THE PROSPERITY MOVEMENT:

Wounded Charismatics

by

Roger L. Smalling, D.Min

Table of Contents

Chapter One:  The “God” In the Mirror…6

Chapter Two: Faith or Fiction  …14

Chapter Three: Sovereignty and Suffering  …20

Chapter Four: Origins of Word of Faith …34

Chapter Five:  Positive Confession  …40

Chapter Six: Wounded Faith …48

Chapter Seven: Even As Thy Soul Prospereth  …54

Chapter Eight: As Rich As Abraham  …64

Chapter Nine: Sufficiency, Yes!  …71

Chapter Ten: The Jesus Died Spiritually Heresy  …79

Chapter Eleven: Job And The Kingdom  …89

Chapter Twelve: The Psychology Behind The Word Movement  …95

Chapter Thirteen: Denying the Symptoms: Is it valid? …101

Chapter Fourteen: Did Jesus Heal Them All?  …111

Chapter Fifteen: How To Grow In Faith  …118

Appendix A: Comparative Chart, Word of Faith vs Bible  …124

Appendix B: On “Divine Nature” 2Pe.1:3-4  …126

Appendix C:150 Verses That Word-Faith Cultists Don’t Like To Hear...127

Bibliography: …137
Preface

Jason drove away from the Bible school in despair. He had invested his life, money and faith in the teachings of the school.

He had watched a fellow student die the week before from dysentery, an easily curable disease.­The unfortunate student, motivated by the teachings of the Word of Faith school, had not resorted to medical treatment.

Jason still believed in God. He simply did not want to pray to him. In Jason’s mind, he was not abandoning God, for God had abandoned him. His Bible lay closed in a corner of the car as he headed home to attend a state university. He had decided on a career that did not include gospel ministry.

I met Jason at the university. He was a fellow student in an educational psychology course. We got acquainted through a mutual interest in good Mexican food.

During lunch one day, I asked Jason if he was a Christian. He replied yes, though he had not read the Bible in three years nor attended church and had no plans for doing so. He then related the above story.

Jason did not know I had just finished writing the manuscript for this book. I gave him a copy and it changed his life.

Today Jason is a public school teacher and a member of a sound evangelical church. God had not abandoned him. He realizes now the true God had delivered him from the false one, taught at the Word of Faith school.

The last time I saw Jason, he told me a really funny joke and was laughing. I had not seem him laugh much before.

If you are looking for ammunition against the Charismatic movement, put this book down. It is not for you. Likewise if you are looking to support the view that spiritual gifts and miracles no longer exist.

I am not a cessationist, (one who believes gifts and miracles of the Spirit ceased after the Apostolic age.) I believe New Testament spiritual gifts exist today, though not necessarily for the same purposes nor in the same way as sometimes taught in Charismatic circles.

This is vital to clarify, because a common defense by the prosperity teachers against critics, is that we are “against the Holy Spirit” or “against spiritual gifts.” I am against none of these. I am against false gods, false christs and false prophets.

The Charismatic movement initially had commendable aspects. Asking God for fresh empowering of the Holy Spirit and earnestly desiring spiritual gifts to edify the church, is laudable. Scripture, in fact, commands it.

The movement tended to be a well-deserved rebuke to older and colder denominations. It was a fresh reminder of my own duty as a minister to pray for the sick...with occasional dramatic results.

A great reverence for the Word of God also characterized much of the movement. While some Charismatics mistakenly thought of the Bible as a magic wand to get what they want, some traditional denominations did not seem to think about the Bible at all.

Fresh enthusiasm in worship is another praiseworthy by-product of the Charismatic movement. Personally, I was getting tired of “climbing Jacob’s ladder.” Many fine worship songs in traditional churches today were born out of the movement.

What I do NOT appreciate is the manner in which large sectors of the Charismatic movement have been hijacked by a bizarre gnostic cult, known variously as The Prosperity Movement, Word of Faith or Faith Movement.

I appreciate even less the psychological and spiritual damage done to many former adherents of the movement who have crashed into the wall of reality. Perhaps these are the lucky ones. Thousands of others are still unaware they may be worshiping a false god and a false christ through revelations of false prophets.

This book is not intended as ammunition, but as a tool of mercy. I want it to help those whose faith has been injured by the Faith Movement and deliverance to those still involved, before they too crash into the wall of reality.
About The Author

Dr. Roger Smalling and his wife Dianne are missionaries to Latin America with the Presbyterian Church In America, a theologically conservative branch of the Reformed movement. He is director of “Visión R.E.A.L”, (Reformación En América Latina), dedicated to training Latin American Christians in principles of biblical leadership and sound theology.

He is author of a popular book in Spanish, Si, Jesús, on the subject of God’s grace. He is also a professor with Miami International Seminary, which shares his vision for a Latin America reformation.

The Smallings travel extensively throughout Latin America, holding seminars and conferences in churches of various denominations.

Study guides, essays and courses written by the Smallings, are available on their website in both Spanish and English at:

www.Smallings.com.

CHAPTER ONE

The “God” In The Mirror

Pagan religions have a typical way of reconciling God and man. They split the difference by reducing God to more like a human and exalting man to the status of a god. Mythology, whether ancient or modern, invariably diminishes God to less than what he is, and exalts man to more than what he is.

To the Greeks and Romans, Zeus was king of the gods. He was similar to a very big man, powerful, but neither infinite nor omniscient. He could be fooled. These gods displayed all the foibles of human nature... jealousy, greed and fighting amongst themselves.

In typical pagan mythology, some gods were previously humans, ultimately deified by gaining the favor of a god, or by drinking the divine elixir, ambrosia. Some humans were exalted after death to became stellar constellations.

The Apostle Paul referred to this reduction-exaltation process in Romans 1:22-23:

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools (23) and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Christian revelation, in contrast, brings man and God together in a relationship, while leaving both intact. The meeting point between God and man in Christianity is a mutual righteousness... the righteousness of Christ, credited to the believer’s account through faith in Jesus (Romans 3&4). No change in quality of existence or essence of being takes place in either God or man.

In the gospel, God remains the sovereign, infinite, all powerful being the Scriptures portray Him to be. Man remains a dependant created being.

Kenneth Copeland describes God as:

A being that stands somewhere around 6’ 2”, 6’ 3” that weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple of hundred pounds or a little better, has a hand span of 9 inches across [1]

Copeland exceeds the ancient Greeks in bringing man and God together. Referring to the creation of man, Copeland adds,

God and Adam looked exactly alike. [2]

Even Zeus was not exactly like a man.

Does God have a body?

Sometimes children, or new converts, have a humanistic view of God. They may picture him as an enormous heavenly grandfather sitting on a throne. While such mental imagery is inaccurate, it is not dangerous as long as a Christian eventually grows out of it.

In theology, the notion that God has a body is called “anthropomorphism,” from two Greek words: anthropos= man, and morphos= form. Varieties of anthropomorphism range from the Mormon idea of a physical body, to the more benign view that God has a spiritual body shaped like a human.

All Word of Faith teachers hold to some form of anthropomorphism,  though they differ among themselves. Hinn, for example, does not endorse Copeland’s views, although his own thinking is strongly anthropomorphic.

...Do you know that the Holy Spirit has a soul and a body separate from that of Jesus and the Father? ......God the Father is a separate individual from the Son and the Holy Ghost, who is a triune being who walks in a spirit body and He has hair...has eyes...has a mouth...has hands" [3]

Though Hinn’s concept of a Trinity with spirit-bodies falls short of biblical orthodoxy, at least he does not endorse Copeland’s extreme anthropomorphism.

The danger in anthropomorphism, is that it leads to a denial of the three central attributes of God: All mighty (omnipotent), all knowing (omniscient) and infinite (omnipresent.) Scholars call these three qualities, “incommunicable attributes,” because we finite creatures do not share them in common with God.

