added)
--Frederick Price

"The Spirit of God declared in the earth today what the eternal purpose of God
has been through the ages . . . that He is duplicating Himself on earth."8
(Emphasis added)
--John Avanzini

"God duplicated Himself in kind! . . . Adam was an exact duplication of
God's kind!"9 (Emphasis added)
--Charles Capps

Some faith teachings have become so blasphemous and bizarre that even cultists are
denying them. For example, Mormon scholar and author Stephen E. Robinson, referring to some
of the faith teachers, says:

"Now in fact, the Latter-day Saints would not agree with the doctrine of
deification as understood by most of these evangelists, for in the LDS view
we receive the full divine inheritance only through the atonement of Christ
and only after a glorious resurrection."10

The Glory of God

Was it really God's purpose to create man in His own image and likeness to reproduce or
reduplicate Himself? Historic orthodox Christianity has taught that man's chief end or purpose is
expressed by the Westminster Catechism:

"The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever."

Man's chief end or purpose is to glorify God first of all. Paul put it:

"For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory
forever! Amen" (Ro 11:36).

God is the Creator, Sustainer and Ultimate Goal of all existence.

In dealing with some practical problems in the church at Corinth Paul stated:

". . . yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came
and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through
whom all things came and through whom we live (1 Co 8:6).



103

The answer to any problem or circumstance is God and our relationship to Him.
Everything else is secondary. For God is our Ultimate Goal. We were made to glorify Him.

God said through the prophet Isaiah:

". . . everyone who is called by My Name, whom I created for My glory
whom I formed and made" (Isa 43:7).

"the people I formed for Myself that they may proclaim My praise."
(v. 21; see also 42:8,12)

The Purpose of All Creation

The Bible states that the purpose of all creation is to glorify God. He says nature glorifies
Him (Ps 19:1). The animals glorify Him, notes Isaiah (Isa 43:20). The angels that appeared
at Christ's birth cried out for God's glory (Lk 2:14).

Everything from owls to angelsthe flowers, the butterflies, the grass, the trees,
everything was made to manifest God's glory.

Man in general has failed to glorify God (Ro 8:21-25). To glorify God is to respond
to His presence, His revelation, His Word. We were made to love, to know and understand God
and His ways, to worship and serve Him. This is the primary purpose for which we are here on
earth. This is also the primary purpose for which we are to spend eternity with God. This is our
calling. We were created to glorify God and enjoy Him forever!

A Materialized God

According to Faith theology, however, man was created as an exact duplicate of God,
including even size and shape. Kenneth Copeland sees Adam as a virtual copy of Christ:

"[Adam] was the copy, looked just like [God]. If you stood Adam upside God,
they look just exactly alike. If you stood Jesus and Adam side-by-side, they
would look and sound exactly alike."11 (Emphasis added)

Copeland claims that God is:

"A being that is very uncanny the way He's very much like you and me. A
being that stands somewhere around 6'2", 6'3", that weighs somewhere in the
neighborhood of a couple of hundred pounds, little better, [and] has a [hand]
span of nine inches across."12 (Emphasis added)





104

Jerry Savelle elaborates on Copeland's teachings when he says:

"He measured out heaven with a nine-inch span . . . The distance between my
thumb and my finger is not quite nine inches. So, I know He's bigger than me,
thank God. Amen? But He's not some great, big, old thing that couldn't come
through the door there and you know, when he sat down wouldevery seat in
the house. I don't serve the Glob."13 (Emphasis added)

Morris Cerullo claims:

"As I lay there on the floor in this condition, my spirit was taken out of my body
and the next thing I knew, I was in the heavens. Suddenly, in front of this
tremendous multitude of people, the glory of God appeared. The form that I
saw was about the height of a man six feet tall, maybe taller, and twice as
broad as a human body with no distinguishing features, such as eyes, nose or
mouth."14 (Emphasis added)

So much for God the Father being spirit (John 4:24) who does not have "flesh and bones"
(Lk 24:39). As spirit, God is immaterial. The Israelites saw "no form" when the Lord appeared
to them in Horeb, and therefore they were not to make themselves an image of Him (Dt 4:14-19).

John taught that "no man has seen God at any time" (Jn 1:18); Paul speaks of Him as
"the invisible God" (Col 1:15) who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable
light, whom no one has seen or can see" (1 Ti 6:16); Moses said that "no man could see
God and live" (Ex 33:20).

But how then do we explain the Scriptures that say men saw God? For example: Genesis
32:30; Exodus 3:6; 24:9,10; Numbers 12:6-8; Deuteronomy 34:10; Isaiah 6:1. They saw a
manifestation of God that accommodated itself to the uniqueness of the circumstances and to
limited human capacity.

Benny Hinn even claims to have seen the Holy Spirit wearing clothes:

"I could almost visibly see the Lord, and I could tell you what He was wearing."15

Jan Crouch, apparently giddy with excitement as she asked Hinn, "Was that the
Holy Spirit?" heard him reply "yes."16 Here we have the absurd notion of a Spirit wearing
clothes! It is highly unlikely that spirits wear clothes since by definition they have no bodies on
which to put those clothes. Again the Faith Movement sounds much more like Mormon
teachings than historic Christian teaching.






105

Dominion

The faith teachers show little regard for the simple meaning of words. This is due
to their disdain for theological education and their resultant ignorance of even elementary
Hebrew and Greek, as well as theology in general. According to Benny Hinn:

"Adam was a super being when God created him. I don't know whether
people know this, but he was the first Superman that really ever lived.
First of all, the Scriptures declare clearly that he had dominion over the
fowls of the air, the fish of the seawhich means he used to fly. Of course,
how can he have dominion over the birds and not be able to do what they
do? The word "dominion" in the Hebrew clearly declares that if you have
dominion over a subject that you do everything that the subject does. In
other words, that subject, if it does something you cannot do, you don't
have dominion over it. I'll prove it further. Adam not only flew, he flew
into space. He was--with one thought he could be on the moon."17

Benny Hinn gives us a new meaning for the word "dominion." No biblical scholar would
agree with Hinn that having dominion over a subject means that you do everything that subject
does. The idea is ludicrous for it would mean that, if you have dominion over chickens, you
would be able to grow feathers and lay eggs.

Rather, to have dominion means "the power to rule." The Old Testament verb rada has
the meaning of "tread" or "trample" (Joel 3:13) meaning to "dominate" or "rule." The Hebrew
word masal is a general term for "ruling" or "having mastery over" something or someone. In the
New Testament the term most frequently rendered "dominion" is kratos, which means "power"
or "might." When used of God it denotes His "sovereignty."

Although man is given dominion over nature (Gn 1:26,28; Ps 8:6), political power over
a realm (Gn 37:8; Nu 24:19; Jdg 14:4; 1 Kgs 4:24), and the rule of sin over man (Ps 19:13;
119:133; Ro 6:9,14), dominion belongs ultimately to God (Job 25:2; Ps 22:28; 145:13; Da
4:3,34; 6:26; 7:27; 1 Ti 6:15; 1 Pe 4:11; 5:11; Jude 25; Rev 1:6).

A Relegated God

The Faith Movement relegates God to the role of servant to His own creation. For
example:

"Now this is a shocker! But God has to be given permission to work in this earth
realm on behalf of man. . . . Yes! You are in control! So if man has control, who
no longer has it? God. . . .





106

When God gave Adam dominion, that meant God no longer had dominion. So,
God cannot do anything in this earth unless we let Him. And the way we let Him
or give Him permission is through prayer."18 (Emphasis added)
--Frederick Price

"Adam committed high treason; and at that point, all the dominion and authority
God had given to him was handed over to Satan. Suddenly, God was on the
outside looking in . . . After Adam's fall, God found Himself in a peculiar
position. . . . God needed an avenue back into the earth . . . God laid out His
proposition and Abram accepted it. It gave God access to the earth and gave
man access to God. Technically, if God ever broke the Covenant, He would
have to destroy Himself."19 (Emphasis added)

Sadly, these faith teachers seem oblivious to the implications of such embarrassing
blasphemies. If God must negotiate with one of His creatures to gain access to His own
handiworkthe earthhas He not failed? Does this not suggest that God is not omniscient
(allknowing) since it implies that God was taken by surprise. Also, does it not imply that God is
not omnipotent (all-powerful) since He lost control of that which He created?

The God of Scripture knows the end from the beginning since He is omniscient (Ps
147:5; Ro 11:33; Heb 4:13). This means His knowledge is perfect (Job 37:16), and thus nothing
(by definition) catches Him by surprise (Isa 42:9). It becomes evident that the humanistic deity
of the faith teachers bears no resemblance to the God of the Bible. A God who has physical
qualities and who "fails" cannot be the sovereign God of Scripture. Yet Scripture declares that
nothing is too hard for the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Jer 32:17,27). With Him all things
are possible (Mt 19:26).

We have already seen that God has been demoted by some of the faith teachers who
maintain that He is a materialized being. Thus faith teachers illustrate the fundamental problem
of the professing church: her concept of God. The concept of God's majesty has been lost to
the popular religious mind as A. W. Tozer lamented more than thirt y-five years ago. Our
personal conception of God controls our thoughts and actions. It is of immense importance that
our idea of God corresponds as nearly as possible to the true being of God. A right conception of
God is basic not only to theology, but to practical Christian living.

The second commandment forbids us to manufacture physical images of God--or to
dream up mental images of Him. "Imagining God in our heads can be just as real a breach of
the second commandment as imagining Him by the work of our hands . . . those who hold
themselves free to think of God as they like are breaking the second commandment."20 "Idolatry
is the entertainment of thoughts about God that are unworthy of Him."21

To assume that God is other than He is, is idolatry. All idolatry begins in the mind and
leads to substituting for the true God one made after man's own likeness. The Bible is clear that
God is sovereign.


107

"But our God is in the heavens, He has done whatever He pleased."
(Ps 115:3; see also 135:6)

"Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like Me. I make known the end from the beginning,
from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I
will do all that I please. From the east summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land,
a man to fulfill My purpose. What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have
planned, that will I do" (Isa 46:9-11).

"In Him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of
Him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of His will."
(Eph 1:11; see also Da 4:35; Isa 24:1; 45:9; Ro 9:14-24; 1 Ti 6:15; Rev 4:11)

To denigrate God's sovereignty is to deny that he has absolute right to govern all His
creatures according to His own good pleasure. God's sovereignty means that He keeps the reigns
of government in His own hands. He has total freedom, power, knowledge, wisdom,
determination to carry out a predetermined ("predestined") course of action. Because God
possesses all His character qualities in infinite measure, He is sovereign.

God's sovereignty is universal, extending to all His creatures. It is absolute in that it is not
divided between Himself and someone or something else. His sovereignty is also immutable:
unchangeable and final.

In His sovereignty God has established laws, both physical and moral laws by which His
creatures are to be governed. He determines the nature and powers of the different orders of
created beings and assigns each its appropriate sphere. He appoints to each individual and nation
their position and distributes His favor as He sees fit. God, however, is not capricious He does
not randomly do whatever He pleases. His sovereignty is always exercised in conformity with
His character as a holy, wise, and loving God.

Deified Satan

In the eyes of some of the faith teachers Satan is deified as "the God of this world" and is
invested with so much power that he could manage to "turn the light off in God." Kenneth
Copeland is even willing to give ownership of the earth to Satan:

"God's on the outside looking in. He doesn't have any legal entree into the
earth. The thing don't belong to Him. You see how sassy the Devil was in
the presence of God in the book of Job? God said, 'Where have you been?'
Wasn't any of God's business. He [Satan] didn't even have to argue with him
a bit! You see, this is the position that God's been in Might say, 'Well if God's
running things, He's doing a lousy job of it.' He hadn't been running 'em,
except when he's just got, you know, a little bit of a chance."22 (Emphasis added)


108

Copeland goes on to say:

"The Bible says that God gave this earth to the sons of men . . . and when [Adam]
turned and gave that dominion to Satan, look where it left God. It left God on
the outside looking in . . He had no legal right to do anything about it, did He?
. . . He had injected Himself illegally into the earth--what Satan had intended for
Him to do was to fall for itpull off an illegal act and turn the light off in God,
and subordinate God to himself . . . He intended to get God into such a trap
that he couldn't get out."23 (Emphasis added)

Copeland also asserts:

"What [why] does God have to pay the price for this thing? He has to have a
man that is like that first one. It's got to be a man. He's got to be all man.
He cannot be a God and come storming in here with attributes and
dignities that are not common to man. He can't do that. It's not legal."24
(Emphasis added)

Copeland promises:

"Here's where we're gonna depart from ordinary church: Now, you see,
God is injecting His Word into the earth to produce this Jesusthese
faith-filled words that framed the image that's in Him. . . . He can't
just walk onto the earth and say, 'Let it be!' because he doesn't
have the right. He had to sneak it in here around the god of this
world that was blockin' every way that he possibly could."25 (Emphasis added)

Jesus Christ supposedly told Copeland the following prophecy as He denied to have
claimed to be God:

"Don't be disturbed when people put you down and speak harshly and roughly
of you. They spoke that way of Me, should they not speak that way of You?
The more you get to be like Me, the more they're going to think that way of
you. They crucified Me for claiming that I was God. But I didn't claim I
was God; I just claimed I walked with Him and that He was in me.
Hallelujah."26 (Emphasis added)

These statements are nothing but pure heresy! Blasphemy! They sound more like the
teachings of the Mormons, the New Age and other cults than historic Christianity. No matter
how you try to contextualize such claims you still end up with unmitigated heresy.

John, in his gospel, shows us that Jesus Christ, the Word (logos), became the Son of God
in order that we might become "sons of God" (Jn 1:12-13, etc.). As stated earlier, as human
beings we share in the divine nature (2 Pe 1:4) because we are made in God's image and


109

likeness and thus become participants of that "divine nature" as we are redeemed by Him. It is
Jesus who is Godthe Redeemerwho saves us, who makes our sharing in the divine nature
possible. While we share in God's nature, Jesus possesses that nature.

A Multipersonal God

Hinn made the following statement on the multipersonal God:

"Man, I feel revelation knowledge already coming on me here. Lift your hands.
Something new is going to happen here today. I felt it just as I walked down
here. Holy Spirit, take over in the name of Jesus. God the Father, ladies and
gentlemen, is a person, and he is a triune being by Himself separate from
the Son and the Holy Ghost. Say, what did you say? Hear it, hear it, hear it.
See, God the Father is a person, God the Son is a person, God the Holy Ghost
is a person. But each one of them is a triune being by himself. If I can shock
youand maybe I shouldthere's nine of them. Huh, what did you say? Let
me explain: God the Father, ladies and gentlemen, is a person with his own
personal spirit, with his own personal soul, and his own personal spirit-body.
You say, Huh, I never heard that. Well you think you're in this church to
hear things you've heard for the last 50 years?"27 (Emphasis added)

He's right! Such outrageous teaching is unique to Benny Hinn and possibly to a few of
his "teaching" friends. Some try to excuse Hinn by saying that he has been careless at times. Can
teachers afford to be careless in teaching God's divine revelation? Paul warns:

"Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you
know that we who teach will be judged more strictly" (Jas 3:1).

Because a teacher has great influence, he will be held more strictly accountable (Mt
23:1-33; Lk 20:47).

Two years after his initial "revelation," Hinn once again voiced virtually the same
statement. As he puts it,

"God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost--three separate
individuals, one in essence, one in workand may I add, each one of them
possess His own spirit-body. You don't like it?"28 (Emphasis added)

He's right again! Many of us "don't like it"! It is heresy!

This teaching that each member of the Trinity has His own distinct "spirit-body" is much
more in line with Mormon teaching than orthodox Christianity. For it means that there are three
separate and thus distinct divine beings, that is, gods. This teaching is called Tritheism and was
repudiated by the early church as a contradiction of the Trinity or Triunity of God.


110

The Dangers of Idolatry

J. I. Packer warns of the dangers of idolatry and points us in the direction of the
knowledge of the Holy. He warns against all speculative theology, which rests on philosophical
reasoning rather than biblical revelation. Thus the heaviest obligation lying upon the Christian
church today is to purify and elevate her concept of God until it is once more worthy of Him
and of her.

Daniel's Vision of God

Daniel was a man who had had a true vision of God. It was this vision which gave him
confidence in defying authority (Da 1,6). It was his knowledge of God which formed the
substance of his tremendous confidence in his God. Daniel was convinced that "the most High
rules in the kingdom of men" (4:24; 5:21). God knows and foreknows all things. He therefore
will have the last word in world history and in the destiny of every man.

It is this tremendous sense of God's holy majesty which needs to be recaptured so
desperately in our day and age.




























111

NOTES

1
Kenneth M. Hagin, "Zoe: The God-Kind of Life" (Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries,
Inc., 1989), 35-36, 41 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 108.
2
Kenneth Copeland, "The Force of Love" (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries,
1987), Audiotape #002-0028, side 1 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 110.
3
Paul Crouch, "Praise the Lord" program on TBN (7 July 1986) cited in Hanegraaff,
Christianity in Crisis, 112.
4
Benny Hinn, "Our Position in Christ #2The Word Made Flesh" (Orlando: Orlando
Christian Center, 1991), Videotape #255 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 130-131.
5
Copeland, "Following the Faith of Abraham I" (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries, 1989), tape #01-3001, side 1 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 108
6
Morris Cerullo, "The Endtime Manifestation of the Sons of God," audiotape 1, sides 1 &
2 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 109.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid.
10
Stephen E. Robinson, Are Mormons Christians? (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1991),
63.
11
Kenneth Copeland, "Authority of the Believer" IV (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries, 1987), audiotape #01-1304, side 1.
12
Kenneth Copeland, "Spirit, Soul and Body" I (Fort Worth, TX; Kenneth Copeland
Ministries, 1985), audiotape #01-0601, side 1.
13
Jerry Savelle, "Graming Your World With the Word of God," Part 2 (Fort Worth, TX:
Jerry Savelle Evangelistic Association, Inc. n. d.), audiotape #22-36, side 1.
14
Morris Cerullo, The Miracle Book (San Diego, CA: Cerullo Word Evangelism, Inc.
1984), x-xi.
15
Benny Hinn and Jan Crouch, "Praise the Lord" program on TBN (October 3, 1991) cited
in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 123.


112

16
Ibid.
17
Benny Hinn, "Praise the Lord" program on TBN (December 26, 1991) cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 119.
18
Paul Crouch, "Praise the Lord" program on TBN (July 7, 1986) cited in Hanegraaff,
Christianity in Crisis, 11.
19
Kenneth Copeland, "Our Covenant with God" (Fort worth, TX: KCP Publications, 1987),
8-11 passim cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 25-126.
20
J. I. Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1973), 42.
21
A. W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy (Harrisburg: Christian Publications, 1961), 11.
22
Kenneth Copeland, "Image of God in You" III (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries, 1989, Audiotape #01-1403, side 1.
23
__________, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth
Copeland Ministries, 1990), Audiotape #02-0017.
24
__________, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth
Copeland Ministries, 1990), Audiotape #01-0017.
25
__________, "The Image of God in You" III (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries, 1989), audiotape #01-1403, side 2.
26
__________, "Take Time to Pray, Believer's Voice of Victory" 14, 2 (February 1987): 9.
27
Benny Hinn, "Benny Hinn" program on TBN (October 3, 1991).
28
__________, "Praise the Lord" program on TBN (October 23, 1992).













113


























CHAPTER 12 AN OVEREMPHASIZED DOCTRINE OF HEALING




















114

"When the Bible talks about suffering, that doesn't mean 'sickness'. We have no
business suffering sickness and disease, because Jesus redeemed us from that."1
--Kenneth Hagin

Healing is overemphasized and demanded as a right in the Faith Movement. It is the
central tenet of the movement that it is always God's will to heal.

They are correct in teaching that it is God's will for His people to be healthy. The Hebrew
word "shalom" captures God's wholistic view of man. "Shalom" ("peace") coexists with health in
a natural way. The psalmist put it,

"May The Lord give strength to His people! May the Lord bless His people with
peace!"

Biblical peace is more than the absence of conflict; it includes inner health, wholeness,
and integration. God promised His people shortly after the exodus in Egypt:
"I am the Lord, your healer" (Ex 15:26).

Salvation and health are closely related. David testified that it is the Lord "who forgives
all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases" (Ps 103:3). Jeremiah prays, "Heal me, O Lord,
and I will be healed; save me and I will be saved, for You are the One I praise" (Jer 17:14).