Whatever the nature of a body, whether physical or spiritual, it cannot possess any of these three qualities. A body, by definition, is limited. If God has a body, he cannot be infinite. If not infinite, then not omnipresent, etc.

If God has a body, even a very large spiritual one, then compared with infinity, he must be infinitely small also. I have never met an anthropomorphist willing to say God is infinitely small. Instead, the contradiction is ignored.

Little gods

While reducing God to a big human is theological disaster, equally serious is exalting man to a little god. [4]

Earl Paulk says,

Adam and Eve were placed in the world as the seed and expression of God. Just as dogs have puppies and cats have kittens, so God has little gods; … Until we comprehend that we are little gods, we cannot manifest the kingdom of God [5]

So, in Word of Faith thinking, created in the image of God implies being a duplicate of God.

Do these teachers also confuse the difference between a mirror and a man? When I shave in the morning am I looking in the mirror at flesh and shaving cream? Not really. I’m looking at polished glass. It reflects what I am but does not bleed when I cut my cheek.

The notion of equality with God did not originate with Copeland or Paulk. Their mentor, Kenneth Hagin, taught,

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! [6]

Here, Hagin makes no effort to define God. It’s unnecessary. If Adam stood in God’s presence on equal terms, with no sense of inferiority, then this alone reveals Hagin’s concept of God’s essence and Being.

The Bible, of course, teaches nothing of the kind. In Genesis we see God walking in the garden and communing with Adam. Is this sufficient to suggest Adam and God were equals? Hardly! If Adam were an equal, why did he try to hide from God when he sinned? He could have created his own universe and escaped.

Back to the garden

Let's go back to the Garden of Eden and see where the truth lies.

Genesis never deifies Adam. How can we have something restored which never existed in the first place? If Adam had deity by any definition, why would Satan bother to offer to make Adam and Eve, "as gods"? Eve would have replied, "No thanks, we already have some.”

Yes, there is a promise in the Bible that we can become gods. But notice who made the promise. SATAN! And he is still making the same vain promise today. But the Lord God says,

Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me. Is. 43:10

I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. Is.45:5

In Word of Faith mythology, Adam lost his privileges and status as a god. Man recuperates them through conversion to Christ. Benny Hinn explains,

Christians are little messiahs. Christians are little gods.­[7]

In case we assume Hinn is speaking figuratively, notice these quotes:

Are you a child of God? Then you're divine! Are you a child of God? Then you're not human! [8]

I am a little messiah walking on earth,..... You are a little god on earth running around. [9] Christians are little messiahs. Christians are little gods.­[10]

It seems these teachers are not saying every human being is a god. Only Christians are gods. Copeland adds,

Every Christian is a god. … You don't have a God in you; you are one. [11]

Before Copeland, his mentor Kenneth Hagin taught,

You are as much the incarnation of God as Jesus Christ was...the believer is as much the incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth. [12]

Copeland parrots this error,

Jesus is no longer the only begotten Son of God. [13]

Both Hagin and Copeland disregard the importance of the term “only begotten” in Jn.3:16. This word sets apart the sonship of Jesus as distinct from our own.

Not only do these teachers confuse “image” with “duplicate,” they also confound union with Christ with identity as Christ.

We are adopted children (Romans 8). Jesus was never adopted because he was in the family (the Trinity) from all eternity. It borders on blasphemy to apply the word “incarnation” to a mere human.

Paul Crouch and the TBN Network

The Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), is the biggest religious television network in history. Founder Paul Crouch is close friends with Hagin, Copeland, Hinn and other Word of Faith teachers. Crouch exclaims,

Christians are little gods.[14]

God draws no distinction between Himself and us. God opens up the union of the very godhead (Trinity), and brings us into it.[15]

Declaring no distinction between God and us is pretty radical. If Crouch is referring to the God of the Bible, he should conclude Christians are omnipresent, omniscient, all-mighty and perfect. Either that, or he is referring to some other god.

In the Bible, our union with Christ is through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ. “Union” does not mean “deify.”

We would think Crouch and friends would hesitate to make such claims on public television. He must have known he would draw criticism. His reaction?

Do you know what else that's settled then tonight? This hue and cry and controversy that has been spawned by the devil to try to bring dissension within the body of Christ that we are gods. I am a little god. I have His name. I am one with Him. I'm in covenant relation. I am a little god. Critics be gone!" [16]

Crouch thinks the devil is behind the criticism he and his friends have drawn though calling themselves gods. The critics should be silenced. In Crouch’s mind, he is proclaiming self-evident truth.

His complaint did not silence the critics. Five years later, Crouch blasts them again with:

I think they're damned and on their way to hell and I don't think there's any redemption for them...the heresy hunters that want to find a little mote of illegal doctrine in some Christian's eye and pluck that little mote out of their eye when they've got the whole forest in their own lives and in their own eyes. I say to hell with you! ...Oh hallelujah. Get out of God's way, quit blocking God's bridges or God's gonna shoot you if I don't! [17]

Apparently it is a “little mote” to redefine the Christian God. Those who disagree are damned with no hope of redemption. Crouch thinks they deserve that God should annihilate them.

Defending his Word of Faith friends, Crouch continues,

... if you want to criticize Ken Copeland for his preaching on faith, or Dad Hagin. Get out of my life! I don't even want to talk to you or hear you. I don't want to see your ugly face! Get out of my face in Jesus' name. [18]

It is understandable we may say things we regret in a fit of frustration.  We all offend in many ways. To date, there have been no expressions of regret from Crouch or his friends, nor a whisper of retraction of these teachings.

In paganism, a progression takes place. First, a human is like a god. Then he is part god. Then he is a god. The final stage is, he thinks he is God Himself.

Word of Faith teachers stop short of this last stage. None of them have ever suggested they are God himself. They come close to it, however, by claiming a union with Christ so intimate that the demarcation between themselves and Christ is blurred.

By union with Christ, they mean a mixing of divine essences, not just personal relationship. Benny Hinn declares,

When I stand in Christ - I am one with Him; united to Him; one spirit with Him. I am not, hear me, I AM NOT PART OF HIM, I AM HIM! THE WORD HAS BECOME FLESH IN ME! ...When my hand touches someone, it's the hand of Jesus touching somebody. [19]

I [Jesus] loved you enough to become one of ya! And I love you enough to make you one of me!" [20]

We would hope Hinn is speaking figuratively, but it does not sound like it. He confuses relationship with Christ, with mixture of divine essence.

Are you ready for some real revelation knowledge....you are God. [21]

It is possible Hinn meant to say, “you are A god.” Hopefully he was not at this moment digressing toward the final stage of paganism.

Conclusions

It looks like the Word of Faith teachers have taken the pagan route in bringing man and God together. Their “god” is not even as big as Zeus.

If we thought these Word of Faith teachers were merely immature in their doctrine of God, we would be less alarmed. This is not the case. For three decades they have paraded their teachings openly. Biblical scholars have tried to reason with them. Books have refuted their pagan doctrines. They have ignored every rebuke, refused every correction, disregarded sound scholarship and cursed those who have tried to help them.

Is there anything worse than worshiping a false god? Possibly. It would be for a person to imagine he is a god himself. Word of Faith teachers do both.

So be careful about sipping from the fountain of their teachings. The drink they offer is not ambrosia. It will not make you a god. It is deadly poison.

From this chapter we learn:

•   Word of Faith teachers replicate pagan thinking by redefining the Christian God as less than what the scriptures reveal him to be and granting divine status to man.

•   Word of Faith teachers are therefore prophets of a false god.

•   The movement teaches that Christians are little gods, of the same essence as God himself.

•   These teachers confuse man as image of God with man as a duplicate of God.

•   The Bible teaches union with Christ through the Spirit. Word of Faith doctrine teaches joining with Christ though a mixing of our supposed divinity with his.

•   Word of Faith teachers define their critics as unenlightened and spiritually dead, worthy of divine judgment.

CHAPTER TWO

Faith or Fiction

Near my house is a gymnasium where personal trainers teach body building. Like these trainers, the prosperity teachers see their mission as helping Christians develop strong faith muscles to control reality.

Faith in God is the whole point of the Bible. How could anything be wrong with this emphasis? Nothing... assuming these teachers mean the same as the Bible intends by the words “faith” and “God.”

Poison in a milk bottle

Filling a milk bottle with poison is not necessarily wrong. It would be bad, however, to give someone the bottle and call it milk.

This often happens in theology. Teachers take biblical words, empty them of their original content, add their own meanings and pass them off as legitimate. Followers end up accepting ideas they might ordinarily reject.

So, just because a teacher uses words like God, faith, Jesus, does not necessarily mean they are teaching the Word of God. It may be poison in a milk bottle.

Which faith?

Kenneth Copeland: Faith is a power force. It is a tangible force. It is a conductive force.  [22]

Copeland:  Faith is a spiritual force....It is substance. Faith has the ability to effect natural substance. [23]

These teachers see faith as a mystical force we manipulate to our advantage. In combination with our spoken words, faith becomes a catalyst to create our own reality.

They do not see faith as simple trust in God. It is a mystical power in its own right, almost like a law of nature such as gravity or electromagnetism. Though not really a physical law, it is powerful enough to effect matter.

We would be unconcerned if we thought they were speaking figuratively.  Or, if we thought this view were uniquely Copeland’s, we could ignore the anomaly. However, it typifies the movement. Charles Capps,

Faith is the substance, the raw material....Faith is the substance that God used to create the universe, and He transported that Faith with His words....Faith is the substance of things, but you can't see faith. Faith is a spiritual force. [24]

In case we suppose Capps was speaking metaphorically, note the following,

Here, essentially, is what God did. God filled His words with faith. He used His words as containers to hold His faith and contain that spiritual force and transport it out there into the vast darkness by saying 'Light be!' That's the way God transported His faith causing creation and transformation. [25]

 Copeland echos Capps on the power of this force-substance in the creation scenario.

God used words when He created the heaven and the earth....Each time God spoke, He released His faith -- the creative power to bring His words to pass."  [26]

To these teachers, God has faith and depends on it for his creative power. The prosperity movement sees this as a self-evident fact. In discussing the potential of faith in the lives of Christians, Copeland refers to,

The very faith that God used when He created,...[27]

Who made this mystical faith-substance on which God depends for his creative power? If God, why would he be dependent on it?

Where do we fit in?

According to prosperity doctrine, we have access to the same force God used to create the world. As little gods, we can tap into this faith-force at will and create the reality we wish. If we lack prosperity or good health, the problem is our ignorance of how to control the law of faith.

Throughout the centuries, Christian theology has understood “faith” to mean trust or belief in God. Whatever else prosperity movement adherents mean by the term, it is clear they do not mean that.

Shock effect

Sometimes I like to grab the attention of my theology students by saying, “faith, by itself, has no inherent value, power or merit. It is not a good work and deserves no reward. In some circumstances, it may not even be a virtue.”

My remark loses its radical tone after explaining that faith is like an empty box. It takes its value from its contents. If the box contains Christ, then its value is immeasurable. What if the box contains the devil?

Faith itself is morally neutral, taking its value from the object to which it is associated. Looking at it this way, faith may not even be a virtue, unless it is directed toward Christ. In fact, it can even become a vice, such as faith in a false god, or faith in one’s own righteousness. [28]

Faith is the vehicle which brings Christ to us. When a friend pulls into our driveway, we think of the friend, not the vehicle. The relationship is what matters, even though it would not take place if a vehicle had not brought him.

This is what I mean by faith has no value, “by itself.”

So, if faith has no inherent virtue or power, how could it be a creative force? Christ possess all the virtue and power. Faith is merely the vehicle which brings him to us.

Is faith a “law”?

Throughout The Laws of Prosperity, Copeland portrays faith as an indispensable law. We sow seeds of faith like a farmer plants a crop, anticipating a harvest.

This is true as long as we understand it as a metaphor for simple trust in God’s promises. If we go beyond this and make it a “law” in the sense of a mystical force, we fall into serious error.

Only once does the Bible refers to faith as a “law.”

Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Romans 3:27 (KJV)

In context, Paul contrasts faith with works as the principle through which God communicates the gift of righteousness. This has nothing to do with mystical forces. The NIV translates the Greek term “law” as “principle,” possibly to avoid such confusion. Scripture never portrays faith as a “law” in any other sense than this.

Faith in faith?

Hagin’s booklet, Having Faith In Your Faith, became a milestone in the development of the Word of Faith movement. It crystallized the central concept that faith is a law to manipulate.

To Hagin, it makes perfect sense to have faith in our faith. If faith is a force we control, we should obtain more faith by growing in our confidence to manipulate it. Hagin viewed this process as an upward spiral leading to greater power.

Hagin was right if faith is a mystical substance we manipulate. If not, his reasoning is carnal self-dependence.

Grace out the window

[--- Unable To Translate Text Box ---]

The gospel is a “grace” movement, not a “faith” movement.  When Paul said, For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith, it settled forever the question as to what saves us. Faith does NOT do the saving. Grace does the saving. Faith is merely the vehicle by which God’s grace comes.

Grace means unmerited divine favor. If faith were a force or substance we could manipulate, then salvation would be a work deserving reward. In that case, faith could be excluded for the same reason as we exclude works...precisely because it would deserve reward.

 The Apostle Paul clarifies,

Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. Romans 4:3

Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace... Romans 4:16

Why does he say, so that? Because he understands faith is not deserving of reward, and therefore is the only appropriate vehicle of grace.

How then could faith be a law, substance or a force we control to obtain blessing? Where does this leave grace?

Prosperity teachers miss this paradox: It is precisely because biblical faith is NOT a law, force or substance that grace comes through it.

Where does faith originate?

Faith is not a gift of grace in Word of Faith thinking. Grace contradicts the concept of a mystical force-substance manipulated at our own discretion.

The Bible teaches clearly that faith is a gift of grace. Even though saving grace comes through faith, this faith is generated by grace itself. This is not circular reasoning. God is the origin of the whole process.

 ..., He [Apollos] was a great help to those who by grace had believed. Acts 18:27

The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 1Tim. 1:14

Shorthand

Christians often say we are saved by faith. Do we mean it is faith itself which does the saving? No. This is biblical shorthand for expressing faith is a vital instrumental for bringing Christ who does the saving.

A good example is when Jesus said to a repentant woman, Your faith has saved you (Lk.7:50). He meant the woman’s faith opened the door to the One who does the saving. He would never imply that the woman’s faith did the saving without him. If that were the case, she need not have bothered coming to Jesus at all.

At times scripture associates two things so closely, that the one becomes a metaphor for the other. Example: In Jn.17:3 and 12:50, obedience to God’s command is called “eternal life.” The obedience itself is not the eternal life, but leads to it. We would hesitate to call obedience a mystical substance to manipulate in order to generate eternal life.

Likewise in scripture, faith is so vitally associated with obtaining blessings, that it may sound like faith itself generates the blessings. This is shorthand for showing the importance of faith, not showing faith to be a mystical force which properly manipulated, will produce whatever we want. 

Does it denigrate biblical faith to question the so-called Faith Movement? No. Our intent is to give faith its rightful place, no more, no less. Christ, in turn, receives the glory he deserves.