The spiritual and physical well-being of people was so closely related that it was the
priest who was the presiding health officer. This was true in Jesus' day also. This is why He so
often told people to show themselves to the priest after they had been healed. He was to verify
their healing and declare them ceremonially clean for social purposes. It is God's will for His
people to be wholehealthy as well as holy.

Jesus' Wholistic Approach to Ministry

The Greek word "savior" (soter) is applied to salvation or rescue from disease as well as
sin. The word "save" (sozo) means heal as well as save.

When John the Baptist began to wonder whether Jesus really was the Messiah, Jesus
answered him by pointing to His ministry as outlined by the prophet Isaiah:

"So He replied to the messengers, 'Go back and report to John what you have seen
and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are
cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the
poor (Lk 7:22).

This Old Testament prophecy, which Jesus accepted as the charter of His ministry, shows
Jesus' wholistic approach to ministry. He came to deliver His people physically, emotionally and
spiritually. He came to make people whole as He met every dimension of human need.


115

Is Sickness Always the Result of Personal Sin?

It is erroneous to teach that obedient Christians ought never to be sick. This heresy is the
result of the faulty idea that sickness is the result of personal sin. This was the prevalent view
of the Jewish people of biblical times (e.g. the friends of Job).

The Rabbis used to say that dropsy was due to immorality, jaundice to hatred, poverty to
pride, liver trouble to backbiting, and leprosy to an evil tongue. Although disease and death have
come to the human race in general because of mankind's sin, it is a cruel hoax to claim that
individual sickness is always the consequence of personal sin or that a person of sufficient faith
will be healed. Illness is not necessarily the result of personal sin.

Suffering, sickness and death are some of the consequences of original sin, the guilt
and corruption inherited and confirmed by every person from Adam. If it were not for the Fall of
Adam there would be no suffering, sickness or death. The Lord told Adam literally "in the day
that you eat from it [the forbidden fruit], you will surely die" (Gn 2:17).

Personal Sins and Sickness

It is true, however, that sometimes there is a direct relationship between personal sins
and sickness:

"Praise the Lord, O my soul; and forget not all His benefitswho forgives all
your sins and heals all your diseases. . ." (Ps 103:3).

The more immediate consequences of sin attach more directly to particular sin. The Bible
is clear that there are psychosomatic illnesses. Solomon said that a negative mental attitude will
produce physical disease while a cheerful attitude will act as medicine to the body:

"A cheerful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones" (Pr 17:22).

Becoming bitter or rebellious toward God or refusing to trust Him produces insecurity,
guilt, fear, and anxiety which in turn can result in physical illness. David testified to the direct
relationship between his own personal sins and sickness (Ps 32:3-5; 38:3-5).

When the lame man was let down through a roof for healing, Jesus told him that his sins
were forgiven (Mk 2:5). Jesus first dealt with his physical problem at the spiritual level, where
the real cause of his paralysis was. Once the spiritual problem (sin) was removed, Jesus then
healed his physical condition.

Paul warned that some of the Corinthian believers were "weak and sick" and some had
even "died" because they were sinning against the Lord's body by partaking of the holy Eucharist
in an "unworthy manner" (1 Co 11:27-30).



116

Here we see that many Corinthian believers came under the "discipline" of God,
becoming weak, sick, and even dying. As God's redeemed children we are disciplinedjust as a
human father disciplines his childso that we might repent of our sins (2 Co 7:10) and grow in
grace (2 Pe 3:18; He 12:7-11).

The "judgment" referred to here means not God's eternal judgment on the unbeliever, but
such disciplinary judgment as physical sickness and death (v. 30). Since physical death is final,
there is no possible way to grow through such discipline. Then what is its purpose? Possibly to
save us from further committing the kind of sins that would result in God's eternal judgment
(possibly what John calls "the sin unto death"death to the body to save the soul1 Jn 5:16-
17; see also Ac 5:1-11).

Another purpose of disciplinary judgment is to prevent others among God's people from
falling into the same sin.

Personal Sin Not Always Cause of Sickness

While general or original sin (the inherited sin nature traceable to Adam, the original
"head" of the human raceRo 5:12) is the cause of death and all disease (vv. 12,17-19), personal
sin (individual acts of wrong we regularly commit3:23) is seldom its cause (Lk 13:1-5).

In ancient times it was often assumed that calamity would befell only those who were
extremely sinful. But Jesus pointed out that all are sinners who must repent or face a fearful end
(vv. 1-5). The Rabbis believed that "there is no death without sin, and there is no suffering
without iniquity" and even thought that a child could sin in the womb or that its soul might have
sinned in a preexistent state. They also held that terrible punishments came on certain people
because of the sin of their parents. Here again Jesus emphatically contradicts such beliefs (Jn
9:1-3).

Some are born with afflictionssuffering before they ever reach the age of committing
sins (Jn 9:1-3; Ac 3:1-2). Others like Job undergo great suffering while living upright lives.
For Jesus Himself "although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He
suffered" (Heb 5:8). Jesus never committed sins, yet He suffered.

Job and His "Friends"

The faith teachers have twisted the lesson of the book of Job by teaching that Job suffered
because of fear. They base this on Job's statement in which he testifies that what he feared came
upon him (Job 3:25). But this does not explain why Job suffered? Job suffered not because of
fear, but because he was the most "upright" person of his day (1:1,8). This is God's view of
Job. Because of his integrity, Job could be trusted with the extreme testing (vv. 6-21; 2:1-10)
that God often permits in the lives of mature and devoted disciples.




117

Satan, who insisted that Job's righteousness was due to God's blessings, that his service
was for profit, was repeatedly shown to be incorrect. Satan even tried to use Job's wife to
encourage him to curse God when calamities hit, but Job refused and thus "he did not sin in
what he said" (2:10).

The theology of Job's three friends and that of the Faith Movement is very similar.
Eliphaz, the Temanite, pondering Job's great suffering, reasoned:

"Consider now: Who, being innocent, has ever perished? Where were the
upright ever destroyed? As I have observed, those who plow evil and those
who sow trouble reap it. At the breath of God they are destroyed; at the blast
of His anger they perish" (4:7-9).

Eliphaz's point was that innocent and righteous people never suffer. Since Job was
suffering, God must have been punishing him for some sin (5:17; 15:20).

God told Eliphaz that the latter had accused Job falsely for this when he attributed Job's
sickness to sin (42:7). Bildad, the Shuhite, added that if Job was upright then God would have
blessed him. Since Job was suffering, it was obvious that Job was evil (Job 8:6). Bildad reasons
that since God cannot be unjust, Job and his family must be suffering as a result of sinfulness but
if Job pleads for mercy, and if he has really been upright, God will restore him. Zophar, the
Naamathite, had harsh words as well. He decided that God was actually being lenient with Job
and that he could have suffered more severely, if he had gotten all that his iniquity deserved
(11:5-6). Here we see that Zophar also thinks that Job is shallow and lacks an understanding of
the true nature of God (vv. 7-9). We see later in this saga, however, that it is Zophar who lacks
wisdom when God speaks against Zophar himself (42:7).

Job's response to the theology of his friends was that they were "miserable comforters":

"I have heard many things like these; miserable comforters are you all!" (16:2).

Job saw the fallacy of their simplistic arguments about life. He states that some wicked
people do prosper (12:6-9). Job's counselor's have focused on the fate of the wicked (8:11-19;
15:20-35; 18:5-21; 20:1-29), but Job insists that experience shows just the reverse of what his
friends have said.

The wicked, who want to know nothing of God's ways and who even consider prayer a
useless exercise often flourish in all they do (21:14-15). Far from dying prematurely, as
Zophar assumed concerning them (20:11), they live long and increase in power (v. 7).
Bildad's claim that the wicked have no offspring or descendants (18:19) Job flatly denies
(21:8,11). Such statements irked the counselors and made them brand Job as a man whose
feet were slipping (12:5; 9:21-24).




118

Yet Solomon, the wisest man that ever lived, concurred with Job's observation
(Ecc 7:15). The prosperity of the wicked and the suffering of the righteous is also
addressed by Ezekiel (12:1-2) and by David in two entire psalms (Ps 37 and 73). The logic of
the faith teachers' position is that if suffering and poverty are the result of sin, then prosperity
must automatically be the result of obedience to God. But to hold to such a view is to fly in the
face of Scripture and life itself.

Yet Job's friends insisted upon their distorted theology in their effort to instruct him (Job
22:21-28). Their ancient counsel sounds like an echo from the faith teachers of today, and was as
fallacious then as it is now. Job had already made it clear that he deeply yearned to see God and
be His friend (19:25-27). And he responds to this last attempt by Eliphaz with the statement: "I
have not departed from the commands of His lips; I have treasured the words of His mouth more
than my daily bread" (23:12).

Job understood that God tried him and all the righteous for a purpose: "But He knows the
way that I take; when He has tested me, I will come forth as gold" (v. 10).

In the same vein, Peter, who once rebelled at the idea that Christ would suffer (Mt 16:21-
23), later asserted that suffering for righteousness is blessed (1 Pe 4:12-19). As in the case of Job,
the persecutions faced by believers during the time of Jesus were divinely sent judgment
intended to purify God's people. Peter argues that if God brings judgment on His own people,
how much more serious will the judgment be that he will bring on unbelievers!

Not only was Job disappointed with his "miserable comforters," but God was upset with
them because they had "not spoken of Me what is right as my servant Job has" (Job 42:7).

Job, like the rest of us, was imperfect, however, having the weaknesses of fallen
humanity. His misfortunes led him to lament his birth (ch. 3), to vacillate between desiring God
to crush him (6:8-9) and to heal him (7:7-10; to blame God for tormenting him (13:21,25) and
treating him unjustly (9:21-24); to question God's treatment of him (ch. 10); and to occasionally
perceive God as his enemy (13:13-10). These are the reasons why Job is rebuked by God
(ch. 38-42). And Job repents of such unbelief!

It is vital to recognize, however, that Job is rebuked for challenging God's wisdom and
sovereignty and thus acting out of ignorance (38:2) and presumption (40:8), albeit not for
fear, unbelief, or speaking "negative confessions." In the final chapter of the book (42:7-9),
despite Job's mistakes in word and attitude while he suffered (though he was the most upright
person of his day, he was not perfect), he is now commended and the counselors are rebuked.
Why? It is because even in his rage, even when he challenged God, Job was determined to speak
honestly and truthfully before Him.

The counselors, on the other hand, mouthed many correct and often beautiful creedal
statements, but without the living, personal knowledge of the God they claimed to honor. Job
spoke to God; they only spoke about God. Even worse, their spiritual arrogance caused them
to claim knowledge they did not possess. They presumed to know why Job was suffering.

119

In the last section of the book (42:12-16) we see the conclusion of this cosmic battle
with the Accuser and the restoration of Job. No longer is there a reason for Job to experience
sufferingunless he was sinful and deserved it, which is not the case. God does not allow us to
suffer without a purpose, and even though that purpose may be hidden in the mystery of His
divine plan (Isa 55:8-9)never for us to know in this lifewe must trust in Him as the just
God who "works all things together for the good of those who love Him" (Ro 8:28).

"If"

Faith teachers would have us believe that using the word "if" is a sign of unbelief.

Frederick Price says concerning praying in accordance with God's will:

"If you have to say, 'If it be thy will' or 'Thy will be done'if you have to
say that, then you're calling God a fool."2

He believes that we should know God's will and that "If" is a confession of uncertainty.
Such a statement flatly contradicts the biblical doctrine of God's sovereignty (Ps 115:3; 135:6;
Da 4:35; Ro 9:20).

Jesus used the word "if" in reference to God the Father's will. He prayed,

"My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from Me. Yet not as I will, but
as You will. . . . My Father, if it is not possible for this cup to be taken away unless
I drink it, may Your will be done" (Mt 26:39,42).

Here Jesus used the word "if" both negatively and positively. His use of the word had
nothing to do with the eventual outcome of God's will. Scripture is clear that it was God's will
that Jesus would drink the cup. Only by doing so would He fulfill prophecy and redeem mankind
from their sin.

Lack of faith ("if") is not always the reason why God doesn't heal (Mt. 8:1-3). Although
the leper had a measure of faith when he even approached Jesus, he obviously lacked a robust
faith because he questioned Jesus' willingness to heal. Therefore he knelt before Jesus and said,

"Lord, if you are willing, You can make me clean" (v. 2). Jesus responded graciously by
saying that He was "willing" and immediately cured him of his leprosy (v. 3). The insistence that
"if" automatically signifies unbelief is simply not warranted by Scripture.

In fact, according to James the unwillingness to use such a word is evidence of arrogance:






120

"Now listen, you who say, 'today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city,
spend a year there, carry on business and make money.' Why, you do not
even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist
that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say,
'If it is the Lord's will, we will live and do this or that.' As it is, you boast
and brag. All such boasting is evil" (Jas 4:13-16).

To pretend to know how God orders life in any area is presumption, not a sign of faith.
To claim we always know God's will so fully that we are not to use the word if is the height
of presumption, which James calls "evil."

Although Paul's ministry was accompanied by "signs, wonders and miracles" (2 Co
12:12; Ro 15:19), neither he nor his associates always experienced perfect health. And never is
their sickness attributed to lack of faith, nor their recovery to great faith.

Some of the faith teachers actually state that Paul's lack of perfect health was the result of
their lack of faith. Paul acknowledges routinely the presence of sickness in a way that is sharply
different from his attitude toward Satan and sin. Paul does not lay a guilt trip on Timothy when
he hears about his stomach condition, but recommends a little wine for his stomach and his
frequent ailments (1 Ti 5:23). If he had been confronted with a situation in which Satan and sin
had made inroads, he would have reacted much more strongly (1 Co 5:1-8).

If we believe all of Scripture to be inspired by the Spirit of God, then Paul's prescription
for "wine for the stomach" in Timothy's case was just as inspired as the laying on of hands and
oil prescribed by James (5:14-15).

REASONS FOR SICKNESS

There are many reasons for sickness.

1. Germs. Most often, we are sick not because of the devil, not because of sin in ou
lives, nor because of judgment from God. We are sick from bacteria, viruses, or physiological
abnormalities. We live in a "fallen" world. We may be sick because of congenital weaknesses.

Our bodies are finite and therefore break down. Frailty has been passed down through the
human family ever since the Fall.

Sickness is often the result of abuse of our bodies. Improper diet, lack of exercise, or lack
of rest may bring illness.

2. Old Age (Da 8:27). Although Daniel recovered, Elisha did not (2 Kgs 13:14). There is
no reason to believe that Elisha, who performed twice as many miracles as Elijah, died because
of a lack of faith. If there was something spiritually wrong with Elisha, causing him to die in his


121

sickness, why did his bones retain enough power after his death to resurrect a dead man (2 Kgs
13:20-21)? Our bodies get weaker as they get older since the moment we are born we begin to
die physically.

3. Overwork may be an unexpected cause for sickness (Php 2:25-30). There is no
evidence that Epaphroditus was ill because of hidden sin or lack of faith. Paul tells the believers
at Philippi that he "almost died for the work of Christ, risking his life to make up for the help you
could not give me [Paul]" (v. 30). Paul holds him up as an example of a servant of God who
should be welcomed with great joy and honored (v. 29). Epaphroditus was hardly a person with
sin or lack of faith!

4. Discipline or Judgment (1 Co 11:30). Kenneth Copeland claims:

"The religious idea that God chastises His own with sickness and disease and
poverty is the very thing that has caused the church to go 1500 years without
the knowledge of the Holy Spirit. . . ."3

If Copeland is right, then the Holy Spirit contradicts Scripture since the cross of Jesus
Christ shows us that suffering and love are not incompatible. The Father loves the Son, and yet
the Father willed that the Son die on a cross:

"Yet it was the Lord's will to crush Him and cause Him to suffer . . ." (Isa 53:10).

Jesus never once questioned His Father's love.

David was glad for his afflictions because it was through them that he learned obedience
to God's Word (2 Sa 24:13-15 = Ps 119:67-71). Just as in the case of judgments (1 Co 11:30),
chastisements (Heb 12:5-11), and trials (James 1:2-3), there are times when sickness is designed
to elicit repentance, to produce endurance, and to result in holiness. Some claim that God does
not inflict His people with illness. This is not true:

"The Lord said to him [Moses], 'Who gave man his mouth? Who makes him deaf
or mute? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I, the Lord?" (Ex. 4:11)

When God allowed Satan to tempt Job, Satan said to God,

"But stretch out Your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely
curse You to Your face" (Job 1:11).

Notice "Your hand," that is, God's hand, not Satan's. God did this first by using the
Sabeans who were probably south Arabians from Sheba who became known as "traveling
merchants" (6:19). But then "another messenger" came and said, "The fire of God fell
from the sky and burned up the sheep and the servants . . ." (2:16). "The fire of God" which
fell from heaven is obviously God's doing. This is probably lightning (Nu 11:1; 1 Kgs
18:38; 2 Kgs. 1:12).

122

It was God who struck Zecharaiah dumb for his unbelief (Lk 1:18-20). There is no
indication whatsoever that He used Satan to bring punishment as faith teachers typically claim.
Ironically, Paul's Damascus Road conversion makes it clear that it was God who brought
physical blindness on Paul even as he found spiritual light (Ac 9:3-4,8-9).

Although God does bring healing in all these instances, it was He who inflicted the
disease. There are other instances, however, where God inflicts sickness without bringing
physical healing (13:11). The result of such blindness, as in the case of Paul, was belief
(v. 12).

When Gehazi sought to use the grace of God granted to another individual for his own
material advantage, which was equivalent to making merchandise of God's grace (2 Co 2:17), he
was struck with leprosy from which he and his descendants never recovered (2 Kgs 5:27).

Those who say that it is unfair and unworthy of God to inflict punishment need to be
reminded that God subjected Himself to the same laws of the universe to which man is subjected.
5. To bring Glory to God. Jesus ties sickness to the work of God (Jn 9:1-3). Without the
blindness there could be no healing. The blind condition provided an opportunity for Jesus to
display the work of God. Even death can bring glory to God: "Jesus said this to indicate the kind
of death by which Peter would glorify God" (21:19). In one situation God is glorified by
healing, in another He is glorified by withholding healing. Only God knows what is best in any
given situation! If God's actions do not fit neatly into our formula, we must change our formula!

Healing and Medicine

There are also cases in the Bible of God healing through the use of medicine. Many argue
against the use of physicians by citing Asa who was criticized because he sought a physician and
not the Lord (2 Ch 16:12). This is not proof that we should not go to a doctor because
physicians in those days frequently resorted to occultic practices.

Hezekiah was told to use a "paste made of figs on his boil, and he would get well" (Isa
38:21). Paul encouraged Timothy to use a little wine for his stomach because of its medicinal
benefits (1 Ti 5:23). Jesus used spittle and dirt (Jn 9:6; Mk 7:33; 8:33) and the disciples (Mk
6:13) and elders used oil (Jas 5:14). Both were considered to have healing qualities.

The issue, however, is not whether or not these elements had healing qualities, but
whether Jesus disassociated Himself from medicine. In fact, He seemed to sanction it. After all,
the priests to whom He sent the ten lepers represented the health officials of the day (Lk 17:14).
There are instances of people being sick but not healed such as Paul (1 Co 2:3; 2 Co 1:8-9; 12:7-
10; Gal 4:13-15; 6:11) and Trophimus (2 Ti 4:20).

Although in many instances the Bible states that Jesus healed "all" that came to Him (Mt
8:16; 12:15; Ac 10:38), there are other instances where Jesus healed "many" (Mk 1:34) and one
instance where there was a multitude of other sick people (Jn 5:1-8) unattended to by Jesus.
Some have argued that John did not bother to mention that Jesus healed the others at the pool of
Bethesda, but this is highly unlikely given the rest of the passage (vv. 10-15).
123

Anyone with rudimentary knowledge of Greek knows that the word "all" does not
necessarily mean "every single individual." When Paul states that in the eschaton "all Israel will
be saved" (Ro 11:32), is he really saying that every single Israelite will be saved? Hardly. If
this is so, then the question is raised, "How can we know when the Bible uses the word "all"
whether it means every single individual or "people as a whole"? As with most issues of
interpretation, we know it by the context.

As crowds were coming to be healed, Jesus would often withdraw to lonely places for a
time of prayer (Lk 5:15-16). Although Jesus healed "all" who came to Him, everyone in need
was not healed.

In Scripture there is also a case of "partial" or "progressive healing" (Mk 8:22-26). The
blind man first saw men "like trees" walking about until Jesus touched him a second time. Then
his sight was totally clear.