The so-called Faith Movement is a misnomer. These teachers are not exercising faith in any biblical sense of the word. It is a pseudo-Christian movement of idolatry, egotism and narcissism. Idolatry? Yes. What idol? Themselves.

From this chapter we learn:

•   The prosperity movement teaches:

     -   faith is a mystical force and a spiritual substance.

     -   God himself was dependent on the force of faith to create the universe.

     -   as created gods, man has the ability to create his own reality by manipulating the law of faith.

     -   we ought to have faith in our own faith.

•   The prosperity movement does not teach faith by any biblical definition.

•   Biblical faith is neither a law, a force nor a mystical substance.

     -   Faith is simple trust in God.

     -   Faith is morally neutral, dependent on the object with which it is associated.

     -   The gospel is a grace movement, not a faith movement.

     -   Faith is a gift of the grace of God.

CHAPTER THREE

Sovereignty and Suffering

I glanced across the large audience under the tent. Usual crowd. An interesting mixture of Ecuadorian faces, from toddler to elderly. A few teens hid shyly in the back shadows, fearful of being noticed by their peers.

Many had heard a rumor that the "gringos" were working miracles over at the tent and that constituted the best show in town. Besides, they didn't want to miss the free film we would show after the preaching.

This typical South American crowd had one thing in common. None had ever heard a clear presentation of the gospel and most of them never would again. Whatever I preached in the next few moments had to be simple and clear. I started with: "GOD IS A GOOD GOD!"

As I proclaimed this, I knew those saved that night would face trials in the coming months. We would need to help them through the lengthy process of learning who God really is and what He intends by the term "good.” I also knew there are no short-cuts.

Do I regret using the simplistic slogan, "God is good"? Not a bit. If I returned to Ecuador, I would start the next evangelism campaign with the same approach.

When people begin to mature in Christ, they soon realize that issues are not as simple as previously thought. Eventually the convert suffers a financial setback, an illness in the family, or the loss of a loved one. The suspicion enters that perhaps God has something wholly different in mind than was first imagined. The convert learns from the Bible that God is Almighty. Why then did He not do something about this problem? Friends tell him the devil caused it. Does this mean that God has no control over the devil? Little comfort in that!

Soon the local faith-brigade comes along and dutifully informs him that it is his own fault because of a lack of faith. So it all depends on himself? But "self" doesn't seem quite up to it these days. Guilt feelings come as he wonders if he's starting to blame God.

In short, he eventually encounters the age-old dilemma: The Sovereignty of God and the suffering righteous.

Is it possible to lay the responsibility at God’s doorstep  while continuing to love and trust him?

Part of the problem with the slogan, "God is a good God" resides in a perverted definition of the word "good.” Left without explanation, it suggests a standard of goodness outside of God which He Himself follows. This is nonsense.

No rules are tacked up on His throne-room wall for Him to consult to make sure He does everything right. If any standard existed independently of Him then it would be greater than He. The will of God alone is the ultimate standard of goodness.

In Genesis Chapter One, God planted a tree in Eden and called it "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” God forbade man to eat of it, and for excellent reasons. Man's finite nature restricts his ability to define correctly for himself what is good and evil. God alone has that prerogative. We repeat Adam's sin when we presume otherwise.

But before we address the issue of the highest good, we must not ignore the question of whether or not God is in absolute control. If He's not, then it doesn't matter what He esteems as the highest good because He can't enforce it anyway.

The options are clear: Either He is Sovereign or He isn't.

There was a time in church history in which anyone who even questioned the Sovereignty of God would have been considered heretical. Yet just today I read the first chapter of a book by a very popular evangelist who categorically denies that God is in control of this world. He claims that God's hands are tied unless someone prays. Such statements are blasphemous because the Bible says:

...He does according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His Hand or say to Him, 'What have You done? Daniel 4:35

My counsel shall stand and I will do all My pleasure. Isaiah 46:10

But our God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases. Psalms 115:3

But what about the "free-will" of man? Can God control that? Let's check some Bible examples:

Nebuchadnezzar

This pagan king of Babylon made three serious mistakes. First, he made a god to suit himself. (Daniel 3) How typically human!

Man wants a god he can manipulate. Non-threatening. Easy to live with.

But today people are more enlightened. Instead of using gold they simply invent gods of their own imaginations.

Secondly, he used every means at his command to get others to worship his sham god. (It's a good thing Nebuchadnezzar didn't have radio and TV at his disposal. He might have succeeded.)

Thirdly, he committed the most serious error. He attributed the works of the Almighty to his god. (Daniel 4:30)

The true God called him a madman.

What did God do about it? He reached inside Nebuchadnezzar, and yanked his mind out of his head...reason, free-will, and all. It left him a raving beast for the next seven years.

Did God require Nebuchadnezzar's permission to do that? Did He need anyone's prayers to accomplish it?

After the seven years, when God was good and ready, He restored Nebuchadnezzar's mind.

What did Nebuchadnezzar understand about his experience when he came to his senses? .”..and He doeth according to His will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth: AND NONE CAN STAY HIS HAND..."

THE ANTICHRIST AND THE TEN NATIONS

Who is going to be in control of the thought processes of the Antichrist...the false prophet, the Great Whore and the Ten Nations during the end times? The Devil?

"For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill His will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled." Revelation 17:17

THE ENEMIES OF JESUS

Acts 2:23, "This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge..." (NIV).

DID THE APOSTLES BELIEVE IN GOD'S SOVEREIGNTY

OVER MAN'S ACTIONS AND WILL?

Acts 4:24,27 & 28 ..."Sovereign Lord,” they said, "you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them... Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed. They did what Your power and will had decided beforehand should happen." (NIV)

DID GOD CONTROL THE EGYPTIANS?

Exodus 14:17 "And I, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow thee; and I will get Me honor upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host..."

WOULD ANY OF US HAVE BEEN SAVED IF GOD HAD PAID ANY ATTENTION  TO THE INCLINATION OF OUR THOUGHTS AND WILLS?

Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."

John 6:65 .”..no man can come unto Me, except it were given unto him of My Father."

John 6:37 "All that the Father giveth Me shall come to Me."

Multitudes of Christians today are worshipping a false god. They praise a parody of the true God...the result of modern culture via the vain imaginations of honored and confused teachers. I call this the "sham god" of modern Christianity.

WHAT IS THIS "SHAM GOD" LIKE?

His highest ambition is to exalt man's wonderful self-potential.

He waits humbly and patiently for the kind permission of man's free will in order to do anything.

He depends on man's own self-generated faith.

He is frustrated in His plans by his rebellious creatures, having been taken by surprise and helpless to stop them.

His hands are tied unless someone prays.

He is subjugated to a set of spiritual laws superior to Himself.

He rewards men with money in direct proportion to their faith.

He is not really in control of this world.

He is not Sovereign.

However accommodating such a god may be to human reason, He has one fatal flaw: HE DOES NOT EXIST.

WHAT IS THE TRUE GOD LIKE?

The God of the Bible is Sovereign. He is in absolute control of all things. "He does as He wills in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth..." whether it seems agreeable to human reason or not.

Some say, "This makes man a puppet"! I reply that anything else makes God a puppet!

Others add, "But this doesn't seem fair"! I remind these of Paul's admonition: "One of you will say to me: Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will? But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?" Romans 9:19-20 (NIV)

Now that we see the Bible doctrine of the Sovereignty of God, where does that leave us? Have we painted ourselves into a corner? We were trying to explain how to answer the dilemma of the suffering saint without laying the blame at God's doorstep. Yet we just proved that God does as He pleases, restricted by nothing and no one. Doesn't this add to the dilemma?

In the short run, yes. In the long run, no.

The tendency to deny God's Sovereignty is a defensive reaction on the part of well-meaning Christians. We want to get God off the hook somehow.

But consider this possibility: Perhaps God doesn't want to be let off the hook. Perhaps He put Himself there deliberately. If so, we must be careful not to let Him off because He might resent it.

A problem with getting God off the hook, is that the hook doesn't stay empty. Instead we find ourselves on it!

Many Christians consider this solution quite acceptable. They suggest that God has relinquished part of His authority to us, and that the answers to all our problems rests with ourselves. His hands are effectively tied, to a degree, unless we act. So, this wraps up the package neatly and we can all go home now.

But a couple of knots on this package are loose, and I'd rather not go home just yet:

If God has relinquished any part of His Sovereignty to man, we must determine exactly which percentage He has  given up. Then we'll know to what degree we can worship Him. After all, we surely don't want to give Him all the glory if we are partly in control. That wouldn't be fair, would it? If He has given 25% of His sovereignty to man, then let us worship God 75% and man 25%. Or we can alter II Corinthians 1:25 to read "for by 75% faith in God ye stand: yea, the other 25% belongeth to thee." Instead of calling Him the Almighty, let's call Him the Almost Mighty. Forgive this sarcasm. But if we must talk about dilemmas, this is a royal one.

The basic error here is in failing to distinguish the difference between sharing authority and relinquishing it. It's like a joint checking account. If you add someone else's name to the account it doesn't remove your own authority to write checks nor are you limited to the approval of the other parties. If you want, you can set it up so that the others need your approval, but you don't need theirs. Perfectly legal and logical.

What a horrendous error to imagine that God has ever given up any of His authority just because He allows some of His creatures to share it!

That's why truths about our authority in Christ are no grounds for self-dependence. God controls the degree of our personal involvement in each case. If you drop the pen, don't worry. He can still write the check Himself if He has to.

WHO HAS THE KEY?

If the degree of responsibility is individual and personal, then it is irrational to judge a brother as faithless for being poor or sick. Example: A car requires gasoline to run. The car is not running. Therefore it is out of gas. Sounds good so far. But wait! A car can stop for many reasons. Perhaps the engine has failed...or maybe the owner doesn't intend to use it right then.

So it is with our problems. Lack of faith could be a factor. But, on the other hand, maybe the brother's faith "tank" is full. In such cases, the key is in the hand of our Owner and He will turn it at the time and place of His choosing.

God's Sovereignty must never be used as an excuse for a poverty doctrine nor passive acceptance of illness. Few today believe the archaic notion that suffering is intrinsically good for the soul. Or that we must submit passively to every affliction. But some fail to realize that the opposite view (that health and wealth are inherently good) is wrong. Both views are opposing sides of the same false coin. Many Christians imagine themselves full of fuel because they are whizzing down the highway. But some are just coasting downhill toward a crash. Knowing these things makes it easier to avoid judging our brother, doesn't it?

"GOOD.”..BY WHOSE DEFINITION?

At the beginning of this article, I suggested that our perception of "good" might be distorted. Most people assume that man's welfare is God's highest priority. Then they define "welfare" in terms of creature comforts: Health, Wealth, Peace and Security.

We are greatly deceived if we imagine there's any truth in these assumptions.

Consider this: God created man knowing full well that he would fall. Acts 15:18 "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." He foreknew that the vast majority of mankind would go to hell forever. Yet He created man anyway. Why?

Romans 9:21 suggests the answer. "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?" (NIV)

God's highest priority is to reveal His nature, not the welfare of man. The entire redemption story, both in salvation and condemnation, provides the background on which God displays His attributes.

"Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God:" Romans 11:22 (NIV)

"His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to His eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord." Ephesians 3:10,11 (NIV)

C.S. Lewis brought out the striking thought that Shakespeare was wrong when he said, "All the world's a stage and we the actors.” As we look closer at the theater we discover that the play is not about us, but about God. He is the one on center stage, and we are merely the backdrop.

Grace could not exist without a sinner. Like a flower growing out of manure, the very element that is so repulsive, produces the beauty. But can grace exist for the majority? Hardly! If you do the same favor for everyone, then it becomes general policy rather than a favor. A neighbor brings us fresh home-baked bread as a sign of special friendship. If she did this for everyone, it would cease to be a special favor.

Neither could the wrath of God exist without a sinner. To demonstrate destructive power, there must be something to destroy. (Romans 9:21).

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE WELFARE OF HIS CHILDREN?

Doesn't God have their concern in top priority? Yes, He certainly does. He loves and cares for us and has planned our highest good from before the foundation of the world. And He is determined to see us attain His best, whether we like it or not.

Recently I was struck by the following comment in a book: "The ultimate goal of sanctification is nothing." After recovering from temporary befuddlement, I had to agree. Sanctification is the goal, and God loves us too much to back down from it. Holiness has no further purpose than itself.

It follows, then, that God defines the term "good" in consequence of whatever will produce holiness in us. All other scriptural principles are subservient to this.

Considering this, it becomes less surprising that Christians experience trials and sufferings. If anything could be cause for doubt, it should be that believers do not suffer more than they do.

I have observed Christians who maintain a Biblically solid understanding of God's Sovereignty. They go through their trials easier and rarely ask the question, "Why did You allow this"?

What then are the options when we confront a serious trial? We have three, and only one is right.

OPTION ONE

Accuse God of injustice for leaving us in a helpless state.

All spiritual tests consist in being apparently abandoned by God. If this feeling were absent, it would cease to be a valid test.

Knowing that trials are inevitable is a potent weapon for going through them successfully. Don't worry - this knowledge isn't some sort of dangerous mystical confession that will magically produce the trials. Reality is reality regardless of what we say about it. Peter said, "Therefore, since Christ has suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind..." I Peter 4:1. He warned, "Beloved, do not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you..." v.12.

Blaming God gives only a temporary and artificial feeling of relief... Like trying to put out a fire by throwing sticks at it.

OPTION TWO

Submit passively to the affliction as God's will since He is Sovereign and could have prevented it.

This reaction is almost as dangerous as the previous one. Exploitive religions use such reasoning to keep the oppressed in subjection.

In Judges 3:2 we read that God left enemies in the land knowing that they would attack Israel. Why did He do such an apparently mean thing? Because He wanted them to learn how to fight.

Suppose the Jews had assumed that God was teaching them humility. They might have just laid down in the streets and submissively let the chariots run them over. They would have learned humility all right, but that wasn't the lesson intended. Sometimes God allows the devil to attack the believer so he can learn to fight.

I recall the story of a young Bible school student who suffered severe trials for several weeks. Nothing was going right. Everybody was hassling him. Constant depression. Then one night while alone, he suddenly lost his temper and shouted, "Satan! In the Name of Jesus, get off my back!" Peace enveloped him. The pressures were gone. And a Still Small Voice broke through to his spirit..."Well, son, I see you finally decided to stand up and fight.”

Passive submission to every trial and affliction is both unscriptural and dangerous.

OPTION THREE

Submit to God but resist the affliction, even though you know that God, in His Sovereignty, allowed it.

Never in the history of humanity has a thorn existed as sharp as Paul's thorn in the side of charismatics. Elaborate explanations have been devised to prove that his affliction was not a physical illness...as if that were important.

By engaging in such disputes, Christians successfully rob themselves of the main points of the lesson. If God felt it mattered that much, He would have made it indisputably clear. Let's observe some of Paul's instructive reactions to this thorn:

First, he never stopped to enquire as to the source of the affliction. If it was bad, he fought it. Simple.

Second, observe the way he fought it. It was with humble and beseeching prayer. He asked God to remove it. He didn't command God, nor try to maneuver Him. Nor did he try to manipulate it out of existence with some special knowledge of spiritual principles, such as "confession.” He had better sense than that. He simply prayed.