Physical healing may sometimes be delayed because other matters need to be dealt with
first. As a person's spiritual health improves, it beneficially affects his physical state (3 Jn 2).
The teachings of the great Greek physician Hippocrates (ca. 430 B. C.) dominated Western
medicine for almost two thousand years. He believed that health results from accord with natural
processes. He put it: "Nature heals; the physician is only nature's assistant."4

While at times healing comes through prayer alone, at other times the disease requires
medicine or even surgery. Longstanding emotional illness and fractured relationships may
require counseling over a period of time. However it may come, we accept the healing as God's
gift. The great French surgeon Ambroise Pare insightfully declared: "I care for the wound; God
cures it."5 God, then, is the source of all healing, but He uses various means to heal.

Is Healing in the Atonement?

How are we to view Isaiah 53:4f.: "Surely He took up our infirmities and carried our
sorrows . . . and by His wounds we are healed"? Some see only spiritual healing in this
passage. The context of Peter's reference to this verse shows that this is how Peter applies this
verse: "He Himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for
righteousness; but by His wounds you have been healed" (1 Pe 2:24).

But is that how Matthew also applied his statement?

"When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to Him,
and He drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick. This was to
fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: 'He took up our infirmities
and carried our diseases'" (Mt 8:16-17).





124

Here the context is deliverance and physical healing. Matthew uses the word "this" to
compare such ministry to the atoning work of Christ. There is no doubt that faith teachers are
correct in stressing that physical healing is in the atonement. The New Testament is clear that the
cross is the focus of God's redemptive activity. And since sickness is ultimately a result of the
Fall, healing finds its focal point in the atonement. Healing, therefore, is part of the work of the
atonement carried out by Jesus on the cross.

But does that mean that healing is as automatic as the forgiveness of sin? Biblical scholar
Donald Carson, while convinced that healing is in the atonement, is not as convinced that healing
is therefore the automatic benefit to all believers:

"From the perspective of the NT writers, the Cross is the basis for all benefits that
accrue to believers; but this does not mean that all such benefits can be secured at
the present time on demand, any more than we have the right and power to demand
our resurrection bodies."6

Although forgiveness is instant in the present time, healing is not always granted because
while we are the new covenant people of God, we still possess our earthly and sinful bodies.

When healing does take place, it is a reminder that we Christians are a part of a new
kingdom, a new creation, and that such healing is a foretaste of what is to come in the eschaton.
When healing does not take place, it shows that the new kingdom will not finally arrive until the
Second Coming, and that until then, even Christians must face life in the domain of the evil one
who is "the god of this world" (1 Jn 5:19).

Is Healing Always God's Will In This Life?

Healing is not always God's will in this life. Paul's own body was weak, or sickly (2 Co
10:10). He confesses that he always carried in his body "the death of Jesus" (4:10-11), and the
context makes it clear that he is referring to his physical weaknesses.

The frailty of the "clay jar" of Paul's humanity (2 Co 4:7) is plainly seen in the
constant hardships and persecutions with which he is buffeted for the sake of the gospel and
through which he shares in Christ's sufferings (1:5; Ro 8:17; Php 3:10; Col 1:24). Outwardly
Paul groaned (2 Co 4:16) as he longed to replace his present "earthly tent" with the "heavenly
dwelling" (5:1-2). Many biblical scholars believe Paul's "thorn in the flesh" was malaria
(probably Asian Malaria) because it felt like a "thorn" or "stake" as described by Paul in
2 Corinthians 12:1-10 and effected the eyes which likely explains why Paul wrote with such
large letters (Gal 6:11). In fact, Paul preached in Galatia as a direct result of illness (4:12-15).

We simply cannot be sure of whether Paul's "thorn in the flesh" was malaria or something
else. But that it was physical is clear. Many of the faith teachers say that the "flesh" here refers to
Paul's sinful nature and that "the messenger" that Paul refers to is a "person" (most probably a
demon) from Satan who is attacking his sinful tendencies. The context makes such a meaning
highly unlikely.

125

Faith teachers get around difficult passages by making a distinction between "suffering"
and "sickness." They see suffering as something external that results from following Jesus, and
believe this is what Paul is suffering from in this incident. Sickness and disease, they say, are
part of the Fall and the curse, and these have now been overcome by God in Christ.

Can such a clear distinction be biblically sustained? No! The biblical writers made no
such distinction. In both testaments, the most common word for sickness is the word "weakness."
This means that frequently only the context tells us what kind of weakness involved.
All evil, not just sickness, is the result of the Fall. While God can deliver from all evil, He
does not always choose to do so.

Just as Satan was responsible for Paul's "thorn in the flesh" (2 Co 12:1-10), so he also
hindered Paul Satan from returning to Thessalonica (1 Th 2:18). Yet in neither case is there any
indication that Paul "failed." Therefore sickness is not to be considered some unique part of the
Fall that can be exorcised at will. Rather it is part and parcel of the whole of fallenness. Although
we are promised healing, yet somehow there isin this present agea place for "a little wine"
(natural means) for one's ailments (1 Ti 5:23).

Erroneous Biblical Theology: Realized Eschatology

The Faith Movement fails to understand New Testament theology as eschatological or
sees eschatology as realized (the eschatonthe coming of the End).

What is perplexing to the reader is that, while Jesus said that the Kingdom arrived with
His own comingand that the Spirit's coming in fullness and power was also a sign that the
New Age had taken placeevil and its effects are still evident everywhere. How is this possible?
Beginning with Peter's sermon on the Day of Pentecost (Ac 3), the church came to realize that
Jesus had not come to usher in the "final" End, but the "beginning" of the End.

With Jesus' death and resurrection, and with the coming of the Spirit, the blessings and
benefits of the eschaton (future coming of Christthe End Times) had already come. In a sense,
the eschaton had already come. But in another sense it had not yet "fully" come. The Kingdom
and salvation, therefore, are to be seen as both "already" and "not yet," that is, "here" in part and
yet "to come" in fullness.

We therefore live "between the times." That is, between the time of the beginning of the
eschaton and the consummation or completion of the End. At the Lord's Table we celebrate our
eschatological hope as we proclaim "the Lord's death until He comes" (1 Co 11:26). Although
we can already experience God's forgiveness, we have not been perfected yet (Php 3:7-14).

The "already" and the "not yet" pervades this "between the times." Although death has
been conquered (1 Co 15:54-57; Heb 2:14-15), yet we still die (Php 3:20-22; 1 Co 15:26).
Although we live in the Spirit, we battle our sinful nature (Gal 5:16-25) as well as Satanthe
enemy of our souls (Eph 6:10-13). Although we have been justified and thus face no
condemnation (Ro 5:1-9), yet there is still a future judgment (the Great White Throne Judgment

126

for unbelieversRev 20:11-15 and the Judgment Seat of Christ for the believers1 Co 3:13-15;
Rev 21:4; 22:12). Although the early church lived in the light of the values of the eschaton and
knew its benefits, she had to live out these values and benefits in the present world.

The mistake of the Faith Movement is that it so emphasizes the "already" that the "yet to
come" is swallowed up. Thus Christ is seen as exalted, but not as crucified, and God's work is
viewed in terms of signs and wonders and power, but not servanthood and suffering.

Is it true that because God heals, He must heal everyone? Is it true that because God
provides, He must abolish all weakness, hunger, poverty, hardships, difficulties, persecutions
suffering? Not according to Scripture (2 Co 4:8-12; 6:3-10; 11:21-12:10).

Apostles and Super Apostles

The emphasis on authority and power by faith teachers shows that they resemble the
"super apostles" of New Testament times. Paul uses irony and sarcasm to get the Corinthians to
see how poor they (Paul and other followers of Christ) really are because of their haughtiness
and spiritual immaturity in comparison with the "super apostles." "Already you have all you
want!

Already you have become rich! You have become kings . . .!" (1 Co 4:8). Paul then
draws a stark contrast between himself and them, using himself as the example of what it means
to live out the future ("yet to come") in the present age ("already"4:9-13).

Paul refers to the nature of apostleshipthe apostle and his ministryas a glorious
message, not glorious messengers (2 Co 4:7). "Jars of clay" or "crackpots" is all that apostles
really are. And to make this point even more poignant, Paul plays the "fool" by bragging.

But what does he brag about? The very things these "super apostles" despise:
weaknesses.

Paul points out that he isn't even allowed to tell the content of his "visions and
revelations" (12:1-6). God's strength is perfected, he points out, not in delivering the Messiah
from crucifixion, nor in delivering His apostles from physical suffering. Rather God's strength is
perfected in the crucifixion itself, and in the apostle's weaknesses.

The Corinthians rejected Paul as an apostle because of his bodily weaknesses (10:1,10).
They rejected Paul and his theology of the cross with its suffering. They gloried in their
impressive credentials (especially their oratorical ability which was so highly valued in that
day11:6) while Paul gloried in his weaknesses (12:5,9). The Messiah of the super-apostles was
the Messiah of power, glory, and miracles while Paul's Messiah was the "crucified Messiah" (1
Co 1:18-25), the Messiah of weakness, shame, and suffering.




127

The "Already" and the "Not Yet"

Faith teachers attempt to relieve or deny the tension between the "already" and the "not
yet" or "yet to come." However, just because God has brought His Kingdom to bear on this
present evil does not mean we can demand all of the future in this present age. The redemption
of our bodies and the final resurrection still awaits us.

Paul is a testimony to the fact that we can live out a joyous life in the already as we
experience a mixture of want and plenty, sickness and health, poverty and riches. This is so
because we have the prospect of a future glory (Ro 8:18-24; 1 Co 15:20-28). Just as we still die
even though death has been conquered, we still get sick though sickness has been destroyed. Just
as the Son of God Himself was perfected through suffering, so we continue to be perfected
through suffering.

Total health still awaits us. The promise of "redemption for our bodies" is still future
(Ro 8:23). Our bodies are still subject to "corruption" (v. 21) and thus we feel the effects of its
limitations (e.g., aging2 Co 4:16).

When the prayer of faith is not answered and the healing for which we have prayed does
not come, we are not to look for someone to accuse of failure in faith. While we may search our
hearts to see if God points out the reason, we must be careful that we do not become unduly
introspective and we too readily blame ourselves or others.

A healthy option is to remember that besides faith there is hope (1 Co 13:13).

Just as faith has to do with God's promises that are for the here-and-now, hope has to do
with God's promises for the future. Not only does Today belong to God, but so does Tomorrow.

"Healing" Is Not Necessarily God's Work

We also need to keep in mind that healing is not necessarily God's work. It can be
performed by the power of Satan. Magicians in Moses' day were able to duplicate some of the
miracles performed by Moses (Ex 7:10-12; 8:5-7). They gave up after not being able to
duplicate plague number three (v. 18).

At the Judgment Day many who performed miracles will be told by Jesus, "I never knew
you. Get away from Me, you wicked people!" (Matthews 7:21-23). False Messiahs and false
prophets will appear in the last days and "perform great miracles and wonders in order to deceive
even God's chosen people, if possible" (Mt 24:23-24). Simon, the sorcerer, "astounded the
Samaritans with his magic" (Ac 8:9-11). The anti-Christ ("the beast") will draw attention and
confidence to himself through the working of the miraculous (2 Th 2:9-10; Rev 13:12-14).





128

God Must Be God

God must be God! He remains sovereign. Healing, like any other benefits, is a gracious
manifestation of God's goodness. Therefore God is under no obligation to heal. As an act o
grace healing is never deserved, it is only given. It is a gift of grace, not a reward for faith. We
pray, not because we can twist the arm of God by our faith, but because prayer is God's method
of accomplishing His purpose in this world. God answers prayer, not because He must, but
because He is good.

No Formulas

There are no formulas to healing! No cut-and-dried solutions. Because God is sovereign
He cannot be programmed. We cannot demand that He operate the same way in every case.
God's ultimate purpose in this universe and in our lives in the final analysis determines how He
chooses to work in any given situation.

Paul explains that "outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed
day by day" (2 Co 4:16). We are still waiting for "the redemption of our bodies" (Ro 8:23).

The Holy Spirit is not yet our full inheritance, only a "deposit" or "pledge" or "down-
payment" (2 Co 1:22) guaranteeing our "inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's
possession" (Eph 1:14). Therefore we cannot, in this life, expect the fulfillment of all of God's
promises such as perfect health or the redemption of our bodies (Ro 8:18-23). The day for our
glorified bodies is still in the future. The day of our "full inheritance" is still ahead. Healing,
therefore, is not a guarantee, but a benefit of Calvary.

While the power of death (the fear of it) has been destroyed by Christ's death and
resurrection (Heb 2:14-15), its presence is still with us as proven by the inevitable termination of
physical life. Death is the "last enemy" that shall be destroyed in the future (1 Co 15:26).

Ultimate Purpose

The purpose of healing is not merely to meet a human need. It is ultimately to bring glory
to God. When healing comes, it is not simply because someone has a need. The ultimate purpose
of healing is to bring the person into a closer, more intimate relationship to God and fellow
human beings. Healing is not an end in itself, but God's means to an endthat we become better
persons and do good in the world in which we live.









129

NOTES

1
Kenneth Copeland, The Laws of Prosperity and as quoted in Time (February, 1986).
2
Frederick Price, "Ever Increasing Faith" program on TBN (16 November 1990) cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 271.
3
Copeland, The Troublemaker (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Publishing, n. d.), p.
12 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 267.
4
Charles E. Hummel, Healing (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1982), 21.
5
Ibid., 31.
6
Donald Carson, The Expositor's Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 1984), 8:207.






























130



























CHAPTER 13 POSITIVE CONFESSION AND THE GOSPEL OFCONDEMNATION



















131

"What is it you want to get from God? If you want healing, then sow healing seed?
If you want a miracle, sow some miracle seeds! If you want to be unafraid, then
sow some seeds along this line. If you want deliverance from fear, habits, Satan's
power, then get the appropriate seeds and sow them in your heart."1
--John Osteen

"Name it and claim it" and "Believe it and receive it" are catchphrases typically heard on
the lips of faith teachers. They reflect a belief that if you find "appropriate" texts in the Bible
you can sow them in your heart and then claim the thing you want and which they offer.
Positive confession is the "faith" to behave as if what you asked for has already been
granted. Is speaking out in faith the key is gaining victory as faith teachers claim? Mark
11:23-24 is foundational to this teaching:

"I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into
the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will
happen, it will be done for him."

Is speaking the key?

Faith Formula

Kenneth Hagin claims that Jesus Christ Himself appeared to him and personally gave him
the faith formula that he has been so fervently pontificating. Just like John on the Isle of Patmos,
he was surrounded by a white cloud which enveloped him as he began to speak in tongues.2 As
the Lord appeared to him, "He stood within three feet of me."3 Hagin says that Jesus told him to
get a pencil and a piece of paper after he and Jesus casually talked about finances, ministry and
current affairs. Jesus then instructed Hagin to "Write down: 1,2,3,4."4

According to the Jesus of Hagin's revelation, "if anybody, anywhere, will take these four
steps or put these four principles into operation, he will always receive whatever he wants from
Me or from God the Father."5 (Emphasis added)

Hagin makes clear that that includes whatever you want financially.6

He capsulizes the formula simply as: "Say it, Do it, Receive it, and Tell it." In fleshing
out this formula Hagin makes the following points:

Step 1: Say it. "Positive or negative, it is up to the individual! According to what the
individual says, that shall he receive."7

Step 2: Do it. "Your action defeats you or puts you over. According to your action, you
receive or you are kept from receiving."8

Step 3: Receive it. We are to "plug into the powerhouse of heaven."9 "Faith is the plug,
praise God! Just plug in."10

132

Step 4: Tell it so others may believe. This final step serves as the outreach program
of the Faith Movement.11

According to the Jesus who appeared to Hagin, this formula is to be used by Christians
because "it would be a waste of their time to pray for Me [Jesus] to give them victory. They have
to write their own ticket."12

Was this Jesus of Nazareth, or another Jesus (2 Co 11:3-4)?

Faith plays a key role in positive confession and is tied to their notion that God has faith.
He is a "faith being."13 They claim that Mark 11:22 proves indisputably that God has faith.
Copeland says that the phrase "have faith in God" really means "Have the faith of God."14

Similarly Charles Capps, in his book, God's Creative Force, says of this passage,

"A more literal translation is 'Have the God kind of faith, or faith of God. . . .
God is a faith God.'"15 (Emphasis added)

Frederick Price, in his book, How Faith Works, appeals to the original Greek text and
claims the same meaning.16 And Kenneth Hagin, in his book, Bible Faith Study Course, asserts
that God has faith as this is what is taught by "Greek scholars."17

Such an interpretation seems to contradict 2000 years of orthodox Christian scholarship
since few Greek scholars agree.18 The vast majority point out that the phrase echete pistin theou
means "Have faith in God." Echete means "have," (imperative and indicative are exactly the
same form with the imperative being contextually indicated) pistin means "faith," and theou
means "God." The scholars point out that theou means "of God" because it is an "objective
genitive."19

This means that the noun is the object of the action.

Since "God" is the object of faith in Mark 11:22, the phrase more likely means "have
faith in God," not "have the faith of God." The only way for this to be construed to mean "the
faith of God" is for "of God" to be a subjective genitive in which God would be the subject of
faith. As A. T. Robertson points out, "It is not the faith that God has, but the faith of which God
is the object."20 God is not the subject of some impersonal laws of faith. He is the Sovereign
of the universe in whom our trust rests.21

To interpret this to mean "have the faith of God" is to fly in the face of all the translations
of the Bible. They all translate theou "in God" rather than "of God." Moreover, to argue that God
has faith or is "a faith-being" is to run counter to God's essential nature which is eternal. If God is
a faith-being He is bound by time. Faith, as Paul points out, will one day pass away as it will be
realized in fact (1 Co 13). Faith is a category needed only in time, once eternity is ushered
in there will be no need for faith. Thus we see that there are no references to faith as being
present in heaven.

133

Words

The Faith Movement points to words as another key element in bringing our desires to
reality. How important are words? Although the speaking is important, the key is the condition
of the heart ("not doubt in his heart but believes"). Are miracles waiting to be spoken into
existence as the faith teachers claim? Yes and no. Yes in that miracles are possible to those
who believe, but no in that merely speaking things does not guarantee things to happen.

The condition of the heart must be good"believing." This is why it is possible to speak
forth some things that have no relation to the heart as Isaiah shows in describing Israel's spiritual
state (Isa 29:13). James warns of hypocrisy in saying one thing and doing another (Jas 2:15-17).
Merely using a positive confession: "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed" simply is
not enough, says James. Unless this faith is expressed in action (rather than in mere words) it is
"useless" or "dead." The point James makes is that genuine faith (saving faith) cannot exist
independently of deeds (2:1-26).

According to some faith teachers, the mere confession of well-being should create the
well-being. But this is sheer hypocrisy according to James. Sham and nonsense can mark
positive confession as well as spiritual power. What good is it if we call Jesus Lord and do not do
what He demands of us? Such confession and behavior is the contradiction (Lk 6:46). Jesus
called it "hypocrisy." Hardly the stuff of "the force to words" that the faith teachers would have
us believe.

Trapped by What?

Another verse that many faith teachers appeal to in their unscriptural emphasis is
Proverbs 6:2: "If you have been trapped by what you said, ensnared by the words of your mouth
. . ."

Is the meaning that we will be trapped or ensnared if we make a negative confession? Not
at all! Such a twisted interpretation is self-discrediting. The context shows that Solomon is
warning people not to be hasty in cosigning for another person's debt, because if the debt is not
paid, the person who cosigned is also liable for the debt.

Telling God What We Want

Yet another text used by faith teachers is Isaiah 45:11:

"This is what the Lord saysthe Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning
things to come, do you question Me about My children, or give Me orders
about the work of My hands?"

Does this mean that all we have to do is speak our minds and God will make it happen? Is
it saying that we just need to tell God what we want, and He will do it? Not only that, but is it
even saying that God is not going to do anything for us unless we speak out the command?

134

The context makes it clear that God is promising to raise up a heathen king who will
deliver Israel from exile in Babylon. God is not encouraging us to command Him to do anything.

The prophet Isaiah is actually saying, "How dare anyone order God around?" To make
this emphasis clear, God continues by showing His sovereign wisdom and power (not man's) in
the next verse: "It is I who made the earth and created mankind upon it. My own hands stretched
out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts" (Isa 45:12).

Faith teachers have managed to turn the meaning upside down. These verses warn against
audaciously attempting to command God. Isaiah also uses the analogies of the potter and the clay
and the parents and the child to make this point (vv. 9-10).

God Works in Various Ways

Although Joshua witnessed the walls of Jericho tumble down by the power of a positive
shout, he did not experience the crossing of the Jordan River the same way. The priests were to
march into the Jordan first.

Joshua did not take over the other cities by shouting.

Moses did not cross the Red Sea by a shout. Instead he held forth his staff.

Naaman would never have been healed of his leprosy if he had made a positive
confession instead of dipping in the Jordan River seven times.

Peter would have sunk, as he eventually did, if he had made a positive confession
instead of keeping his eyes on Jesus.

Just because Daniel was able to walk into a lion's den and demand that their mouths shut
does not mean that we are to do the same thing. Unless we are specifically told by God to do so,
as Daniel was, such an action would mean instant death. God's ways are different for different
times and for different people and for different circumstances. There is no formula for
commanding God almighty to meet our needs!

Are There Limitations To Prayer?

Are there any limitations of what God will do in answer to our prayers? According to the
faith teachers, the only limitation is lack of faith. But is this so?

Job and Old Testament Prophets

We have already seen that faith teachers claim it was Job's negative confession, that o
fear (Job 3:25), that caused his tragedies. If this were so, why did not God commend Job's
followers who made this very claim? Instead, God sternly rebuked them. And Job was
commended as we saw in the last chapter (see also Jas 5:10-11).

135

This argument of faith teachers also ignores the fact that Job's lamentation comes after
his trials (Job 1:6-2:13), not before. Thus his lament was a product of his suffering, not its cause.

There is no record that Job uttered a negative confession before his trials. Even after Job
had suffered two major trials, God asserts that "in all this, Job did not sin in what he said"
(2:10). If Job unleashed forces hostile to God by his negative confession, why did God judge
Job to be "blameless and upright" after his first calamity? God's choice of Job above all others to
be tested so fiercely speaks volumes for his character, integrity, and devotion to God (1:1,8).

If Job's negative confession was the cause of his suffering, why didn't David experience
the same since he testified: "One of these days I will be destroyed by the hand of Saul" (1 Sa
27:1). David did not perish by the hand of Saul! His negative confession did not result in what he
feared: death.

James commends the sufferings of the prophets along with the sufferings of Job (Jas
5:10-11). The prophets were known for their pronouncements of doom as they carried forth
Gods message ("who spoke in the name of the Lord"Jas. 5:10) which often included
judgment as well as commendation. They are used by James as "examples of patience in the face
of suffering" (v. 10) and are considered "blessed" because they "persevered" (v. 11).

James specifically commends Job for his perseverance in suffering and makes reference
to their having "seen what the Lord finally brought about" (v. 11) in his lifethe purifying
work as clearly evidenced in the last section of the book (chapter 42). If Job's negative
confession was such an offense to God, why is he commended as an example of perseverance?

When Ahab and Jezebel threatened Elijah he "was afraid and ran for his life" (1 Kgs
19:3). But what Elijah the prophet feared did not take place. Why not? If negative confessions
and actions are so powerful, why don't they typically come to pass? Only a very small percentage
of our fears actually happen.

Jesus

Jesus' prayers were not always answered. When He wept (literally "sobbed" or "wailed
loudly") over Jerusalem He wanted His people to know God's righteousness and peace. He said
He wanted to gather His people as a hen does her chicks, but "they would not" (Mt 23:37). Jesus'
prayerHis "longing"was not fulfilled.

God the Father

Peter points out that God is patient with His people ". . . not wanting anyone to perish,
but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Pe 3:9). Although it is God's desire to see everyone
"come to repentance" this does not mean that they will. We know from other Scriptures that
"narrow is the road that leads to life, and only a few find it" (Mt 7:13). Does this mean
that this is so because of God's negative confession: "Not wanting anyone to perish"?


136

Paul

Paul's prayers were not always answered. Demas, Phygelus and Hermogenes deserted
him. Surely Paul and Luke must have had intense prayer sessions for their fellow workers and
for the believers in Asia, yet some of such prayers were not answered. Paul testifies that when he
came to Macedonia he had had no rest and that he had been "harassed at every turnconflicts on
the outside, fears within" (2 Co 7:5). On reaching Macedonia Paul, instead of having his fears
realized, was at last comforted by the arrival of Titus, who brought the news he most wanted to
hear concerning the situation in Corinth.

Titus himself had been well received in that city and was able to assure Paul (v. 7) of the
"longing" and "ardent concern" of the Corinthian Christians for him and of the "deep sorrow"
they had expressed for the grief they had caused him. Consequently, his "joy was greater than
ever" (v. 7).

Fear and Trembling

Paul says that we are to work out our salvation in "fear and trembling" (Php 2:12-
13). This is a reference to working out our salvation to the finish. It is not a reference to the
attempt to earn one's salvation by works, but to the expression of one's salvation in spiritual
growth and development (sanctification).

Salvation is not merely a gift received once for all; it expresses itself in an ongoing
process in which the believer is strenuously involved (Mt 24:13; 1 Co 9:24-27; Heb 3:14; 6:9-11;
2 Pe 1:5-8)the process of perseverance, spiritual growth and maturation. This salvation is to be
worked out not in praise and joy, but in fear and trembling. Why? It is because of the serious
nature of salvation. This does not mean that salvation is to be worked out in doubt or anxiety, but
in reverential fear and a singleness of purpose. This is the only proper response to the grace of
God before whom we must one day stand and give an account (e.g. the Judgment Seat of
Christ1 Co 3:10-15; Rev 21:4; 22:12).

God's holiness requires the judgment of human sin, and people's awareness of this
requirement often causes them to be in dread of Him. But the grace that also characterizes God
and His forgiveness can change the dread into reverence so that His terrible name may be
praised (Ps 99:3; 111:9). Thus the fear of the Lord is at the same time both an attractive and
terrifying thing. Our God is an awesome God!

The Fear of God

Why is there virtually no reference to "the fear of God" in the teachings of faith teachers?
Since the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (the theme of the book of Pr 1:7; 9:10;
31:30; see also Job 28:28; Ps 110:10), why is it not emphasized in the teachings of the Faith
Movement? Such reverence for God includes submission to His lordship and to the commands of
His Word (Ecclesiastes 12:13). And "submission" is another neglected word.


137

Why?

Can our prayers save a lost person against his will? Isn't the Bible clear that each person
is ultimately responsible for his eternal destiny (Eze 18:1-32; Jn 3:5,16-21,36; 4:13-14)?

Can we eliminate poverty with our prayers? Or did not Jesus say that the poor will always
be with us (Mt 26:11; Mk 14:7; Jn 12:8)?

What is Failure?

Some faith teachers state categorically that "God will not let me fail!" But what is failure?

How do we as finite human beings measure it? Sometimes failure is the back door to
success. Human "failure" can provide perspective on eternal realities that we would not see
otherwise. Failure is often God's discipline to keep us from going astray (Ps 119:71).At times it
drives us back to a deeper commitment than we would otherwise make. It also serves as a
motivation for us to get our priorities straightin line with God's.

What are the Desires of the Heart?

One of the favorite verses used by faith teachers is Psalm 37:4: "Delight yourself in the
Lord and He will give you the desires of your heart." What are "the desires of the heart"? Are
they not the desires that come from "delighting in Him"? And what does the Lord delight in?
Material health, wealth and prosperity? Hardly! In fact just a few verses later the Lord says:

"Better the little that the righteous have than the wealth of many wicked . . ." (Ps 37:16-
17). This whole psalm emphasizes God's protection and deliverance, His eternal rewards, and
man's righteousness and faithfulness as God's blessings.

Confession of Sin

One of the most serious implications of this "faith" doctrine is its emphasis on the
confession of sin. Although Jesus taught His followers to pray daily for the forgiveness of sin
(Mt 6:12), Kenyon argued that

"When you confess your weakness and your disease you are openly confessing
that the Word of God is not true and that God has failed to make it good. . . .
The believer who is always confessing his sins and his weakness is building
weakness, failure, and sin into his consciousness."23

The argument is that God requires a positive confession since Christians are "not only
clothed in the righteousness of Christ but actually partakers of His Righteousness. This is
photo of our present walk with Christ."24 Faith teachers, therefore, hold that it is wrong to
confess our sins in church. Because we are in Christ, we know instantly when we have sinned


138

and can ask for forgiveness on the spot. To confess our sins corporately in church is not only
unnecessary but also negative since it focuses attention on the devil's power in our lives. Such
focus thus hinders the work of the Spirit.

If this were true, why is Scripture replete with corporate confession of sin (Da 9:4-19;
Mt 6:12)? If we take negative or wrong confessions literally, then Jesus was mistaken
when He asked the blind man what he wanted, because in so doing, He elicited a "negative"
confession. Whereas Kenyon teaches that having "signed for the package . . . we should never
talk about our disease,"25 the blind man negatively confessed his blindness to Jesus who did heal
him.

Words, though descriptive (Western thinking) and creative (Eastern thinking), are not
magical. Even though words have power to create, they do not in and of themselves, create.
Therefore they are not a force in and of themselves.

Healing as a Totally Spiritual Phenomenon

Kenyon also teaches that healing is totally a spiritual phenomenon. This is why faith
alone, without medicine, is so important. After all, what can medicine do for the spirit of man?
Kenyon puts it:

"You must have seen as you have studied the book that healing is spiritual.
It is not mental as Christian Science and Unity and other metaphysical teachers
claim. Neither is it physical as the medieval world teaches. When God heals,
He heals through the Spirit."26

When Jesus healed the ten lepers (Lk 17:11-19), did He heal them physically or
spiritually? If He did so spiritually, why did only two come back to show appreciation? Not a
very spiritual response from those supposedly healed spiritually! Here we see the gnostic
tendencies of the Faith Movement. This simplistic faith formula is not only unbiblical, it is also
dangerous physically and spiritually.

Larry Parker and his wife believed the "positive confession" teaching and stopped
medical treatment for their son (who also believed the doctrine), believing in "faith" that he was
healed. Instead, he died. Their tragic story is told in the book, We Let Our Son Die.27

Are We Ever Asked To Deny Reality?

Never are we asked in Scripture to deny reality! Never are we told to deny the
testimony of our five senses. In fact, it was Jesus' custom to send people to the priests of the
Synagogue to verify that their healings were authentic. In the same way, we should always have
our "healings" verified by the medical profession so we do not live by presumption but by
biblical faith.



139

Tragic Results

Churches have been recipients of people who have been shocked and who have ended up
in disbelief as they have found that this simple gospel of positive confession simply does not
work in a real world. Many have come to testify that though they have genuinely and thoroughly
believed they have fulfilled the conditions for healing, that such healing did not always come.
Yet because of their commitment to a "faith formula," some have been left with guilt feelings,
fearing that they had not believed hard enough. Others are not found in any church because they
"know better" and are angry at God for betraying them.

Still others have become so demoralized that they have given up any semblance of hope
for healing of any kind. Tragically they have stopped to pray for healing carte blanche. They
reason that since they did not have enough faith for healing, they certainly would never have
enough for anyone else's healing. Such a belief in an absolute causal link between faith and
healing or faith and any other issue is erroneous and dangerous.

John Wimber, whom God has used to heal thousands, tells about a man whose five-
yearold son died of a blood disease. After the boy's death, the father suffered tremendous guilt
because he believed his faith had not been strong enough to heal his son. Eight months later,
the man himself died of a stress-induced disease.26 Bad theology is a terrible taskmaster! In the
end such emphasis on faith becomes a gospel of condemnation.

What god?

Not only does the "faith formula" doctrine fail the normal test of reality, its view of God
is quite different than what we find in the Bible. This god can heal sickness but has to await
some specific quantity or quality of faith to be offered up to Him before healing is released.
Doesn't such a relationship between man and his Maker become contractual rather than
covenantal? Isn't this just another form of works/righteousness since it is required of man that he
has a certain amount of faith before God's blessings can be released? Could this be why there is
so much noise and emotionalism at many of these healing meetings? Often a frenzy is whipped
up to get the people, and thus God, moving. Rather than God who moves according to His grace,
we see here a god who moves according to man's work.

Writing Our Own Ticket

Can we really "write our own ticket with God"? Can we get God to do anything so long
as we have the right kind of faith or invest the appropriate human effort?

The Babylonians believed in fertility gods who would act if enough of the right offering
was made in the proper fashion. Isn't this attitude, "I confess and You (God) have to move," just
another form of the old pagan practice of the Babylonians? Is the God of the Bible obligated to
act when His people pray? Are the acts of God to be subordinated (held hostage) to the offerings,
even the offering of faith, of His creatures? While it is true God's people are promised God's
blessings and that we can expect them, we are never told to claim them.

140

The "faith formula" doctrine holds that the function of faith is to get results. Faith is
assumed to precede and produce miracles. In many New Testament instances faith in Jesus did
not precede healings (Mt 8:10; 9:18; 14:31; Mk 2:4; 5:36; Lk 7:50; 17:6). In other instances
miracles did precede and served to produce faith (Mt 11:4; Lk 24:13-35; Jn 9:1-38; 10:37; 12:37;
20:31).

Purpose of Miracles

Miracles sometimes occur in response to faith and sometimes to instill faith. The
emphasis of faith teachers shows a tremendous naievete about the purpose of miracles as
revealed in Scripture.

We see that miracles demonstrated Jesus' compassion but surprisingly such accounts are
fairly rare (Mt 14:14; 20:34). The broader testimony of Scripture is that God's power may
be demonstrated at least as dramatically through people's suffering as through their health. In the
Gospels the classic example is the passion and crucifixion of Christ. Likewise, authentic
discipleship also embraces the way of the cross (Mk 8:31-35).

Jesus' miracles also show a concern to break down social barriers (Mk 1:41; 7:24-30; Lk
17:11-19). Jesus' miracles challenged the Jewish Sabbath laws (Mk 3:1-6; Lk 13:10-14:1-6), and
exposed Israel's faithlessness (Mt 8:10-11; 17; 17:17). Above all, Jesus' miracles supported His
teaching that the kingdom of God was arriving with His ministry and that He Himself was God's
unique Son (12:28; 4:23; 9:35; 11:4-6,25; 21:14; Mk 1:15; 2:10-11; 7:32 = Isa. 35:6; Lk. 7:11-
17=2 Kgs. 4:8-37; 7:16 = Dt. 18:18; Jn. 9:5).

The Meaning of Words

Do "everything," "anything," "whatever" always have an absolute meaning in Scripture?
The doctrine of positive confession claims this. They confidently pontificate that John 14:13-14
teaches that we can ask God for everything, anything, and whatever and it will be done. Jesus put
it:

"And I will do whatever you ask in My name, so that the Son may bring glory
to the Father. You may ask Me for anything in My name, and I will do it."
(Jn 14:13-14)

This is not simply prayer that mentions Jesus' name, but prayer in accordance with all
that the person who bears the name is. How do we know that? It is because in ancient times an
individual's "name" summed up his whole person, his character and personality. This prayer,
therefore, is prayer aimed at carrying forward the work Jesus didprayer that He Himself will
answer.

Faith teachers claim that anything can be named, claimed and even demanded, whether it
is good weather, a new car, financial success, the recovery of lost property, or the salvation of a
loved one.

141

As in most languages other than English, "everything" does not always mean
"everything" in an absolute sense. It is often used as a simple and common expression such as,
"Is everything all right?" The context is key in understanding what is meant. It does not mean
"everything" indiscriminately. "Everything" means "everything" in conformity to the kind of
person Jesus is and thus what His Word says since His Word is an expression of who He is. This
precludes the faith teachers' approach that is man-centered and happiness-centered as it manifests
human nature at its worstselfishness, self-centeredness, and pride.

When faith is more important than grace, lack of faith because it conveniently, though
unbiblically, explains why things happen for some but not for others. This is true whether in the
realm of material abundance, health, or anything else. Thus the confidence of faith teachers lies
in man's faith or lack thereof, rather than in the God of grace.


































142

NOTES

1
John Osteen, How To Release The Power Of God (John Osteen Publications, 1978), 21
2
Kenneth Hagin, How To Write Your Own Ticket With God, 2-3 cited in Hagin,
Exceedingly Growing Faith, 2nd ed. (Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries, 1988), pp. 73,74
and cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 74.
3
Ibid.
4
Ibid., 75.
5
Ibid.
6
Ibid.
7
Ibid.
8
Ibid.,
9
Ibid.,
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
Kenneth Copeland, Reference Edition of the Holy Bible cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity
in Crisis, 88.
14
Ibid.
15
Charles Capps, God's Creative Power (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1976), p. 95 cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 89.
16
Price, How Faith Works (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1976), 95.
17
Kenneth Hagin, Faith Bible Study Course (Tulsa, OK: n. p., n.d.), p. 88 cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 390.
18
Paul King (Unpublished paper entitled, FAITH OF GOD? 1) points out that there are
scholars such as Princeton scholar Joseph Addison Alexander (A Commentary on Mark, 310),
T. J. McCrossan (Christ's Paralyzed Church X-Rayed, 320-321), Charles Price (The Real Faith,

143

58-69 and The Creative Word, 86), and Charles Harrah (whose book, From the Pinnacle of the
Temple, pp. 100-103 is an early critique of many of the teachings of the Faith Movement), who
attempt to demonstrate that this interpretation is a valid one. Preacher Charles Spurgeon also
used this interpretation as early as 1879 and as well as Missionary J. Hudson Taylor, and godly
leaders such as Andrew Murray, Oswald Chambers, F. B. Meyer, F. F. Bosworth, and A. B.
Simpson. As Paul King points out, "Simpson's understanding of the faith of God and
contemporary faith teaching is that modern faith teachers say we should develop and exercise a
'God-kind of faith,' whereas Simpson says we receive from God "the faith of God" Himself. So it
is not a matter of faith in God vs. faith of God, but both. Simpson makes it clear that having the
faith of God does not mean having faith in your own faith." (Unpublished paper entitled, FAITH
OF GOD? 2).
Similarly Oswald Chambers and F. B. Meyer see such faith as "reckoning on God's
faithfulness" (Oswald Chambers: His Life and Work, p. 53 and F. B. Meyer, Five Musts of the
Christian Life, 91ff.).
19
A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press,
1930) I: 361.
20
A. T. Robertson and W. Hersey Davis, A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament.
10th Revision (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), p. 357 cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity
in Crisis, 91.
21
Some point out that this interpretation is contrary to "historic Alliance teaching." Since
this issue, as it is understood by various people in the evangelical tradition (unlike faith teachers
who have taken these teachings to the extreme), is a minor one, I do not believe it is proper to
call it "an historic teaching." "An historic teaching" is only useful in reference to major points of
doctrine. Otherwise Christians who belong to various denominations or movements end up
parroting anything and everything taught by its leaders. This would stifle free, creative and
independent thinking. With such a minor issue as this, we should allow for differing viewpoints.
No leader, however good, is infallible. Therefore it is legitimate to respectfully disagree as long
as it is not an issue that has serious consequences.
The context is the withered fig tree (Mk 11:20-25). The natural meaning seems to be that
just as Jesus in conducting His ministry put full faith in God to honor His work with divine
power, so the Christian is to trust God in the conduct of his or her own ministry in Jesus' name.
In fact, this reference to removing "the mountain" by a word of prayerful faith has reference to
two directions: positively and negatively. That is, it is curative in making amends in the lives of
others and negative in removing obstacles to ministry (in reality, even the negative becomes a
positive as it accomplishes its purpose so that God's program can go forward). Here specifically,
it means the nation Israel (the fig tree) is shelved as the instrument to be used of God in His
redemptive program and replaced by the Church). This emphasis upon Jesus' ministry as the
setting for the miracle and faith described here is further evidenced in the passage that follows
(Mk 11:27-33) where Jesus' opponents question Him about the authority for His work. The issue
at stake is the communication of Jesus' authority to His disciples.



144

22
I am not aware of any translation that translates this phrase any other way. Among the
translations examined were KJV, NKJV, RSV, NAS, NASB, NIV, CEV, LAMSA and paraphrases
such as the Amplified Bible, Williams, Phillips, the Good News Bible, the Living Bible, etc.
23
Kenyon, The Two Kinds of Faith, 60.
24
Kenyon, Two Kinds of Righteousness, 38.
25
Kenyon, The Two Kinds of Faith, 60.
26
Ibid.
27
Larry Parker with Don Tanner, We Let Our Son Die (Eugene, OR: Harvest House
Publishers, 1980), n. p.
26
John Wimber, Power Healing (San Francisco: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1987), 46-47.





