Never try to manipulate God. Every time I attempt it, I get my hands slapped.

Notice also that Paul prayed more than once about his problem. Some have taught that it's unbelief to pray twice for the same thing. But Paul didn't think so. If my car doesn't start the first time, I try the key again until it does.

Isn't it amazing the clever theological devices that Christians invent to get themselves into bondage? Some people are absolute geniuses at making traps to catch themselves in. Paul's approach to the problem demonstrated that the ultimate outcome depended on his Sovereign Lord. Doubtlessly, if God had told him that the answer was to stand on his head and whistle "All hail the king,” he would have done it. He was open to whatever the Lord told him to do, even if it was to do nothing.

In fact, "nothing" is exactly what the Lord said to do. "My grace is sufficient for thee." Yet even then, Paul didn't lose his holy aggression. He reached out and took hold of the affliction and wrung out every last drop of grace he could. Then he picked up that grace and slapped the tar out of the devil with it. Most likely when Paul was through, the Devil was sitting back on his haunches thinking that it would have been better to have left that preacher alone.

Someone asked me how to tell the difference between a Satanic attack and a Divine testing. Actually, it doesn't really matter. Since God is Sovereign, it is always both anyway. God allows Satan to attack us because He wants us to defeat him. If it weren't for the devil, the church would be lazy, and Christians would learn little.

It distresses some people to learn that God and Satan can agree on anything, but it's so. For two parties to test a third, they must agree on the conditions of the test. The Book of Job illustrates this:

God declared Job's sincerity, while Satan denied it. This resulted in a test of Job's integrity, with Satan being the immediate and active cause and God the ultimate and passive cause.

The notion that Job's problems were his own fault, caused by his fear, (quoted out of context from Job 3:25) is easily dismissed by Job 2:3 .”..although thou movedst Me (God) against him, to destroy him without cause." (No cause from Job's side of the fence). The only thing that Job ever feared was God. (Job 1:1,8)

Not only does God affirm that the test was without any basis in Job, but He also takes full responsibility for it.

We see then that both Satan and God used the same events but with opposite intent. The difference then between a Satanic attack and a Divine testing is not in the means but in the opposing purposes. Satan wants to prove the worst about us, and God is out to prove the best. So it's a waste of time trying to figure out which is which. Just submit to God and fight the affliction. "In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly." Job 1:22

The love that both Paul and Job had for God was of a rare and beautiful kind. It was different from mere "natural affection,” which is to love those who do good to us. As long as the relationship is profitable, we desire to maintain it. This is natural affection. When it ceases to be useful, we drop it. Job's wife had this kind of love for God. It wasn't enough in a pinch. She wanted Job to curse God and die. 

Natural affection is normal. Mothers love their children, husbands their wives. But the difference between Agape love and natural affection shows up the minute the relationship ceases to be beneficial. The opposing reactions of Job vs. his wife glaringly expose this difference.

Sometimes the essence of a spiritual trial revolves around the question of the quality of our love. We love the Lord because He does good things for us. But in His Kingdom, this won't pass. He wants us to love Him for Himself. This involves a mental rather than an emotional choice. In times of testing this choice is made.

This sheds some light on ordinary trials. But what about genuine tragedies? The loss of a loved one? A crippling accident? These can hardly come under the category of "trials.”

A tragic accident occurred during our missions conference in Ecuador,in 1981. A pick-up truck carrying about a dozen young people overturned due to an error in judgment by the driver. She was going about 60 miles an hour at the time . It was a miracle that no one was killed. But an eight year old boy was permanently crippled in his right leg. The driver, a missionary lady, was in anguish, filled with guilt and confusion. A few days after the accident, she asked me the inevitable question, "Why did God allow it? If God is in control of all things, why didn't He let me be the one injured instead of the child"?

I knew the question was coming and wanted to be prepared with an answer. So, partly out of my own frustration, I responded with another question, "Even if God were to give an answer, would it relieve this child's pain, or yours? No answer could ever replace the tragedy. So you might as well quit asking the question. Either God is God or He isn't. Sometimes that is the only question that He allows us to face.” To my amazement, this brought tremendous comfort to the young lady. Though the experience left scars, she is a fruitful and happy missionary today.

Christians with a firm grasp on God's Sovereignty go through their trials and tragedies much easier than those who doubt it. This truth has been the bulwark of saints throughout the ages, and as we enter the end-times, we must cling to it tenaciously.

Let no one imagine that because I proclaim these truths, that I am an expert sufferer. I admire those sweetly passive folks who accept difficulties with quiet repose. Are they that way by grace or is it really the result of a natural predisposition of temperament? It's doubtful if most of my readers are like that though. Personally, my disposition prefers temper tantrums.

To my chagrin, I discovered early that God remains unmoved by my protests. He just continues the operation anyway, as though it were none of my business. Apparently, we can add Tenacity to His list of attributes. He seems determined to bless us with qualities we did not know were part of the bargain when we accepted Christ.

I could have done better in the past. I hope to do better in the future. It would be simple if we could only find a way to remove from suffering one minor detail: IT HURTS! Apart from that, suffering would be quite tolerable.

I say this to clarify that understanding a few truths about our trials, and how they relate to our Sovereign Lord, will not relieve the pain, nor answer all the questions. It will still hurt. But at least it becomes endurable when we understand that there is meaning and purpose behind it.

I'm painfully aware (excuse the pun), that the views I've shared do not fully cover the ground any more than does the slogan, "God is a good God.” I would be the prince of fools to say they did.

So let's lay the matter at God's doorstep, where He wants it to be, and go on with humility... knowing that He is greater than any concept of Him that we could ever imagine.

From this chapter we learn...

•   God is sovereign over everything, including evil. Though he is not the cause of evil, it is under his control. 

•   Since holiness is God’s highest value for Christians, he allows us to suffer trials for our sanctification. Therefore, lack of faith may not be the cause of sickness or financial problems

•   It is cruel, besides unscriptural, to accuse a person of unbelief because of illness or poverty.

•   Despite the philosophical tension between the goodness of God and evil in the world, God calls us to trust him regardless.
CHAPTER FOUR

The Origins of Word Of Faith

Word of Faith has its roots in a pagan cult that rivalled Christianity during the first three centuries of the Christian era, known as Gnosticism. The early Church fathers, such as Iranaeus eventually refuted and destroyed it.

Various Gnostic cults existed, but all held to a form of Dualism. This meant matter is bad and spirit is good. The Bible, however, teaches God created both realms and called all creation, spiritual and material, ‘good’.

Some Gnostics even taught two gods: An evil one which governed the material realm and a good one, the spiritual. All, however, held that a series of spiritual laws exist between the two dimensions by which both realms could be controlled. Certain spiritually elite people were endowed with a special "gnosis" or "revelation knowledge" by which they could learn to manipulate these laws to their advantage ... even to controlling their own spiritual destinies.

A Gnostic goal was to attain to divinity and become a kind of creative "god." This was through the "releasing" of his spirit from the material realm through his special "knowledge" of the mystical forces governing the universe.

Iranaeus, one of the third century fathers who combatted Gnosticism in his book Against Heresies, comments on the spiritual pride characteristic of Gnostics:

They consider themselves 'mature', so that no one can be compared with them in the greatness of their Knowledge, not even if you mention Peter or Paul or any of the other apostles..." (I, XIII, 6)

 .”..such a person becomes so puffed up that he ... walks with a strutting gait and a supercilious countenance, possessing all the pompous air of a cock! (III, XV, 2)

The parallels between ancient Gnosticism and Word of Faith are too striking to ignore. But how did Gnosticism get transported into the 20th Century?