145



























CHAPTER 14 A CONDITIONAL GOSPEL (SLOT-MACHINE RELIGION)



















146

"Give one house and receive one hundred houses or one house worth one
hundred times as much. Give one airplane and receive one hundred times
the value of the airplane. Give one car and the return would furnish you a
lifetime of cars. In short, Mark 10:30 is a very good deal.1 (Emphasis added)
--Gloria Copeland

"If you have bicycle faith, all you're gonna get is a bicycle."2 (Emphasis added)
--Frederick Price

"Not only is worrying a sin, but being poor is a sin when God promises
prosperity."3 (Emphasis added)
--Robert Tilton

"[I want] to get you out of this malaise of thinking that Jesus and the disciples
were poor. . . . The Bible says that He has left us an example that we should
follow His steps. That's the reason why I drive a Rolls Royce. I'm
following Jesus' steps."4 (Emphasis added)
--Frederick Price

Frederick Price, Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, Robert Tilton and other faith teachers
would have us believe that what we have is exactly due to our faith or lack of it. This is why
there is such an emphasis on health, wealth, and prosperity. What you believe is what you get!
You believe for a bicycle, you get a bicycle, you believe for a Rolls Royce, you get a Rolls
Royce. It's as simple as that!

Such a utilitarian attitude undermines the whole biblical teaching on selflessness and self-
sacrifice because it caters to unworthy motives. This undue emphasis on prosperity by the Faith
Movement leads to an unbiblical theology of giving. A key verse used by faith teachers is Luke
6:38:

"Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken
together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure
you use, it will be measured to you."

Although orthodox preachers and teachers such as Charles Spurgeon, Andrew Murray, A.
B. Simpson, and Hannah Whitehall Smith all taught that there is a place to plant seed for one's
need, there is no place for manipulating God to cater to one's selfish desires. Charles Spurgeon
correctly points out that Luke 6:38 teaches that "we are to give in order to get so we can give
even more." This verse is very clear that God honors our generosity which is a manifestation of
our faith, but such generosity is not to be motivated by greed.

The teaching: We give in order to get is a false theology of giving. In the Bible, God's
love and giving are predicated on His mercy, which means that in their every expression they are
unconditional.


147

God loves, gives, and forgives with no strings attached. The human response to such
grace and generosity is similarly unconditional, as illustrated by the prophet Habakkuk:

"Though the fig tree does not bud and there are no grapes on the vines,
though the olive crop fails and the fields produce no food,
though there are no sheep in the pen
and no cattle in the stalls,
yet I will rejoice in the Lord,
I will be joyful in God my Savior" (Hab 3:17-18).

Habakkuk had learned the lesson of faith (2:4)to trust in Gods providence
regardless of circumstances. He declares that even if God should send suffering and loss, he
would still rejoice in his SaviorGod.

The Faith Movement would have us believe that we are to give in order to get. This is
slot-machine religion. It is driving a bargain with God. You put in your dime and pull out
your package of gum. You put in your quarter's worth of virtue or service or praises and out pops
the blessingsa new car for chastity, a long life for church attendance, etc.

This crass attitude is reminiscent of the two Scotsmen who were shipwrecked. They
floated on the wide ocean for days on a fragile makeshift raft. All they had to drink was a gallon
of scotch which they had prudently saved from the wreck as an antidote to shark-bite. At last one
of them was moved to pray:

"O Lord, out of the perils of the great deep we cry unto Thee,
invoking thine infinite mercy; on my honor as a Presbyterian
I promise Thee that if Thee preserve my life I'll worship Thee
in the true church every Sabbath for all my days;
I'll touch no more the whisky; I'll touch no more thee lassies; I'll . . ."

At this point his friend interrupted to say: "I wouldn't commit myself so far, friend; I
think I see land."

Slot-machine religion!

Seed-Faith

A phrase used by some of the faith teachers is:

"Have a need, plant a seed."






148

This is what is called "seed-faith." And money is typically tied to such faith. Since
money is tied to exercise of faith, how is this teaching substantially different from the selling of
indulgences in the Middle Ages? Since "seeds of faith" is money given to the faith teachers so
the givers can gain health, wealth, and prosperity, the only difference is that in the Middle Ages
the gain was spiritual--the health of the soul (getting the soul out of purgatory).

Copeland assures us that we guarantee our own prosperity if we give to the Lord and
to the poor. He also admits that he will give to the poor only on the condition that he is also
given opportunity to tell them about Jesus. While sharing the gospel is a responsibility that we all
have, it is never used as a criterion of whether we should help people (Mt 25:31-46; Jas 2:14-26;
1 Jn 3:17-18). To tie evangelism quid pro quo to almsgiving and the American profit motive is
unbiblical.

A Foreign Message

The teaching that God rewards us for faith, giving, and being good by making us
materially rich was not the message of the early church fathers. Nor was it the message of the
people of faith who throughout history set the church and the nations aflame with revival. A God
who serves His people will end up with pampered children rather than soldiers of the cross,
spiritual flabbiness rather than spiritual muscle. Any time there is a shift of focus from the
transcendent God to "What's in it for me?" Satan wins. As A. W. Tozer put it:

"It seems that Christian believers have been going through a process of indoctri-
nation and brainwashing, so it has become easy for us to adopt a kind of creed
that makes God to be our servant instead of our being God's servant.

Why should a man write and distribute a tract instructing us on 'How to Pray so
God Will Send You the Money You Need'? Any of us who have experienced a
life and ministry of faith can tell how the Lord has met our needs. My wife and
I would probably have starved in those early years of ministry if we couldn't
have trusted God completely for food and everything else.

Of course, we believe that God can send money to His believing childrenbut it
becomes a pretty cheap thing to get excited about the money and fail to give the
glory to Him who is the Giver!

So many are busy 'using' God. Use God to get a job. Use God to give us safety.
Use God to give us peace of mind. Use God to obtain success in business. Use
God to provide heaven at last.

Brethren, we ought to learnand learn it very soonthat it is much better to
have God first and have God Himself even if we have only a thin dime
than to have all the riches and all the influence in the world and not have
God with it!"5 (Emphasis added)


149

Is more and bigger really better? Any time there is a shifting of focus from the
transcendent God to "What's in it for me?" Satan has won the battle.

An American Perversion

Such an Americanized perversion of the gospel (what author Joe Magliato appropriately
calls The Wall Street Gospel6 tends to reinforce a way of life and an economic system that
oppresses the poor. If one biblical theme is emphasized more than any other (except for
salvation) it is helping the poor (more than 250 references in the Bible). The prophets repeatedly
denounced those who were insensitive to the needs of the poor and took advantage of them.

Seeking more prosperity in a society wallowing in opulence ignores God's concerns
about the needy. Such a mind-set contradicts the message of the cross. Instead of self-denial, it
makes demands of God. God's will is assumed to be synonymous with the will of man.

Is the god of the Faith Movement wonderfully obliging but not too discriminating? Is He
not a Big Brother who delights to help us by forbearing to ask any embarrassing questions about
the moral and spiritual qualities of our desires?

The crass materialism endemic to our Western culture is part and parcel of the Faith
Movement which panders to self-aggrandizement and self-indulgence instead of selflessness and
self-sacrifice. Does not such reasoning lead to the Christ of utility, a kind of Aladdin's lamp for
minor miracles for anyone who summons Him to do His bidding?

Is this not cultural conformity? Is it not the worship of carnal convenience, not very far
removed from the gods of paganism? Did not Paul warn against such worldliness (Ro 12:1-
2)? God is looking for living sacrifices who do not allow the world to squeeze them it to its
mold, not followers who embrace worldly standards and values.

God has redeemed us to make us holy and to restore us to the image of God. To
accomplish this He disengages us from earthly ambitions and draws us away from the cheap,
tawdry, and unworthy prizes that people of the world set their hearts upon. God will not use His
sacred power to further our worldly interests. Such a notion is unworthy of our Lord and
injurious to our own souls. The sovereignty of God and the lordship of Christ must be kept in
the forefront as we contemplate what Christianity is all about. Otherwise we will end up by
following a Lord who is merely a christ of convenience and not the true Lord of glory.










150

NOTES

1
Gloria Copeland, God's Will Is Prosperity (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1978), 54.
2
Frederick Price, "Ever Increasing Faith" program on TBN (9 Dec., 1990) cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 187.
3
Robert Tilton, "Success-N-Life" television program (27 December, 1990) cited in
Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 186.
4
Price, "Ever Increasing Faith," cited in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 187.
5
A. W. Tozer, I Talk Back to the Devil (Harrisburg: Christian Publications, Inc., 1972),
30-31.
6
Joe Magliato, The Wall Street Gospel (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers 1981).





























151


























CHAPTER 15 A FASCINATION WITH AUTHORITY AND POWER




















152

"The seventy-two returned with joy and said, 'Lord, even the demons submit
to us in Your name.' He replied, 'I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.
I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to
overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you. However,
do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are
written in heaven" (Lk 10:20).

The above passage is a warning to conservatives and faith teachers alike. To the
conservatives it is a corrective that points out the authority inherent in true service to God.
These early followers of Christ did have authority to "trample on snakes and scorpions"
and "to overcome all the power of the enemy" so that "nothing will harm [them]" (v. 19).
Conservatives often use this passage to show that only our salvation is important. This is to
overlook the authority we have in Christ in all areas. It also is a warning to the faith teachers and
others fascinated by the supernatural that man's salvation is more important than power to
overcome the evil one or escape his harm. The fact that our salvation is recorded in heaven is
much more important (Ps 69:28; Da 12:1; Php 4:3; Heb 12:23; Rev 3:5).

Jesus' Warning

Jesus' disciples were continually warned against this tendency toward fascination with
power and the spectacular. Jesus' disciples, James and John, asked to share prestige and power
with Jesus in the future kingdom by sitting on His right and left. It was in that context that Jesus
pointed to servanthood rather than power. Jesus responded to His disciple's request by stating
that all He could promise them was to "drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I
am baptized with" (Mk 10:39), that is, suffering. Then He pointed to the principle of authority
in the Kingdom of God (Mt 20:25-28; Mk 10:42-45).

Obedience, not power, is the test of true spirituality (Matthew 7:21-23). Love, not the
powerful display of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, is the most important thing in one's life (1 Co
13).

Triumphalism
(The Theology of Glory)

The effects of God's powermiracles, signs, excitement, successesprove nothing
about the character of God. Self-centered focus on man's triumphal experiences pervert the
message of the cross because it delivers a "cheap grace" in that they focus on what God has done
for us rather than on the person and character of God Himself. The triumphalistic theologies of
glory describe faith as a payoff rather than a cost. Historic orthodox Christianity has always
viewed the cross as the test for everything!

The theology of the cross, in contrast to normal human standards and insights, can only
be stated by means of paradox (seeming contradiction). Thus the Christian life is a paradox of
rising through kneeling, conquering through submitting, finding through losing, living thorough
dying, and finding joy through suffering.

153

Man's attempts to fully comprehend God and His thoughts and ways are always doomed
to failure. Any attempt to figure God out and then dictate to God what He should do betrays
ignorance, arrogance and sacrilege. If God can conceal Himself in the cross and suffering He can
also hide His gracious response to our prayers. The way of the cross is love, not power;
suffering, not achievement; humility, not glory; shame, not honor; foolishness, not wisdom.









































154


























CHAPTER 16 HOLY LAUGHTER AND THE PRACTICE
OF SLAYING PEOPLE IN THE "SPIRIT"



















155

One of the most obvious manifestations of our fascination with the supernatural is the
recent interest in holy laughter and the practice of slaying people in the "Spirit." As we
examine this issue we are reminded of God's words through the prophet Isaiah:

"My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways" (55:8).

Biblical Examples

Experiences that seem rather strange are not necessarily unscriptural. Conservative
Christianity has sometimes thrown "the baby out with the bathwater" denying the legitimate
place that spiritual experiences have, even strange experiences.

The Old and New Testaments are replete with strange or weird behavior. God's people,
especially the prophets, were told to do some rather "absurd" things to communicate their
messages:

Hannah, in her praying, appeared to be drunk in response to the presence of the Lord.
(1 Sa l 1:12-17)

Saul appeared drunk when the Spirit came on him and he stripped off all of his clothes
and lay down for the whole day (19:23-24).

The bones of Elisha raised the dead (2 Kgs 13:21).

When Ezra read the book of the law to the people, they wept spontaneously as they
heard the words of the law (Ne 8:9).

The psalmist trembled in fear of the Lord (Ps 119:120).

Trembling is recorded as a manifestation that God at times expects from His people
because of their fear of Him (Jer 5:22; see also Isa 66:2; Ez 9:4).

Jeremiah wore the linen belt to symbolize the formerly intimate relationship between
God and Judah (Jer 1:11).

Isaiah went naked and barefoot for three years as a sign against Egypt and Cush.
(Isa 20:3)

Ezekiel prophesied to inanimate objectsmountains (the mountains of Israel.
(Eze 6:1-14)

Ezekiel prophesied to the directionsouth and to the forest (20:45-49).

Ezekiel has a vision of the Valley of Dry Bones in which he breathes (as he prophesies)
life into the bones. These bones represent the house of Israel and the animated bones
are symbolic of the fact that Israel would be restored (37:1-28).
156

Hosea was commanded to marry a prostitute (Hos 1:2).

In some of Jesus' ministry of casting out of demons, there were shrieks, convulsions and
unconsciousness, among other things (Mk 1:23-28; 9:14-29).

The disciples were accused of being "drunk" on the day of Pentecost when the Holy
Spirit came in His fullness to indwell all believers (Ac 2:1-21). Their response to the
Spirit evidently produced some characteristics normally associated with drunkenness.

Peter's shadow healed the sick people on which it fell (5:15).

Handkerchiefs and aprons that touched Paul's body healed the sick and drove out
demons (19:12).

Paul "threw himself" on a young man (Eutychus) who had died and the latter was raised
to life (20:7-12).

Paul fell into a trance to save his life and change the course of his ministry (22:17-21).

John, the apostle, had a vision of lions, a calf, a man, and an eagle, each of whom had
six wings and were filled with eyes all around and within them saying "holy, holy, holy"
as they flew around the throne of God day and night (Rev 4:6-8).

Many of these "men of God" would have been thrown out of most any church run by
conservative Christians who seem to think that unless a practice fits in with their neat Western
cultural standard of what is proper or decent, it must automatically be unscriptural. Such cultural
blindness is both ignorant and arrogant.

The History of Revivals

A serious study of the history of revivals shows that church history is replete with
happenings that we might describe as strange.

Psychiatrist and missionary to the Third World John White, in his book, When the Spirit
Comes With Power,1 shows the prevalence of signs and wonders among God's people down
through the ages such as uncontrollable shaking, sudden falls during prayer, unexpected weeping
or laughter, dramatic healings, prophecy and vision, encounter with demons, etc. This means that
people being slain in the Spirit is only one strange experience among many therefore.

There are three possible explanations of such experiences:

1) They are psychological in nature, based on the power of suggestion or even mass
hypnosis,

2) They are due to demonic deception, or

157

3) They are genuine spiritual (though esoteric) responses to a movement of the sovereign
Spirit of God?

There is no doubt but that Satan can skillfully counterfeit God's ways and gifts.

Therefore we dare not blindly accept all mystical experience as genuine. It is crucial that
we discerningly sift what is of Satan from what is of God.

Holy Laughter

"Holy laughter" is ecstatic joy that expresses itself in laughter. Such laughter, when
genuine, occurs when believers are so "moved by a sense of the Savior's love to them, and, in
turn, by their new love in Him, as to be lifted almost into a state of rapture."1 Like humor in
general, holy laughter brings release from tension when it is truly from God. It can increase the
worshipers' sense of joy even in the midst of difficult circumstances.

Holy laughter allows sinners to be so moved and quickened by the Holy Spirit so that
they perceive the things of God with a new and overwhelming clarity in which joy bursts from
their hearts and along with praise of an almost ecstatic intensity.

Slain in the Spirit

The term "slain in the Spirit" is variously called "falling under the power," "falling
backward," "being overcome," "fainting," "trances," strikings," "transport," prostrations," and
"ecstacies."

While the term never appears in Scripture, there are several biblical examples of people
being powerfully moved upon by God's Spirit. Ezekiel received many of his prophecies while he
was in an ecstatic trance. Daniel "fell on his face" (Da 10:9) as he received repeated visions and
dreams. The Apostle John states in the book of revelation: "On the Lord's Day I was in the
Spirit (Rev 1:10). This probably means that John was in a state of spiritual exaltation similar to
that of Peter when he received a vision (Ac 10:10). John's reaction to the vision of Christ was
prostration: "When I saw Him, I fell at His feet as though dead" (Rev 1:17). Such falling was a
sign of great respect and awe (4:10; 5:8; 7:11; 19:10; 22:8).

The priests in the Old Testament "could not perform their service because of the cloud,
for the glory of the Lord filled the temple of God" (II Chronicles 5:14). The glory cloud
represented the presence of God which had guided Israel out of Egypt and through the desert,
and remained present above the tabernacle (Ex 13:21-22; 40:34-38; Eze 43:1-5; Hag 2:9;
Zec1:16; 2:10; 8:3). Such phenomena may occur gently or violently, with great distress or
profound calm. Falls may be associated with further violent movements, with head-banging,
tremors, and movements suggestive of epilepsy, but commonly with a total absence of
movement.

Participants may have no experience beyond a pleasant sense of calm, or they may have
visions, shakings, or feelings of being crushed.
158

In Scripture, many of those flattened by the power of God were unbelievers. The soldiers
who came to arrest Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane were overcome by God's presence as they
"drewback and fell to the ground" (Jn 18:6). Saul of Tarsus in his zeal to arrest Christians was
struck down in the dust on Damascus Road (Ac 9:1-7).

We know Ezekiel received many of his prophecies while he was in an ecstatic trance. The
Apostle John, writing the Revelation, said, "On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit." Given a
dazzling vision of Christ, he recorded this reaction: "When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though
dead" (Rev 1:17).

Revivals

Mystical states often occurred in accounts of the well known revivals during the 1700s,
1800s, and early 1900s. During the Welsh revivals, one reporter testified, "It is not a question
of one town being awakened, but of the whole principality being on fire."2 Trances were
common during these revivals.3 Ecstasies were common wherever outpourings of the Spirit took
place whether in England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Canada, or United States.

Such ecstasies were reported among people of every denominational stripe such as
Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, and Methodistslong before there were Pentecostal
denominations. In fact, early in this century, though Free Methodism was non-Pentecostal,
numerous Methodist people reportedly were slain in the Spirit.

The Test of Authenticity

If such spiritual experiences are legitimate, what is wrong with people being slain in the
Spirit as practiced by Charistmatics in general and faith teachers in particular?

In the first place, the records we have from Scripture shows that when people were slain
in the Spirit, no one caught anyone. It was an unspoken rule that no one touched what God was
doing. If people were genuinely slain in the Spirit, the Spirit would protect the people from being
hurt. To catch people risks manipulating God as well as the people in order to demonstrate or
prove God's presence and power.

Orchestrating God's Ways

Typically big strong men are chosen to be the "catchers," which suggests to participants
that something powerful is about to happen to them. Talk about man orchestrating God's ways!

Often, those wanting to be ministered to and/or be slain in the Spirit are told to put their
hands in the air. Then a speaker moves rapidly down the line, puts his hand on the forehead, and
gives a quick shove, people fall backward like dominoes.




159

The power of suggestion is also employed along with physical force. As people are
expected to fall, when they are slightly pushed, they get off balance and thus fall. In the case of
those who are not physically pushed, psychological forces alone can cause them to fall
backward.

When people crave mystical experiences, it does not take much suggestion to lead some
into self-induced responses. Such exploitation of divine manifestations by "ministers"
("handlers") is toying with the works of God and inviting, self-delusion and divine judgment.

Showmanship

It takes little discernment, when watching Benny Hinn's healing services, to be
immediately struck by his showmanship, and the attention focused on the so-called "healer."

This does not mean that there is no legitimate healing taking place. But it does mean that
the focus is unbiblical. As a result, such movements have caused discouragement to those who
came to worship God (as opposed to focusing on a "charimatic leader") and terrible
disillusionment to the uninformed and naive who have been sold a bill of goods.