For this information, we are deeply indebted to Judith Matta, author of The Christian Response to Gnostic Charismatic Heresies.[29]Judith is probably the foremost expert in the U.S. today on the Gnostic origins of Word of Faith. She is a graduate of Talbot Theological seminary and a first-class scholar.

In 1875, Mary Baker Eddy published Science and Health, thus launching the Christian Science sect. The First Church of Christ Scientist was founded in Boston in 1879. Eddy had adapted many of the early Gnostic concepts in her writings, which included the denial of the reality of illness and matter.

One of the early converts to Christian Science, and a member of the Mother Church from 1903 until his death in 1908, was Dr. C.W. Emerson. He founded a college in Boston around the turn of the century called Emerson School of Oratory. This was a prep school for boys, not a Bible school.

One of the early students of Emerson's school was a young man by the name of E.W. Kenyon. Kenyon picked up some of the Gnostic concepts and incorporated them into his own writings later on.

The terms, "Word of Faith" and "Revelation Knowledge" are found throughout Kenyon's books. Positive rhetoric characterized his style and much of what he wrote is legitimate. He exalts the power and lordship of Christ skillfully and expounds certain aspects of the authority of the believer. Unfortunately, errors abound in nearly every chapter.

His booklet, Two Kinds of Knowledge, is especially dangerous because of its subtlety. In it, he falls into the usual Gnostic and mystic trap of using reason to deny the validity of reason. Information derived from our five senses, he terms "sense knowledge" and the correlation of that information is done by logic. But "revelation knowledge" comes directly to our spirit, bypassing both reason and five senses. Kenyon believed that since God is spiritual, it is impossible to understand God or spiritual truth without this special "revelation.”

Through this, a dangerous and subtle error enters. If a person swallows it, then the Bible itself comes to be judged by the standard of the "revelation knowledge" that one experiences subjectively. Subtly and unconsciously, the reader of Kenyon becomes his own standard of truth.

Kenyon forgot the eye which reads the Bible, the ear which hears it, and the brain that correlates it are all physical organs. The Bible is a human book as well as Divine. Bypassing the senses and reason inevitably leads to bypassing the Bible also. Untrained Christians eager for supernatural experiences can easily fall into Kenyon-style mysticism.

Kenyon died in 1948, but the Gnostic torch didn't die with him. It was embraced by a young pentecostal hungry for the supernatural, Kenneth Hagin ... the recognized founder and leader of the Word of Faith movement.

Hagin praises Kenyon to the skies in one of his first books, The Name of Jesus, and confesses his deep indebtedness to him. Hagin later passed on these teachings to Kenneth Copeland. Through Copeland came Charles Capps, Jerry Savelle, and others. T.L. Osborn also expressed deep debt to Kenyon in a letter to Kenyon's grand daughter in 1972, calling an him "an Apostle.”

Though Hagin based his views largely on Kenyon, he himself contributed some interesting "revelations" of his own along the way. In the introduction to one of the older editions of his "Art of Intercession,” he describes his eighth "visitation" of Christ. A spirit being, identifying itself as "Jesus Christ,” came into Hagin's room, sat down and talked for about an hour and a half.

During this visit, the supposed Jesus-spirit gave him a startling “revelation.” All the theologians in the past who taught that God was in absolute control of all things were wrong. Hagin claims, "God is not ruling in this world ... And God cannot do anything unless somebody down here asks Him.”

This "being" apparently forgot to do its homework before categorically denying the Sovereignty of God.

Whatever the Lord pleases He does, in heaven and in earth... Psalm 135:6

That the living may know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men..." Daniel 4:17

In Hagin's seventh “visitation,” the spirit-being told him not to pray for his needs any more but to command the angels to get them. Again, this "being" missed some key scripture. Our Father in heaven...give us this day our daily bread. Matthew 6:11 In the context, the Jesus of the Bible commands us to pray to the Father for the fulfillment of our needs.

Am I implying that the "being" who visited Kenneth Hagin and gave him the Word of Faith revelations is not really Jesus Christ, but a deceiving demon? Be assured, I am not implying it. I'm stating it as a fact.

The Hagin hijack: How these teachings entered the Charismatic movement

The Charismatic movement took root in the late ‘60’s and ‘70’s. Sometimes styled ‘Neo-Pentecostalism,’ it was characterized by a rejection of the dead orthodoxy in some traditional denominations, in favor of a new emphasis on the Holy Spirit and spiritual gifts. [30]

In its beginnings, the Charismatic movement was innocuous. Nothing is wrong with seeking new fillings with the Holy Spirit or spiritual gifts. In fact, we are commanded by scripture to do so. A fundamental flaw in the movement, however, was the lack of solid theological foundations.

Charismatics had rejected dead orthodoxy. However, many failed to appreciate the alternative....live orthodoxy. Instead, a mindless mysticism developed. Hagin’s teachings found fertile ground in the new movement.

Many Charismatics were middle-class Evangelicals. While interested in  exciting experiences, they were less enthusiastic about joining with traditional Pentecostals. Classical Pentecostals were often from a poorer less educated class.

Charismatics were ripe for fresh teaching within their own sociological context...a scenario primed for a Hagin hijack.

Though Hagin was the acknowledged leader, he was not as articulate as some followers. His country accent, poor grammar and obvious lack of formal education had little appeal to the middle classes.

The movement gained momentum with the more articulate and younger Kenneth Copeland. His book Laws of Prosperity launched him to Faith Movement stardom, offering a new world view which filled in the theological gaps left by an abandonned orthodoxy.

Books by “faith” teachers flooded the market and the new Charismatics snapped them up like starving fish after bait. Sadly, cash-flow rather than truth determined what books appeared in the Christian market. Those with a dissenting voice found it difficult to get their books published.

An even bigger boon for the Prosperity Movementcame in the 80’s when Paul Crouch of Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), announced the faith movement was the route he would take in his programming.

Jim Bakker of the PTL Network and Paul Crouch endorsed the faith movement’s concepts, giving it world-wide exposure. Result: Gnosticsm, disguised under the banner of “faith,” began to root itself deeply into the psyche of American Charismatics.

A Roman-American parallel

As with the United States today, Rome had been a prosperous society. In the first three centuries as Christianity was taking root, Rome was in its declining years. The society was rife with corruption. Established governmental and religious institutions seemed helpless to stem perversity throughout society.

The culture seemed unable to recover the sense of strength and dominance as before. A subtle but wide-spread insecurity permeated the population. In its wars, Rome began to struggle harder to defeat weak enemies than it did to overcome stronger ones before. We see this in America today. [31]

The middle and upper classes of any society, whether ancient or modern, are used to controling their own lives. Under insecure social conditions, optimism about the future weakens and their sense of control begins to slip. This provided rich soil for gnosticism to take root.

These conditions generate a psychological crisis. American Christians today are subject to similar pressure. The dilemma: How to experience the comforts of the gospel while maintaining the sense of control to which they are accustomed.­As in ancient Rome, this provides fertile ground today for a gnostic-style pseudo-Christian movement like Word of Faith to take hold. Religion which keeps them in control of their reality is the core of its message.

As a convenient byproduct, the teachers reap a financial harvest. Middle and upper-middle classes have money and are responsive to the positive rhetoric and fresh revelations. Everyone seems happy...except God.

The influence of the Prosperity Movement has been partially stemmed by three factors. First, the Assemblies of God, the largest and most influencial Pentecostal denomination in the world, reputiated the Word of Faith teachings in an official position paper. [32]

Second, two books warning about the movement were published and became well-known: Hank Hanegraaf’s, Christianity In Crisis[33] and Dave Hunt’s Seduction of Christianity.[34]

Finally, the most serious blow came with the fall of Jim Bakker (PTL) in the late ‘80’s, and similiar scandals among American TV evangelists. These events, however, were only a trimming of the branches and did not penetrate the roots of the movement, namely Hagin and Copeland and their false god. Though weakened, the tree still flourishes in the U.S. today.