The Difficulty of Discernment

It is not always easy to distinguish the real from that which is fake. When Moses
confronted Pharaoh with the reality of Almighty Jehovah, he cast his rod to the ground and it
immediately became a slithering serpent. But Pharaoh's wizards duplicated this miracle and even
turned water into blood and caused frogs to appear from out of nowhere (Ex 7-8).

Supernatural acts by themselves do not validate a person's relationship to God.

Nor do miraculous acts prove that God is necessarily the source of such miracles. Time is
important in discerning between the real and the fake. Eventually Satan's miracles will be seen
for what they are. After all, Pharaoh's serpents were eventually swallowed up by Moses' rod. In
the end, the seemingly miraculous powers of the pseudo-miracle workers or the performers with
their psychological tricks fail in a confrontation with the omnipotent, living God.

A crucial element typically associated with true movement of God is spontaneity. There
is no need to set the stage. When a person is genuinely slain in the Spirit, it is not any handler but
God who sovereignly touches that person's spirit.

Genuine encounters with the Spirit of God have strong moral and intellectual as well as
emotional and physical components. For when these occur there is an illumination from God
which affects the intellect and will with such intensity that it overwhelms the physical powers
and external senses. The power or force that causes prostration does not emanate from the person
ministering but from God.



160

In attempting to discern the real from the unreal it is vital that we realize that a true
mystical experience involves much more physical euphoria and emotional exaltation (a spiritual
high). Nowhere in Scripture do we find God's purpose in any divine visitation to be merely a
state of ecstasy. God's intent for any divine manifestation is for His plan and program to be
advanced, as lives are transformed and His mission is accomplished. Therefore inflated emotions
and physical reactions become incidental as spiritual formation takes precedence.

Does this mean that a spiritual experience is not genuine if a person's life does not
evidence obedience? Not necessarily. The experience may have been real while the response to
that experience was inadequate.

We live in a day and age when the spectacular is emphasized in religion as in all other
areas of life. It is therefore extremely vital for believers to be cautious about making too much of
mystical experiences. Rather, we are to rivet our attention on Jesus Christ, the Head of the
church, which is His body. Commitment and obedience to Him must be primary as we attempt to
worship and serve Him whether, there is much or little supernatural phenomena occurring around
us. Otherwise we set ourselves up for deception.























NOTE

1
Jerry White, When the Spirit Comes With Power (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 1988).

161


























CHAPTER 17 THE PRESUMPTIOUS USE OF CLAIMS SUCH AS "GOD
TOLD ME . . ."



















162

Many in the Faith Movement and outside it use the phrase, "God told me . . ." or "God
showed me . . ." to justify their teaching or behavior. Is this legitimate? What is the dynamic
involved in such a statement? Does it mean that he heard an audible voice from God? How does
God tell us anything apart from His written Word?

Many conservative theologians claim that God does not, cannot, and will not
communicate apart from His written, propositional revelation. If that is true, are we not left with
mere educated and sanctified common sense?

Is the Word of God (Ro 8:14; Gal 5:18) we are challenged to be "led by the Spirit" and
are given many examples of such leading in the life of the early church.

How does it work?

When a person says, "The Lord told me . . ." is he not really saying that he has a thought,
an impression, an idea or insight regarding a specific area of decision or direction which he
believes is prompted by the Holy Spirit who dwells within? Careless usageover usageof
such a serious claim is dangerous. Why? Because the claimant says that he speaks for God.

Various Reasons

There are various reasons why such a claim is made. One is a very sincere understanding
or perception of what God wants. Hopefully, this is the reason most of us use this phrase from
time to time. Being sincere in our walk with God or even baptized or filled with the Spirit does
not mean that every thought or impression is from the Holy Spirit. We need to distinguish the
flesh from the Spirit so that we may put away the flesh and live in the Spirit. Even though
Pentecost, the fullness of the Spirit, brings to us an experiential awareness of the Holy spirit, we
still need to discern His leading.

Learning to walk in the Spirit and "understand what the Lord's will is," as Paul put it to
the Ephesian believers (5:17), or to "test and approve what God's will isHis good, pleasing
and perfect will," as he challenged the Christians at Rome (Ro 12:2), is directly related to
"the renewing of our minds" (v. 1) so that we might be in tune with what the Holy
Spirit is saying to us.

A perfectly renewed mind that is totally in line with the Holy Spirit will be perfectly led
by the Spirit of God. All the thoughts and all the actions of such a person will be perfectly in
tune with the will of God. Everything such a person says will be what the Lord is saying, and
everything he does is what the Lord would have him do. This is how Jesus perfectly fulfilled
God's will in His own life. But it is not and never will be the case with us since none of us is
perfectly renewed or sanctified.





163

Our knowledge of the will of God in our day-to-day experience is partial and enigmatic
(1 Co 13:9-12). As we walk by faith, and not by sight, we still can never be certain of God's will
for us in our daily experience apart from that which is revealed to us in the objective written
Word of God.

Even though the Holy Spirit seeks to direct our thoughts, His leadings are set into minds
that are influenced by the three enemies of man's soul: the sinful (self-centered) human nature,
the world (system) and the devil (Jas 1:13-14; 1 Jn 1:15-17; 3:8; 5:18-19).

Other Reasons

The psychological need to punish ourselves may explain why we may claim that God
told us to do so and so. Yet another reason is born of a subconscious need to impress others by
appearing to be a super-saint. When we claim that the Lord has communicated to us personally,
the emphasis is on the special relationship that we have with God. Another reason is self-
deception.

If we want something badly enough, it is quite easy to convince ourselves that we are
only doing what God wants us to do. As Jeremiah, the prophet said, "The heart is deceitful above
all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" (Jer 17:9). Only God, who created us, can
know it (v. 10).

I have heard many so-called "prophecies" that much more reflect the speaker's views than
God's.

In Old Testament times false prophets forged God's name to their own religious babbling
as they prophesied peace to Jerusalem where there was no peace (6:14). Jeremiah, the true
prophet, however, prophesied impending doom for Israel: captivity, torture, and death at the
hands of the ungodly Babylonians. It is similar in many charismatic and/or Pentecostal meetings
where prophecies are typically very positive.

When prophecies are virtually always positive we know it is not from God since in
Scripture we see a mixture of hopeful promises and serious warnings. Peoples own desires and
wishes color God's supposed "Word."

Another purpose of such a claim is to use it as a ploy to get our own way. After all, who
can argue against God? Invocation of God's will we leave everyone else vulnerable. By invoking
the phrase "God told me," we can manipulate those who oppose us.

All leadings of the Holy Spirit are set within the context of the church, the body of Christ.
Therefore, all utterances that are claimed to come from God are to be discernedtestedwithin
that context. All leadings of the Spirit must be put to the test by the body of Christ to make
certain there is confirmation since ". . . every matter must be established by the testimony of two
or three witnesses" (2 Co 13:1).


164

When a believerwhether leader or followerclaims, "The Lord told me" it is
legitimate for the congregation of believers to respond, "That is yet to be determined." What is
the implication of this? It is that all statements relating to "the will of God" or "the leading of the
Spirit" are faith statements. Anyone who claims that God has spoken to him or her is saying that,
from what they can determine, they believe this is what the Lord is saying to them through His
Holy Spirit.

History is replete with stories of God's people venturing out in faith and accomplishing
great things for God when they became convinced that God has led them. But there are also
horror stories of people who have claimed to be led by God but who have discovered that they
were wrong. There are countless people who, because of an alleged leading of the Spirit, have
come into financial, physical, emotional, and spiritual ruin.

Leaders can wield great control over people by claiming special revelation from
God. Too often we see leaders claim to speak for God when they appeal for money. This is
Satan's old trick of quoting the Scripturesusing religionperversely. As a result, naive people
are fleeced.

We are easily deceived. We tend to think that whenever God promises something good,
something we consider in our best interests, He is talking to us personally, whereas when He
gives warnings, He is talking to someone else.

Guidelines

There is no question that God desires to lead and guide His people in their day-to-day
activities and in the life of the church corporate. This takes place through prayer, reading and
study of God's Word and through thoughts, impressions, and ideas confirmed through the
witness of the body of Christ and the circumstances following. Since our knowledge of the will
of God is partial at best, we only "see through a glass darkly" (1 Co 13:12) as we are being led
by the Spirit.

Therefore we must be aware of the subjective nature of our understanding of God's will
and ways. This is why all our thoughts, impressions, and ideas must be tested against the
objective Word of God and confirmed by the subjective wisdom of individual believers
combined with the collective wisdom of the corporate body which by its very nature brings
objectivity. Anything less than this is dangerous.

Beware of those who are quick to claim "God told me"!








165


























CHAPTER 18 A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT




















166

Believing What Is True

It is not enough to believe! As Tozer put it,

"We must believe the right thing about the right One."1

Not all faith pleases God. Faith is good only when it is tied to truth. When it rests on
foolishness it can lead to eternal damnation.

Since God has spoken to us through our forefathers, through the prophets, and
preeminently through His Son (Heb 1:1), we all are under obligation to hear the affirmations
as we study the Scriptures under the divine guidance of the Spirit of God who inspired the
Scriptures. This means that we accept all that Jesus has said about Himself and all the prophets
and apostles have said about Him. If not, we may end up believing a Jesus created by our own
imagination and formed after our own likeness.

Illuminism

As we have seen, bad theology is a terrible taskmaster. Illuminism refers to sincere but
deluded claims to direct revelation. The Colossians and the Gnostics elevated mystical
revelations above the direct teachings of the apostles. Similarly the faith teachers easily brush
aside biblical revelation for an advanced spiritual, mystical revelation.

The Faith Movement poses twin dangers because it has elevated experience above
Scripture by reinterpreting Scripture in the light of that experience, and it has forced experience
to conform to an incorrect notion of scriptural truth (that is, of denying reality in some way). The
movement is heretical in that it has divorced Scripture from experience by putting experience
above Scripture. It has done this by claiming things that are not sanctioned by Scripture. It has
also interpreted Scripture by our experiences and reduced its teaching entirely to the level of
what we know and experience.

Excessive Supernaturalism

Excessive supernaturalism refers to affirming the supernatural to the extent that it
exaggerates its discontinuity with the natural. In its reaction to conservative Christianity, which
often plays down the supernatural, the faith teachers constantly expect miracles of all sorts as
striking demonstrations of God's unmistakable presence and power. Therefore they think God is
most present when He is acting contrary to the nature of things and thereby confounding
common sense.

The emphasis on glossolalia (speaking in tongues) as the spiritual paradigm of spiritual
activity (the evidence of the fullness of the Holy Spirit) further shows this excessive
supernaturalism in that the mind and tongue are deliberately dissociated from the rest of the body
(the natural). This divine/human wedge is viewed as evidence that it must be of God. Here we
see undue discontinuity with the ordinary regularities of the created order.

167

When "the God of miracles" works slowly by natural means, this becomes a
disappointment, almost a betrayal. By undervaluing the natural, regular, and ordinary, faith
teachers show a weakness in grasping the realities of creation and providence as basic to God's
work of grace. The God of Christianity is a God of nature as well as a God of grace.

Charismania

Charismania refers to the habit of measuring spiritual health, growth, power, and
maturity by the number and impressiveness of people's gifts. Health, growth, power, and
maturity are to be judged by "the fruit of the Spirit" (Gal 5:22-23) and not by the gifts of the
Spirit no matter how impressive (supernatural and extra-ordinary). Even the power of the Holy
Spirit cannot be wholly measured by supernatural manifestations. Jesus claimed that John the
Baptist was the greatest man who had ever lived up to that time and yet there are no indications
in Holy Writ that John ever performed a miracle. Elijah and especially Elisha, on the other
hand, performed numerous miraculous feats.

Teachings that Contradict Reality (Facts)

When theology does not squarely face or fit facts, theology must change. God never asks
us to deny our five senses. Truth must correspond to reality. Creedless religions such as
Transcendentalism (growing out of "the will to believe" and unwillingness to believe the Holy
Scriptures), Christian Science, other healing movements and the Faith Movement arrogantly
pontificates that as long as a person is sincere and believes God for whatever is asked of Him,
that makes it so. Historic orthodox Christianity, however, teaches that God never asks us to deny
or contradict reality.

Antiintellectualism

The anti-intellectualism of the Faith Movement (as well as in some quarters of Funda-
mentalism and evangelicalism, though to a lesser degree in most cases) shows a betrayal of
the Great Commandment to love God with our "minds." Nowhere in Scripture are we told that it
is sinful to think or that the intellect is to be down-played in spiritual matters. The mind needs to
be addressed as well as the emotions and the will.

An intellectually impoverished religion is a tragedy. There has been too much spoon-
feeding of thoughtless, insipid religious pabulum that caters to the lowest common denominator
intellectually and spiritually. Thus people have remained ignorant of the great sweep of truth
and/or compromised in their spiritual commitment.

Although God is not looking for ivory tower intellectuals, He does recognize that
generations of people will be lost if hard thinking is only done by those who do not seek truth
(Truth). When hard theological and ethical reflection is substituted for experience, the result is
naivety and imbalance in doctrinal and ethical issues.



168

Preoccupation with experience inhibits the long, serious, and at times, difficult
theological and ethical reflection so plainly called for by the New Testament letters. The result is
imbalance in handling the biblical revelation which typically leads to distortion of truth.

In the Faith Movement looking for a direct word from God through the word of
knowledge, the word of wisdom, or prophecy is preferred over the spiritual discipline of
prayerful study, reflective thinking and meditation, and careful analysis. Such a preference often
insists that all problems of faith and conduct will prove to be simple.

Denigration of the intellect by the faith teachers and other religious movements has left
peoples' minds underdeveloped or undeveloped. This has led to a failure in knowing how to
think.

While there may be some learning, the art of learning has been left out. Thus people have
come to think in sub-Christian and anti-Christian ways.

Many take a distorted pride in Christian foolishness and mistake immaturity or childish-
ness for childlikeness and that which is simplistic for simplicity. We all must guard against
becoming just plain "fools," instead of "fools for Christ." If thinking itself is derided to think in a
Christian way is impossible since such thinking means that we think about anything and
everything in a consistently biblical way. This means that our thinking is shaped, directed, and
restrained by the truth of God's Word and God's Spirit.

Thinking carries with it a moral imperative. The searcher for truth must be ready to obey
truth without reservation, or it will elude him. If he refuses to follow the light, he consigns
himself to darkness (Jn 3:19). Intellectual honesty is crucial since wisdom is in its very essence
a moral thing.

Biblical thinking or Christ-centered thinking implies knowledge of God's truth. God's
truth will not as easily yield itself to a person whose mind is not developed. Thus we dare not
disparage the proper function of the mind since the Holy Spirit teaches us all truth as it is
mediated through the mind and heart of man. We love God and obey Him by loving Him with
our minds as our minds are in love with Him. This means we attempt as much as possible to
"think God's thoughts after Him" as we seek to "bring every thought into captivity to the
obedience of Christ" (2 Co 10:5).

Gnostic Hermeneutical Principles

The Faith Movement uses Gnostic hermeneutical principles rather than contextual
scientific exegesis ("historic/grammatical" method). Such spiritualizing, as we have already seen,
leaves us vulnerable to all kinds of interpretations. Thus we have the outlandish and bizarre
teachings of the Faith Movement.




169

Uniformity

The irony is that even with their emphasis on mystical knowledge, the faith teachers have
turned faith in God into a system of thought about God. They have done this by removing much
of His mystery by attempting to tie up all the loose ends of their own human understanding
(logic) and thus reduce Him to being merely a part of their system of ideas. As a result, they
appeal to pious sounding names such as "Christ" and pious phrases such as "God told me" or
"God showed me" to justify their strange human ideas and endeavors.

Even though the Faith Movement is not fully uniform in that its followers claim to
believe in diversity which is a direct consequence of Christian freedom and fallibility, they tend
to practice a cult-like mentality. There is little room for divergence of beliefs as several have
found out in teaching "doctrine" not taught by Kenneth Hagin and his flock.

Eudaemonism

Eudaemonism is the belief that God intends for us to experience continued, unbroken
physical health, financial wealth and emotional euphoria in this fallen world. This message of
euphoria from their platforms and pulpits plus their theology of healing communicates
powerfully the assumption that we are to be happy all the time is the enjoyment of God's
prosperity.

This emphasis on health, wealth and success runs counter to the message of the cross
with its emphasis on denial, persecution, suffering and death. It also loses sight of the good that
can come in the form of wisdom, patience, and acceptance of reality without bitterness when
Christians are exposed to the discipline of pain and of remaining unhealed. The result of such a
"glorious" message is a truncated Gospel which sounds more like Madison Avenue than Jesus.

Neohumanism

The Faith Movement shares some of the goals of present day humanism as it plays into
the desires of selfish human nature which regards creaturely comforts very highly. The cross, the
historic symbol of Christianity, plays a very small role (some sound apologetic in their mention
of the cross) in the theology of the Faith Movement.

Pragmatism, which defines the American temperament, is promoted among the faith
teachers. It is seen in its emphasis on "self-help" and "positive thinking." Showmanship is used
to entice the naive (a la Benny Hinn and Frederick Price). Human effort is believed to be able to
transform the human will. God's power is seen as something to be "plugged into"to gainso
we can experience health, wealth, and prosperitypopularity, peace of mind, etc. The question,
"Will it work?" has overshadowed, "Is it true?" Thus serving God has subtly shifted to serving
self in the name of God.




170

Silent about "The Fear of God"

The Faith Movement, unlike the saints throughout the ages, has been very silent about
"the fear of God" which, according to Solomon, the wisest man that ever lived, "is the beginning
of wisdom" (Pr 1:7).

To downplay the truth of God's severity contradicts what saints have always known: no
one can know the true grace of God who has not first known the fear of God. Law comes before
gospel. Repentance comes before faith. Suffering comes before glory. Without fear there is no
hope for salvation since salvation has to do with rescue. Rescue from what? Our sin! Until we
have an overwhelming sense of our own sinfulness and who it is to whom we have to give an
account, our eyes of faith will not perceive the God of the Bible.

In fact, fear of God is also to characterize our continued Christian life. Paul put it:

". . . continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God
who works in you to will and to act according to His good purpose" (Php 2:12-13).

Paul is not saying we can earn our salvation by works but is calling us to a continual
process of spiritual growth and development (sanctification). Notice that Paul says, "work out,"
not "work for." We can only work out what we already have. Salvation then is not merely a gift
of God received once for all; rather it is also pictured as an ongoing process in which the believer
is strenuously involved (Mt 24:13; 1 Co 9:24-27; Heb 3:14; 6:9-11; 2 Pe 1:5- 8)the process of
perseverance, spiritual growth, and maturation. And, according to Paul, this process is to be
worked out with "fear and trembling." This is not in reference to doubt or anxiety, but to a
serious awareness of what it means to live the Christian life. It is an active reverence and a
singleness of purpose in response to God's grace, since it is God who does His work in us and
then through us by His Spirit. It is those who persevere to the end who are saved (Mt 24:13).

This seriousness is typically lacking among teachers of the Faith Movement as the
benefits of redemption are emphasized to the virtual exclusion of the dangers and responsibilities
of redemption.

A movement that deemphasizes the fear of God does not understand the basics of
Christianity since it is that very fear that is the beginning of wisdom. This shows the appalling
spiritual immaturity of the Faith Movement.

Undue Emphasis on Praise

Although the emphasis on praise by the Faith Movement is a good thing in general, its
own teaching on the subject has made praise very similar to a fetish. How? A fetish is an object
believed to have magical powers or anything held in unreasoning devotion. Praise too is seen by
many of the faith teachers as a panacea, a cure for every problem. This has led to an unhealthy



171

disproportionate emphasis on praise. Praise, like everything else, must be balanced by
repentance, a holy hatred for evil as well as a passionate love for good, etc.these are elements
left out in the teachings of the Faith Movement.

Elitism

Elitism is the feeling and attitude that you have the new or whole truth and are therefore
spiritually superior. With its emphasis on mystical knowledge ("revelation knowledge") and
supernatural experiences and happenings (e.g. miracles) the Faith Movement looks down on
those who do not attain to such knowledge and experience and thus typically speaks to them
condescendingly. In seeing charismatic experience as the New Testament norm for all
time, the faith teachers are judgmental toward non-Charismatic Christianity.

Sectarian

Sectarianism refers to limiting oneself to those of similar persuasion. Thus people in the
Faith Movement become so insular that they almost solely read books written by the faith
teachers, listen to faith speakers, study under faith "theologians," fellowship only with other
people of the faith persuasion, and back causes led only by faith leaders.



























172



























CHAPTER 19 THE URGENT NEED FOR SOUND DOCTRINE



















173

Conceptual Framework: Doctrine

Those who say we are to look only to Jesus and not to any doctrinal considerations are
being naive for this presumes that we can know Christ through any figure conjured up by well-
meaning religious people. Such a position ignores the fact that Jesus Christ is the historic Jesus
of Nazareth: a Person rooted in history.

The Christian Church has always been unalterably committed to the written witness of
the Person and Work of Christ as given by His apostles: the New Testament. This is why the
apostles (primarily John and Paul) framed the Christian faith in doctrinal terms and showed great
concern for its preservation and protection.

Sound Doctrine

The Church cannot afford to allow teaching that merely sounds good (to untrained ears)
and tickles the ears. Sound doctrine is a must! (1 Ti 4:16; 2 Ti 1:13; 4:1-5; Titus 1:7-11). We
must test everything and hold onto that which is good and discard that which is bad (1 Th 5:21).
To speak of Christian faith without the bedrock of "the apostles' teaching" (Ac 2:42), "sound
doctrine" (1 Ti 1:10; Titus 1:9), "sound instruction" (1 Ti 6:3), or "the pattern of sound teaching"
(2 Ti 1:13-14) is to deviate from the bedrock of orthodox Christianity.

It is the truth contained in such doctrine that was taught by the apostles and passed on to
the church. This is the message presented to us in Scripture as our only ground for hope (Titus
1:9) and salvation (1 Co 15:2; 1 Pe 1:23-25). John, the Apostle, put it:

"Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not
have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son" (3 Jn 9).

John further emphasizes the cruciality of such a teaching by adding the solemn warning:

"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into
your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked
work" (2 Jn 10-11).

Paul states that our growth in Christ is dependent upon our obedience to the truth
contained in the apostolic doctrinal framework (Col 4:6) and Timothy is told by his spiritual
father, Paul, that it is only as he adheres to "the good teaching" that he will become a "good
minister of Jesus Christ" (1 Ti 4:6).

Belief and Practice

John, in his emphasis on the correlation between belief (orthodoxy) and practice
(orthopraxis), presents three tests by which we can discern whether our spirituality is authentic:

Believing the right doctrine (1 Jn 2:18-27; 4:1-6, 13-21).

174

Obedience to right doctrine (2:3-6; 28:-3:10).

Living a life of love as a manifestation of right doctrine (2:7-11; 3:11-18; 4:7-12)

Doctrine is essential because it is "truth" (2 Co 4:6; Eph 1:13; Col 1:5; 2 Ti 2:5; Titus
1:14; 1 Pe 1:22; 2 Pe 1:12; Jas 1:8; 3 Jn 4). Scripture is adamant that it is only by coming to
know this "truth" that one comes to know God since Christ is the object, the very center, of this
teaching (2 Ti 3:7; Titus 2:4; Heb 10:26; 1 Pe 1:22). Therefore the early followers of Jesus were
urged not to depart from the apostolic teaching they had received from the very start (Jn 2:7,24,
26; 3:11; Heb 2:1; Jude 3).

Rather they are to "guard" this legacy of faith and transmit it intact to succeeding
generations (Gal 1:9; 2 Ti 1:13-14; 4:3; Titus 1:9).

The Sandy Soil of Conjecture

To jettison such a body of doctrine is to end up in the sandy soil of conjecture with no
higher authority than the latest religious fad. The Faith Movement has discarded much of
orthodox historic Christianity in favor of their "new" revelation. To substantially reject the
Christian wisdom of the ages (e.g. Early Church fathers) and to forfeit many of their teachings is
to cut themselves off from the experienced leadership, structured discipline, and sound biblical
teaching of historic Christianity.

Savage Wolves "From Within"

Paul expressed deep concern not only about "savage wolves" that will invade the
believers at Ephesus, not only from without, but even from their "own number":

"For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God. Keep watch
over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.
Be shepherds of the church of God, which He bought with His own blood. I know
that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the
flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to
draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three
years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears (Ac 20:27-31).

"But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false
teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even
denying the sovereign Lord who bought thembringing swift destruction on
themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of
truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories
they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and
their destruction has not been sleeping (2 Pe 2:1-3).



175

As we have seen in this study of the Faith Movement, in providing a corrective, the Faith
Movement has stepped outside the bounds of biblical truth and ended up in heretical teachings.
In correcting one fault they have committed many faults. Truth has been distorted as they have
so emphasized certain truths that other corresponding truths have been either deemphasized or
completely overlooked or discarded.

Some truths may certainly be considered secondary or peripheral in that they do not have
salvific consequences. Others such as their view of the Atonement, the biblical concept of
sacrifice, the moral attributes of God, and the cross are such serious errors that they bring into
question the whole redemptive purpose of God. This is why such serious distortions must be
fought head on.

Balance

Heresy is not so much the denial of all truth as it is emphasis on one truth to the exclusion
or minimization of another substantial truth.

A. W. Tozer wrote about truth having "two wings."1 We continually see this in Scripture.
We find that "the narrow way that leads to life" (Mt 7:14), is not narrow-mindedness, but
the narrow way that is the midline between two extremes.

Tozer warned us long ago:

". . . that dreamy, sentimental faith which ignores the judgments of God against
us and listens to the affirmations of the soul is as deadly as cyanide. That faith
which passively accepts all the pleasant texts of the Scriptures while it overlooks
or rejects the stern warnings and commandments of those same Scriptures is not
the faith of which Christ and His apostles spoke.

Faith in faith is faith astray. To hope for heaven by means of such faith is to
drive in the dark across a deep chasm on a bridge that doesn't quite reach the
other side."2 (Emphasis added)

Tension between two corresponding truths, form the balance of truth. Thus in Scripture,
God's sovereignty is balanced by man's responsibility, God's keeping power by man's
perseverance, God's love by His wrath, His grace and mercy by His holiness and justice, faith by
works, heirship by servanthood, life in the Spirit by death to self, praise by prayer, etc.

The Faith Movement has approached biblical truth cafeteria style, selectively opting only
for certain truths. Thus they have relieved this biblical tension and ended up with theological
distortion. The result is egocentric anthropocentric theology rather than Christocentric
theology.




176

All-Consuming Goal

The danger for any of us is that we end up with a critical spirit rather than a discerning
mind and heart. We must ardently guard against becoming obsessed with denouncing deception
and hypocrisy. Our hope is not in the consummation of a perfect church, but for the Perfect
Coming of the Lord of lords and King of kings. Loving obedience to the Christ of Holy
Scripture must be our all-consuming passion!





























NOTES

1
A. W. Tozer, That Incredible Christian (Harrisburg: Christian Publications, Inc., 1964),
59-61.
2
A. W. Tozer, Of God and Men (Harrisburg: Christians Publications, Inc., 1960), 57.
3
Ibid., 5.

177

APPENDIX A

The following are examples of the abundance of the miraculous in Scripture outside the
portions of Scripture claimed by the cessationists. The miraculous events will be seen as they are
recorded in the various books of the Bible.

Genesis

The creation of the earth and the fall of man (ch. 1-3)
The rapture of Enoch (5:24)
The sons of God (angelic/demonic beings) married the daughters of men (6:2ff.)
The confusing of human language at the Tower of Babel (11:1ff.)
The supernatural call of Abram (12:1-3)
The plague on Pharaoh's house (12:17)
Abram's trance, the smoking firepot, and blazing torch (15:12-21)
The angel of the Lord appears to Hagar (16:7)
The Lord appears to Abram (17:1ff.)
The Lord and angels appear to Abram and eat a meal with him (18:1ff.)
The angels blind the men of Sodom (19:11)
The Lord destroys Sodom and Gomorrah (19:23ff.)
Lot's wife is turned into a pillar of salt (19:26)
God warns Abimelech in a dream not to touch Sarah (20:3ff.)
God supernaturally saves the life of Hagar and Ishmael (20:17ff.)
Sarah miraculously conceives Isaac (21:1ff.)
The angel of the Lord prevents Abraham from sacrificing Isaac (22:11)
Abraham's servant is supernaturally led to Rebekah (24:12ff.)
Rebekah supernaturally conceives twins (25:21)
The Lord speaks to Rebekah concerning the destiny of the twins in her womb (25:23ff.)
The Lord appears to Isaac (26:2)
The Lord appears to Isaac again (26:24)
The Lord appears to Jacob (28:12ff.)
The Lord speaks to Jacob, commanding him to return to Palestine (31:3)
The angels of God meet Jacob (32:1)
Jacob wrestles all night with the angel of the Lord (32:24ff.)
God appears to Jacob and blesses him (35:9)
Joseph's dreams (37:5ff.)
The Lord kills Er and Onan (38:7ff.)
Joseph interprets the dreams of the cupbearer and the baker (40:1ff.)
Joseph interprets Pharaoh's dream (41:1ff.)1

Judges

The angel of the Lord appears to all Israel (2:1-5)
The spirit of the Lord empowers Othniel to deliver Israel (3:9ff.)
Shamgar kills 600 Philistines with an oxgoad (3:31)

178

Deborah prophesies to Barak (4:4ff.)
The angel of the Lord appears to Gideon (6:11)
The miracle of Gideon's fleece (6:36)
The Lord sends divine panic against Midian so that Gideon can defeat them with only 300 men
(7:1ff.)
The Spirit of the Lord comes upon Jephthah to deliver Israel from the Ammonites (11:29ff.)
The angel of the Lord appears to Manoah and his wife (13:3ff.)
Samson's supernatural feats of strength (ch. 14-16)2

I Samuel

Hannah supernaturally conceives Samuel (1:19ff.)
The Lord appears to Samuel the first time (3:1ff.)
The Lord lets none of Samuel's words fall to the ground (3:19-21)
The destruction of the idol Dagon (5:1-5)
The Lord strikes the Philistines with tumors (5:6ff.)
The Lord kills some of the men of Bethshemesh (6:19)
Samuel's prophetic ministry to Saul (ch. 9-10)
Saul is chosen by lot to be king over Israel (10:20ff.)
The Spirit of the Lord empowers Saul to deliver Israel from the Ammonites (11:6ff.)
Samuel's prophetic ministry to David (16:1ff.)
The Spirit of the Lord comes upon David (16:13)
The Spirit of the Lord leaves Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord terrorizes him (16:14)
An evil spirit causes Saul to try to kill David (18:10-11)
An evil spirit causes Saul to attempt to kill David again (19:9-10)
Three times the Spirit of the Lord comes upon Saul's messengers and they prophesy (19:20ff.)
The Spirit of the Lord comes on Saul and he prophesies (19:22f.)
The Lord repeatedly gives supernatural guidance to David (23:3,10-12; 30:8)
Samuel appears from the dead to Saul (28:12ff.)3

II Samuel

The Lord gives supernatural guidance to David (2:1)
The Lord gives supernatural guidance to David again (5:19)
The Lord gives supernatural guidance to David a third time (5:23-24)
The Lord kills Uzzah (6:7)
Nathan prophesies to David (7:5ff.)
Nathan exposes David's sin (12:1ff.)
The Lord kills David's child (12:15ff.)
Nathan prophesies concerning Solomon (12:25)
The Lord explains the cause of the famine to David (21:1)
The Lord speaks to David through Gad and kills 70,000 Israelites (24:11)4




179

I Kings

The Lord appears to Solomon and grants him great wisdom (3:3ff.)
The glory of the Lord fills the temple (8:10ff.)
The Lord appears a second time to Solomon (9:2ff.)
The Lord tells Solomon that he will take the kingdom from him (11:11ff.)
The prophet Ahijah tells Jeraboam that the Lord has given him the tribes of Israel (11:29ff.)
The man of God prophesies the birth of Josiah, the Lord splits the altar at Bethel,
and the Lord withers Jeraboam's hand and then heals it (13:1ff.)
An old prophet prophesies the death of the "man of God," and the Lord kills the "man
of God" with a lion (13:20ff.)
The Lord prevents Jeroboam's wife from deceiving the prophet Ahijah, and he
prophesies judgment on Jeraboam's house (14:5)
Jehu prophesies judgment against Baasha (16:1ff.)5

II Kings

The Lord strikes Azariah with leprosy (15:5)
Isaiah prophesies to Hezekiah concerning Sennacherib (19:20ff.)
The angel of the Lord kills 185,000 Assyrians (19:35ff.)
Isaiah prophesies to Hezekiah that the Lord will add 15 years to his life (20:5ff.)
The Lord causes the sunlight to go back ten steps on the stairway of Ahaz (20:10ff.)
Isaiah prophesies judgment to Hezekiah (20:16ff.)
The Lord prophesies judgment on Judah through his prophets (21:10ff.)
The prophetess Huldah prophesies judgment on Judah but blessing on Josiah (22:14ff.)6

I Chronicles

The Spirit of God prompts Amasai to prophesy to David (12:18)
Satan incites David to take a census of Israel (21:1)
David sees the angel of the Lord (21:16)
Araunah sees the same angel (21:20)
The Lord sends fire from heaven to David's altar (21:26)7

II Chronicles

Fire comes down from heaven and consumes Solomon's offerings (7:1)
Shemaiah prophesies to King Rehoboam not to fight against Israel (11:2)
Shemaiah prophesies against Rehoboam (12:5)
Shemaiah prophesies again to Rehoboam that God will have a measure of mercy on him (12:7)
God supernaturally delivers Judah (13:15ff.)
The Lord kills Jeroboam (13:20)
The Lord supernaturally delivers Judah from the Ethiopians (14:12ff.)
Azariah prophesies to King Asa (15:1ff.)
Hanani, the seer, prophesies judgment on King Asa (16:7ff.)

180

A man of God prophesies to Amaziah not to take the army of Israel into battle with him
(25:7ff.)
A prophet prophesies judgment on Amaziah for his idolatry (25:15ff.)
Oded prophesies judgment against the Israelite army if they refuse to release their
captives from Judah (28:9ff.)8

Ezra
Haggai and Zechariah prophesy to the Jews who are in Judah (5:1)

Job

Supernatural satanic persecution of Job by God's permission (ch. 1,2)
An angelic messenger comes to Job and tells him that God is sending His fire ("the fire
of God"probably lightning) upon Job's sheep and servants as a test of his faith (1:16)
God's conversation with Job and the restoration of Job's fortune (ch. 38-42)9

Daniel

God supernaturally reveals Nebuchadnezzar's dream and its interpretation to Daniel (2:1ff.)
Daniel's three friends walk in the fiery furnace with the preincarnate Christ and are
preserved (3:1ff.)
Daniel interprets a second dream of Nebuchadnezzar (4:19-27)
God afflicts Nebuchadnezzar with insanity (4:28ff.)
A hand supernaturally appears and writes Belshazzar's judgment on the wall (5:5ff.)
Daniel interprets the writing of judgment on the wall (5:17ff.)
Daniel is supernaturally preserved in the lion's den (6:1ff.)
Supernatural visions of the last days and angelic visitations are given to Daniel (ch. 7-12)10

These accounts show that there is no way that the numerous instances of supernatural
happenings in the Old Testament can be crammed into two neat time periods (Moses and Joshua
and Elijah and Elisha periods). We see here that miracles were especially numerous during the
period recorded in the book of Genesis.














181

NOTES

1
Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, 255-256.
2
Ibid.
3
Ibid., 256-257.
4
Ibid., 258.
5
Ibid. 259.
6
Ibid. 259-260.
7
Ibid. 260.
8
Ibid. 260-261.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid.
























182

APPENDIX B

A Phrygian physician named Alexander was "not without a share of the apostolic grace"
[charisma].1 Papias (A.D. 60-130), bishop of Heirapolis in Phrygia, is said to have been told by
the daughters of Philip of the resuscitation of a man from the dead.2

Justin Martyr (A.D. 100-165), claimed that "it is possible now to see among us men and
women who possess gifts of the Spirit of God."3 In his "A Dialogue with Trypho" he claimed
that the gift of prophecy existed among the Christians. He also felt that the gifts of the Spirit
which used to be manifested by the Jewish prophets, were now the possession of the Church.
This was demonstrated by the cessation of Jewish prophets and the appearance of gifts among
Christians.4 Origen refers to exorcisms, healings and predictions (prophecy). He claims that,
while miracles are less frequent in his day (the third century) they still remain "in them that live
according to the Logos."5

Irenaeus (A.D. 130-200) states that "many" in his time were heard "speaking through the
Spirit in all kinds of tongues."6 In all probability he was referring to foreign languages, since the
early church fathers usually construed the tongues of 1 Corinthians in terms of languages of Acts
2, which were foreign languages. He also says, "Others have foreknowledge of things to come:
they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions. Others still, heal the sick by laying their hands
upon them, and they are made whole."7 Hermas as well refers to prophets and visions,
revelations and other prophetic utterances.8

Tertullian (A.D. 160-220), said: "We acknowledge spiritual gifts." He then went on to list
prophecy, revelation, and visions as examples, and concluded that "the apostle most assuredly
foretold that there were to be 'spiritual gifts' in the Church."9 Although he witnessed extra-
ordinary gifts of the Spirit, their manifestation was waning.

Tertullian and others attributed this decrease to the increasing formalism of the church.
As a strong defender of orthodox Christianity, he vigorously maintained that spiritual gifts
constituted the full Christian experience and challenged his skeptical contemporaries by citing
the apostle Paul.10

Unfortunately, Tertullian became a part of the Montanist cause, a reform movement
which protested against the religious establishment urging a return to apostolic purity with a
revival of all the gifts of the Spirit. Zealous missionary pioneers and martyrs sprang forth from
this movement. But their zeal and reckless enthusiasm antagonized the church leaders and many
of them fell into fanaticism and heresy.

The Church thus became wary of supernatural manifestations of the Spirit. It was the
typical over reaction against fanaticism which served to tighten further the ecclesiastical control
against which the Montanists were protesting.11

Many church leaders, however, continued to advocate the whole range of spiritual gifts.
Presbyter Novation (A.D. 257), wrote concerning the Holy Spirit:

183

"This is He who places prophets in the Church, instructs teachers, directs tongues,
gives powers and healings, does wonderful works, offers discrimination of
spirits, affords powers of government, suggests counsels, and orders and arranges
whatever gifts there are of charismata, and thus the Lord's church everywhere,
and in all, perfected and completed."12

He was a witness that they were operative in the Church in his time.

A century later Bishop Hilary (A.D. 367), gave a list of all the gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:4-
10 and witnessed that these were the effects of the Holy Spirit in the Christian.13

Most of Chrysostom's writing were toward the end of the fourth century. His attitude
toward the charismata (gifts) is not easy to ascertain. In his Homily XXXII he speaks of
prophecy as though it only occurred in the past. But later he suggests that the gifts in general
have continued. In Homily XIV he maintains that raising the dead, exorcising, and performing
miracles still existed in the Church, and adds: "We work signs by the power of the Spirit."14

Augustine (A.D. 354-430), influential theologian and Bishop of Hippo, originally
disputed the existence of the gifts of the Spirit in his day, as did the Western Church in general,
teaching that the gifts were given for the founding of the church and then withdrawn because
they were no longer necessary. On the whole Augustine really did not have much to say about
the gifts. But in his volume 2 of The City of God he recounts his experience as a witness to a
number of miraculous manifestations like exorcism and healing.15

In the sixth century, Pope Gregory wrote his "dialogues." In it he endeavors to show the
Italians what great saints they have produced. His evidence is primarily a case history of the
miracles performed by these saints.16

Middle Ages

Important Medieval writers became rare until Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century.
He wrote about the gifts of the Spirit in Summa Theologica. In volume 24 he contrasts them with
love in the same way as Paul does in 1 Corinthians 13. Thomas suggests that all the gifts fall into
three general categories: gifts of knowledge, gifts of demonstration, and gifts of expression. As
regards demonstration, he argued that in matters of divine revelation, which is above human
reasoning, ordinary proof will not do. Confirmation has to be provided in ways that are proper to
divine power.

Aquinas passed no judgment on the continuation or cessation of individual gifts, nor did
he see any distinction between natural and supernatural gifts. All the gifts were seen as special
graces, whether knowledge, demonstration or expression. All relate to God's supernatural
revelation and are congruent with it.17




184

There is no question that some spiritual gifts (especially the sign gifts) became rare
during the time of the Middle Ages. They waned, however, not because they were no longer
needed but because the Church was departing from New Testament principles and
practices.