An historical irony has occurred. The same pagan gnosticism which rivaled Christianity in the first centuries, and which the early fathers fought to destroy, has resurrected once again to infiltrate the Church today.

From this chapter we learn...

•   The Prosperity Movement is a revival of gnostic concepts, translated into Christian language.

•   These gnostic ideas were conveyed by Mary Baker Eddy and her Christian Science cult, to Dr. Emerson of Boston. Eventually, E.W. Kenyon merged them with Christian doctrines.

•   Kenneth Hagin embraced Kenyon’s teachings and transmitted them to Kenneth Copeland and others.

•   The Word of Faith movement found fertile soil in the Charismatic Movement and virtually hijacked it.

•   The movement’s popularity can be explained in sociological terms. Conditions in the United States today are similar to those which fueled gnosticism in ancient Rome.

CHAPTER FIVE

Positive Confession

The entire pattern of nature and all of our life's circumstances are controlled by our tongue! A powerful spiritual force is generated within us when we speak positively, and this force changes the world around us. [35] The most impossible situations can be changed by our tongue. If the wicked prosper it Is because we Christians have said that they are. Even the salvation of other people's souls depends on our positive confession! We can put curses accidently on people by saying that they'll probably backslide. And when they do, it wasn't prophesy, it was our curse that made them do it! [36]

These statements are mild representations of the Prosperity Movement teaching about the confessions of our mouth. As strange and extreme as these are, they do not stop there. Charles Capps even attributes the Virgin Birth to Mary's positive confession. She received the word of the angel into her spirit and then it was manifest in her womb. [37]

Both Copeland and Capps tell us that Satan has insidiously programmed us from our youth to speak death-dealing and perverse words. We must eliminate them from our vocabulary because they "set in motion the blazing fires of negative spiritual forces.” What are these terrible words that Satan has taught us to say? They are, "That just tickled me to death,” "I'm dying to do that,” "That makes me sick,” "I laughed until I thought I would die,” "I doubt it,” and all other similar expressions. Perverse speech! Death-dealing words! Contrary to God's Word![38]

If we had grounds for suspecting that these men were just exaggerating then we could ignore this teaching. But hundreds of groups are springing up around the country called "Word" churches dedicated to these doctrines with attendance in the hundreds or thousands. Adherents often isolate themselves from other Christians lest their sensitive spirits become contaminated by the negative confessions that the uninitiated might utter. This makes the matter critically serious.

To support these ideas, the following texts are used:

Mark 11:22-24

"And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God. 23. For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.

24. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye received them, and ye shall have them."

The most fundamental principle of faith is expressed in the last verse. We must believe that God has already answered before we see the request come to pass. This is the basis for a positive confession of our faith in God's willingness to hear and answer us.

Positive confession is certainly better than negative. But without a solid Biblical foundation, it can lead to a distorted view of reality.

The passage above was never intended as a blank check for whatever we want or say. It is rather a very basic pattern of faith to be exercised whenever God gives us a personal promise.

Notice that the text begins with the phrase, "have faith in God.” In the original greek, this is EXETE PISTIN THEOU. Literally translated it means, "have a faith of God.” Some of the older manuscripts add the word EI, which is "if" and reads, "If you have a faith from God, truly I say to you..." Christ is telling us that the first step in the process is to hear from God and determine His will before acting. Some "Word" teachers understand and teach this.

In the context of the chapter Jesus has just cursed a fig tree, and It withered up. Curious Peter remarks about it in verse 21, " Master, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.” As if to say, "how In the world did you do that?" The verses that follow are merely Jesus' explanation of how he did it. "Well, Peter, to start with, you have to be operating in the Spirit, and not be impulsive. You must first determine what is the Intention of the Father in the matter, and knowing that, you will have a solid basis for acting in faith." Of course Jesus did not use those words, but a careful analysis of the text and other passages on faith will reveal that such Is basically the intent.

There's a big difference between the ordinary exercise of faith in our lives and the special sift of faith which is given by direct revelation from God. The latter Is referred to in I Corinthians 12:9 as a supernatural endowment. In the context it Is clear that it is not meant for everyone at all times. Paul says, "to another, faith by the same Spirit..."

The withering of fig trees and moving of mountains are not daily occurrences in the life of the believer. By their exceptional nature they necessitate a special gift of faith from God. Understanding this should lead us to a more balanced position with regard to faith and the positive confession that follows. Mark 11:24 is not a proof text granting us the right to anything we happen to desire. The exercise of our faith is based on the previously declared will of God in a matter. We can have whatsoever we say ... If God said It first!

James Chapter 3

The super-faith proponents often use this chapter to support the view that circumstances surrounding human existence are determined by negative or positive confessions.

Verse 6 is a favorite Word of Faith text since it refers to the tongue as capable of setting on fire, "the course of nature.” However, the context of this chapter, plus analysis of the Greek text, leads us to conclude that James means something other than the manipulation of reality by the tongue.

The phrase "course of nature" is TON TROCHON TES GENESEOS In greek and is difficult to translate. "TROCHON literally means "wheel,” whereas "GENESEOS means, "source,” "origin,” "birth,” "existence,” "life.” Vine's Expository Dictionary describes this as a wheel which catches fire from its revolving axle and then spreads its fire outward, Just like the mischief done by the tongue.

James is referring simply to the influence of our tongue with regards to our relationships. He says, "therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God." Is he referring to the control of our environment, or our health and finances via the tongue? Certainly not! He is talking about relationships. If we talk mean to people around us, this will naturally influence the course of our life. We will make enemies. Our gossip might destroy others an well as ourselves. Using James 3 to prove that all the circumstances of our existence are controlled by the words of our mouth, in any sense beyond mere human relationships, is to do violence to the text.

Proverbs 6:2

"Thou art snared with the words of thy mouth..." To quote this verse an a warning against negative confessions to take it out of its context. It refers, not to positive or negative confessions, but to an Injunction to avoid indebtedness, especially with regard to being a "surety" (co-signer) for a friend. The above statement in actually one clause out of an extensive sentence which begins with, "my son, if thou be surety for thy friend, If thou hast stricken thy hand with a stranger, thou are snared with the words of they mouth..."

To resort to such a text to prove a positive confession doctrine is a demonstration of its weakness rather than its strength.

What about this word "confession" in the Bible? Does It ever carry the connotation that the movement claims? Some teachers are quick to point out that the term in the original greek, HOMOLOGEO, is composed as follows: HOMO=same; LOGEO=to speak. Thus, they say, it means "to speak the same thing.” So if we "speak the same things" that God says, we will have the desired result.

Wrong. The word originated that way In pre-christian ages, but by the time the New Testament was written, it carried the meaning of "to profess faith in something or someone.”

Out of the 40 times it is used in the New Testament, (in the above form and in the emphatic form EXHOMOLOGEONAI, and noun form HOMOLOGIA), nowhere does it support the view that the words of our mouth have inherent creative power. Notice some New Testament usages:

Profession of Faith

Of false religious professors, Titus 1:16 Of profession of faith in Christ, Luke 12:8 Of pharisees professing faith in angels and in a resurrection, Acts 23:8 Of spirits admitting or denying the Deity of Christ, I John 4:3

Confession of Sin

Of converted Ephesian sorcerers confessing publicly their deeds, Acts 19:18 Of Christians confessing their sine to God, I John 1:9 Of believers confessing faults to one another, James 5:16

Promising Something to Someone

Judas promising to betray Christ, Luke 22:6

Thanksgiving

Of Jesus thanking the Father, Luke 10:21

Not a shred of a verse exists in the whole Bible to support the Word of Faith usage of the word "confess.”

Two Serious Problems