Political and social developments highly influenced the Church's attitude toward spiritual
gifts. After the Western part of the Roman Empire fell in the fifth century, Christian thought and
life divided and separated geographically. The Roman or Latin tradition developed a different
attitude toward spiritual gifts and worship in general than that of the Greek or Orthodox tradition.
In the West, the church was pressured to exercise many functions of secular authority and
thus became very practical in orientation. This led to an authoritative pattern of leadership in
the Church which so emphasized unity of the body that there was little, if any, room for
diversity.

Authority, not individual religious expression, was the emphasis. Thus there was little
place for congregational exercise of spiritual gifts in the life of the Church.18

Things were quite different in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire which retained a
strong central government at Constantinople until 1451. This provided a stable society in which
the Church could develop. Therefore it was not pressured to take over the secular functions
assumed by the Church in the West.

The Eastern Orthodox Church continued to be more mystical and other worldly
encouraging introspection, individuality, and religious experiences. It encouraged diversity in
which the gifts of the Spirit could be developed and used in freedom. All the spiritual gifts, with
the possible exception of tongues, have always been regarded as normative by virtually all of the
Eastern Orthodox Church.19

The Reformation

With the Reformation period came an extraordinary outburst of prophecy in which
special revelations of the Spirit were again claimed. The problem of spiritual gifts was posed in
an acute form for the reformers. The Zwickau band under the leadership of Storch brought
confusion to Wittenberg with the new prophesying until Luther chased them away with the Word
and Spirit.20

A visionary element marked the spiritual leaders of the Peasants' War and fanatics like
Matthys and John of Leyden were driven by strange apocalyptic fantasies. There were wild
prophesyings claimed.

One example is a girl at St. Gall in Switzerland who vacillated between claiming to be
Christ and antichrist. There were also the so-called "dreamers" who rearranged their marriages
according to a revelation of their "proper heavenly pattern."



185

The issue here, as with the heretical Montanists earlier, is the claim that they possessed
prophecy, which to them, meant that the Spirit was teaching new truth and conduct in accordance
with the advance knowledge that He also gives of future events.21

In answering these various types of "heavenly prophets," the reformers, instead of
pointing out that their predictions were proven false by events, maintained that the Spirit of God
does not add to or replace the Word.

Prophecy, they taught, could not be understood as an extension of revelation. The written
Word is the only authentic and irreplaceable basis or criterion of true proclamation. Thus there
can be no antithesis between the spoken and the written word, between the Spirit and Christ.
Zwingli, Bullinger, Calvin, Whitaker and Luther constantly emphasized the fact that the
Word and the Spirit belong inseparably together. The gifts of the Spirit are thus properly
exercised when they serve the ministry of the Word.22

Luther, who had earlier denied the gift of healing for his time, lived to see his friend
Melanchton miraculously brought from the point of death through his own bold prayers. Luther
demanded Melanchthon to get well and God honored his fervent faith. Toward the end of his life
when he was asked what to do for a man who was mentally ill, Luther gave instructions for a
healing service based on James 5:13-16. He wrote: "This is what we do, and what we have been
accustomed to do, for a cabinet maker here was similarly afflicted with madness and we cured
him by prayer in Christ's name."23

The reformers recognized prophecy as a legitimate gift. They did not relegate it to the
apostolic age. John Knox announced doom in the tradition of the Old Testament prophets on
many occasions, although he made no claim to new and special revelation. Zwingli had at
least a premonition of the Cappel disaster of 1531. There was also a widespread belief among the
reformers that they were living in the last times with Rome on the seven hills and the Turkish
antichrist advancing from the east.24

Calvin never distinguished between permanent and temporary gifts. He saw a distinction
only as it relates to offices. Those necessary for the government of the Church are perpetual
while those applied at the beginning for its foundation are temporary. He thus saw pastors and
elders now playing a leading role rather than apostles and prophets.

While Calvin generally downplayed the need for the gifts since the apostolic era, he
seemed open to the idea that they could have surfaced later on. In fact, he once included Luther
among modern "apostles."25 The primary focus for Calvin, however, was the preaching of the
Word.

The Post-Reformation Age

John Wesley, the father of Methodism and the subsequent holiness movements, observed
a correlation between the loss of gifts and the general state of the Church:


186

"The causes of their decline has been vulgarly supposed because there is no more
need for them, because all the world becomes Christian. . . . The real cause was:
the love of many, almost all Christians so-called, was waxed cold . . . this was
the real cause why the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit were no longer to be
found in the Christian church: because the Christians were turned heathen again
and had only a dead form left."26

It was Wesley's belief that though orthodoxy remained, it did so with diminished
expectations. The church had accommodated itself to secularism and unbelief reigned.

Throughout church history, various groups came into being which were characterized by
their open practice of spiritual gifts. Many of these were considered fanatical and even heretical
by "main-stream" Christians of their day.

































187

NOTES

1
George Mallone. Those Controversial Gifts (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1983).
23.
2
Ibid.
3
Ibid.
4
Geoffrey W. Bromiley, "The Charismata in Christian History," Theology, News And
Notes (Fuller Theological Seminary. March, 1974), 9.
5
Ibid.
6
Ibid.
7
"Spiritual Gifts Today," 166.
8
T. B. Falls, The Fathers of the Church, Vol. VI. 278.
9
"A Treatise on the Soul" (Part I.IX) The Arte-Nicene Fathers. Vol. 3 (Trans. by
A. Roberts and J. Donalson), 188.
10
Ibid., 165.
11
Ibid.
12
Ibid.
13
"The Trinity," II. XXIV, The Fathers of the Church (ed. R. J. Defarrari), 2.
14
"Homilies," A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Church, Vol. XII
(ed. by Philip Schaff), 79, 186.
15
St. Augustine, City of God. Vol. 2, Book 22, The Ancient And Modern Library of
Theological Liturature (Trans. by John Wesley), 337 ff.
16
Paul Blanckenberg Watney. Ministry Gifts: God's Provision For Effective Mission
(Doctor of Missiology Dissertation. Fuller Theological Seminary, 1979).
17
Bromiley, 10.
18
"Spiritual Gifts Today," 166.


188

19
Ibid.
20
Bromiley, The Charismata in Christian History, 10.
21
Ibid.
22
Ibid.
23
John Wimber, "Signs and Wonders Today" Christian Life (October, 1982), 23.
24
Ibid., 25.
25
Mallone, Those Controversial Gifts, 25.
26
The Journal of John Wesley 3.490 quoted in A. Skevington Wood, "John Wesley,
Theologian of the Spirit," Theological Renewal (June-July, 1977), 31 cited in George Mallone,
Those Controversial Gifts, 24.




























189

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arndt and Gingrich. Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Christian Literature. Revised
Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1979.
Archer, Gleason L., Jr. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
Company. 1982.
St. Augustine. The City of God. Vol. 2, Book 22. The Ancient and Modern Library of
Theological Literature. Trans. John Wesley.
Avanzini, John with Cerullo, Morris. "The Endtime Manifestation of the Sons of God" (San
Diego; Morris Cerullo World Evangelism, n. d.), audiotape 1 side 2).
Barron, Bruce. The Health and Wealth Gospel. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1987.
Barth, Karl. The Resurrection of the Dead. London: E. T. 1933.
Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. The Cost of Discipleship. New York: Mcmillan Publications. 1966.
Bowman, Robert M., Jr. "Ye Are Gods? Orthodox and Heretical Perspectives on the Deification
of Man," Christian Research Journal 9. 1987.
__________. "Positive Confession and the 'Faith' Teaching." Christian Research Journal
9. November 17, 1987.
__________. "Positive Confession and the 'Faith' Teaching." Christian Research Journal 9.
November 17, 1987.
Bromiley, Geoffrey. "The Charismata in Christian History." Theology, News And Notes. Fuller
Theological Seminary, March, 1974.
__________. "Anthropomorphism," The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Vol. One,
A-D. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1979.
__________. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Vol. Two. E-J. Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1982.
__________. Translator. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company/Paternoster Press. 1985.
Brown, Colin. General Editor. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company. 1975.
Bruce, Alexander. The Humiliation of Christ. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans
Publications. 1955.
Bruce, F. F. I and II Corinthians. London, Oliphants. 1971.
__________. The New Century Bible Commentary. London: Oliphants. 1979.
Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians.
Translated by J. Pringle. 1551. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company. 1957.
Carson, Donald. The Expositor's Bible Commentary. Vol. 8. Zondervan. 1984.
Capps, Charles. God's Creative Power. Tulsa, OK: Harrison House. 1976.
Cerullo, Morris. "Endtime Manifestation of the Sons of God." San Diego: Morris Cerullo World
Evangelism. n. d. Audiotape 1, sides 1 & 2.
__________. The Miracle Book. San Diego, CA: Cerullo Word Evangelism, Inc. 1984.
Copeland, Gloria. God's Will Is Prosperity. Tulsa, OK: Harrison House. 1978.
Copeland, Kenneth. The Laws of Prosperity. Fort Worth, TX: February. 1986.
__________. "The Force of Love." Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries. 1987.


190

__________. "Authority of the Believer." IV. Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries.
1987.
__________. "Our Covenant with God." Fort Worth, TX: KCP Publications. 1987.
__________. "Following the Faith of Abraham" I. Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries. 1989. Tape #01-3001, side 1.
__________. "Image of God in You." III. Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries. 1989.
__________. "Believer's Voice of Victory" program. April 21, 1991.
__________. "The Price of it All, Believer's Voice of Victory 19." 9. September 1991.
__________. Reference Edition of the Holy Bible. Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries. 1991.
__________. Spirit, Soul & Body. Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1985.
__________. "Take Time to Pray, Believer's Voice Victory." 14, 2. February 1987.
__________. The Troublemaker. Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Publishing. n.d.
__________. "Walking in the Realm of the Miraculous" Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland
Ministries. 1979.
__________. "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne?" Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth
Copeland Ministries, 1990. Audiotape #02-0017, side 2.
Crouch, Paul. "Praise the Lord." Program on TBN. July 7, 1986.
Crouch, Jan. "Praise the Lord." Program on TBN. 5 February 1986.
__________. "Praise the Lord." Program on TBN. 31 July 1992.
Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House.
1993.
Defarrari, R. J. "The Trinity." II, XXIV. The Fathers of the Church.
Eddy, Mary Baker. Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures. Boston: First Church of
Christ Scientist. 1971.
Edwards, Jonathan. The Works of Jonathan Edwards. Vol. 2. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth.
1974.
Enroth, Ronald. Evangelizing the Cults. Ann Arbor: Servant Publications. 1973.
__________. What is a Cult? A Guide to Cults and New Religions. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 1983.
__________ and Melton, Gordon J. Why Cults Succeed Where the Church Fails. Elgin,
IL: Brethren Press. 1985.
Farah, Charles. From the Pinnacle of the Temple. Plainfield, NJ: Logos. 1978.
Fee, Gordon D. The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospels. Costa Mesa, CA: The Word for
Today. 1979.
__________. The First Epistle To The Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the
New Testament. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 1987.
Fee, Gordon D. & Stuart, Douglas. How to Read The Bible For All Its Worth. Grand Rapids:
Zondervan Publishing House. 1982.
Forsyth, P. T. The Justification of God. London: Duckworth. 1916.
__________. The Cruciality of the Cross. London: Hodder & Stoughton. 1906.
__________. The Work of Christ. London: Hodder & Stoughton. 1918.
Hagin, Kenneth. "Christ our Substitute." The Word of Faith. Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin
Ministries. March, 1975.
__________. Exceedingly Growing Faith. Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries. 1988.

191

__________. Must Christians Suffer? Tulsa, OK: Rhema Bible Church, AKA Kenneth Hagin
Ministries Inc., 1983.
__________. Faith Bible Study Course. Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1976.
__________. How To Write Your Own Ticket With God. Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries.
1979.
__________. The Name of Jesus. Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries. 1981.
__________. Must Christians Suffer? Tulsa, OK: Rhema Bible Church, AKA Kenneth Hagin
Ministries Inc. 1983.
__________. "Incarnation," Word of Faith. Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries. December,
1978.
__________. "The Name of Jesus: The More Excellent Name." The Word of Faith. April,
1976.
__________. Plead Your Case. Tulsa, OK: Faith Library. 1979.
__________. Redeemed From Poverty, Sickness, and Death. Rhema Bible Class, Tulsa, OK:
AKA Kenneth Hagin Ministries. 19.
__________. "The Resurrection! What it Gives Us . . ." The Word of Faith. Tulsa, OK: AKA
Kenneth Hagin Ministries. April, 1977.
__________. "Spirit, Soul, & Body; Part Three: God Heals through the Spirit of Man." Word of
Faith. Tulsa, OK: AKA Kenneth Hagin Ministries. December, 1977.
__________. The God Kind of Life. Tulsa, OK: Faith Library, 1973.
__________. Man of Three Dimensions. Tulsa, OK: Faith Library, 1973.
__________. Must Christian Suffer? Tulsa, OK: Rhema Bible Church, AKA Hagin, Kenneth
Hagin Ministries Inc. 1983.
__________. What To Do When Faith Seems Weak. Tulsa, OK: Rhema Bible Church, AKA
Kenneth Hagin Ministries, Inc. 1979.
__________. "Zoe: The God-Kind of Life." Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries, Inc., 1989.
Hagin, Kenneth, Jr. "Trend Toward the Faith Movement." Charisma. August, 1985.
Hanegraaff, Hank. Christianity in Crisis. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers. 1993.
Hanlon, A. P. "Ecstasies." Encyclopedia Dictionary of Religion. Washington, D.C.: Corpus
Publications. 1980.
Harrah, Charles. From the Pinnacle of the Temple. Bridge Logos, 1979.
Hinn, Benny & Crouch, Jan. "Praise the Lord." Radio Program on TBN. October 3, 1991.
Benny Hinn, Good Morning, Holy Spirit. 7th Edition. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.
1990.
__________. "Our Position 'In Christ'," Part 1. Orlando, FL; Orlando Christian Center. 1991.
Videotape #TV.
__________. "Our Position in Christ. #2The Word Made Flesh." Orlando: Orlando Christian
Center. 1991. Videotape #255.
__________. "Praise-a-Thon." program on TBN. November 6, 19
__________. "Benny Hinn." Program on TBN. October 3, 1991.
__________. "Praise the Lord." Program on TBN. October 23, 1992.
Hitt, Russel. Eternity. October, 1981.
Hollinger, Dennis. "Enjoying God Forever: An Historical/Sociological Profile of the Health and
Wealth Gospel." Trinity Journal. 9:2. Fall 1988.
Horton, Michael. Editor. The Agony of Deceit. Chicago: Moody Press. 1990.

192

Houseworthy, Ruth Kenyon. Taped Interview. Lynwood, Wash: Feb. 19, 1982.
Hummel, Charles E. Healing. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1982.
James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience. New York: The New American
Library, Inc., 1958.
Jones, Bryn. According To Your Faith. School of the Word Study Series. Harvestime,
1985.
Kenyon, E. W. Identification: A Romance in Redemption. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publsihing
Society. 1968.
__________. Jesus the Healer. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society. 1940.
__________. The Bible in the Light of Our Redemption. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing
Society. 1969.
__________. The Two Kinds o Faith. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society. 1969.
__________. Two Kinds of Knowledge. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society. n.d.
__________. Two Kinds of Life. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society. 1971.
__________. Two Kinds of Righteousness. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society. 1965.
__________. The Hidden Man. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society. 1970.
__________. Jesus the Healer. Seattle: Kenyon's Publishing Society. 1968.
__________. What Happened from the Cross to the Throne. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel
Publishing Society, 1969.
__________. The Wonderful Name of Jesus. Seattle: Kenyon's Gospel Publishing Society.
1927.
King, Paul. "FAITH OF GOD." Unpublished Paper. 1998.
__________. "FAITH AND REVELATION AND SENSE KNOWLEDGE." Unpublished
Paper. 1998.
LaHaye, How To Study The Bible For Yourself. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers. 1976.
Larson, David L. "The Gospel of Greed Versus the Gospel of Grace." Trinity Journal. 9:2. Fall
1988.
Lewis, Gordon R. Confronting the Cults. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House. 1975.
Lewis, Gordon R. & Duddy, Neil. "Who Is This 'Other Jesus'?" Moody Monthly. April, 1984.
Logos Magazine. Assemblies of God Publication. July-August, 1981.
Magliato, Joe. The Wall Street Gospel. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers. 1981.
Mallone, Those Controversial Gifts. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. 1983.
McConnell, D. R. A Different Gospel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers. 1988.
__________. A Different Gospel: The Cultic Nature of the Modern Faith Movement. A
manuscript presented to Hendrickson for Publication in 1988.
McGrath, Alister E. The Christian Theology Reader. London: Blackwell Publishers, 1995.
__________. The Enigma of the Cross. London: Hodder & Stoughton. 1987.
McKay, W. A. Outpourings of the Spirit. Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication and
Sabbath-School Work. 1890.
MacLaine, Shirley. Dancing in the Night. New York: Bantam Books. 1985.
__________. Out on a Limb. New York: Bantam Books. 1983.
Magliato, John. The Wall Street Gospel. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers. 1981.
Miller, Elliot. Healing: Does God Always Heal? (San Juan Capistrano, CA: Christian Research
Institute, 1979).
The NIV Study Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible Publishers,

193

Olsen, George. The Charismatic Church. Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, n.d.
Onken, Brian A. "Misunderstanding of Faith' and "The Atonement of Christ and the 'Faith'
Message," Forward 5. 1982. and Forward 7. 1984.
__________. "The Atonement of Christ and the Faith Movement, Forward. 7, I 1984.
Osteen, John. How To Release The Power Of God. John Osteen Publications, 1978.
Packer, J. I. Knowing God. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1973.
Parker, Larry, and Don Tanner. We Let Our Son Die (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers,
1980).
Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves To Death. New York: Penguin Books. 1985.
Price, Frederick. Identification #3. Inglewood, CA: Ever Increasing Faith Ministries. 1980.
Tape #FP 545, side 1.
__________. How Faith Works. Tulsa, OK: Harrison House. 1976.
__________. Faith, Foolishness, or Presumption? Tulsa OK: Harrison House. 1979.
__________. Is Healing For All? Tulsa, OK: Harrison House. 1976.
__________. Prosperity on God's Terms. Tulsa, OK: Harrison House. 1990.
Quasten, Johannes. Patrology (Utrecht-Antwerp: Spectrum Publishers, 1950.
Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House. 1978.
Roberts, A. and Donaldson, J. "A Treatise on the Soul." Part I.IX. The Arte-Nicene Fathers.
Vol. 3.
Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures in the New Testament. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1930.
Robertson, A. T. and Davis, Hersey W. A New Short Grammar of the Greek Testament. 10th
Revision. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House. 1979.
Robinson, Stephen E. Are Mormons Christians? Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1991.
Savelle, Jerry. "Graming Your World With The Word of God," Part 2 Fort Worth: Jerry
Savelle Evangelistic Association, Inc., n.d.
Schaff, Philip. "Homilies." A Select Library of Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers of the Church.
Vol. XII.
__________. The Creeds of Christendom. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House. 1985.
Sire, James W. Scripture Twisting. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1980.
Sproul, R. C. Knowing Scripture. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1977.
Tilton, Robert. "Success-N-Life." Television Program. 27 December, 1990.
Tozer, A. W. Man: The Dwelling Place of God. Camp Hill, PA: Christian Publications. 1966.
__________. I Talk Back to the Devil. Harrisburg: Christian Publications, Inc. 1972.
__________. That Incredible Christian. Harrisburg: Christian Publications, Inc. 1964.
__________. The Knowledge of the Holy. Harrisburg: Christian Publications. 1961.
__________. Of God and Men. Harrisburg: Christians Publications, Inc. 1960.
__________. That Incredible Christian. Harrisburg: Christian Publications, Inc. 1964.
__________. "Worship: The Missing Jewel in the Evangelical Church." Harrisburg: Christian
Publications, Inc., n. d.
Wagner, C. Peter. "The Power in the Early Church." Christian Life. April, 1982.
Watney, Paul Blanckenberg. Ministry Gifts: God's Provision For Effective Mission. Doctor of
Missiology Dissertation. Fuller Theological Seminary, 1979.
White, John. When the Spirit Comes With Power. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988.
Wiersbe, Warren. Why Us? Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Company 1984.


194

Wimber, John. "Signs and Wonders Today." Christian Life. October, 1982.
__________. Power Healing. San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers. 1987.
Wood, Skevington A. "John Wesley, Theologian of the Spirit." Theological Renewal. No. 6.
June-July, 1977.