Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

The WOF vs. Scripture Challenge...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Quiet Wyatt
(Posting the following in full, because it is unfortunately no longer available on the web).

The following is an article which first opened my eyes in the late 1990s to how widespread the WoF/Kenyonist teaching was throughout the charismatic and Pentecostal movements. I had known of the teaching, since Copeland-Haginism had made some inroads even in the classical Pentecostal AG and CoG churches I had been raised in, but I had no idea how pervasive the teaching really was until I came across the following article:

THE ATONEMENT AND THE WORD OF FAITH

by Tim Germain

The Word of Faith is also known as the Faith Movement. The main preachers besides Kenneth Hagin and Kenneth Copeland are: Kenneth Hagin Jr., Gloria Copeland, Don Gossett, Marilyn Hickey, Roy Hicks, Charles Cowan, Lester Sumrall, Ed Dufresne, Norvel Hayes, Jerry Savelle, Fred Price, Benny Hinn, Henry Hinn, Charles Capps, Buddy Harrison and Ken Stewart.

The Father of the Word of Faith Movement is E. W. Kenyon who died in 1948. Wherever you go books by E. W. Kenyon will go hand in hand with the Faith Movement.

The following quotes represent the teaching of the Word of Faith Movement concerning the Doctrine of the Atonement.

"You have to realize that He (Jesus) died; you have to realize that he went into the pit of hell as mortal man made sin. He didn't stay there, thank God. He was reborn in the pit of hell and resurrected."{1}

"Do not let the physical suffering of the graphic scene of Golgotha rob you of the reality of the son of God being made sin for us. When he was made sin he was turned over by God to the adversary. You remember that he uttered the sentence "It is finished". You can now understand that he did not mean that he had finished His substitutionary work."{2}

"Jesus went to hell like any sinner..."{3}

"Satan had conquered Jesus on the cross...Satan triumphantly bore his spirit to the dark regions of Hades. When he had suffered Hell's agonies for three days and three nights, the supreme court of the universe cried "Enough" He had paid the penalty and met the claims of justice."{4}

"Adam died spiritually when he ate of the fruit. Jesus died spiritually when he opened himself to sin...He became a spiritually dead man."{5}

"When [Jesus] said it is finished, on that cross, he was not speaking of the plan of redemption. The plan of redemption had just begun. There were still three days and three nights to go through...[in hell], He suffered punishment for three horrible days and nights."{6}

"There can be no substitution unless Christ actually paid the spiritual penalty of man's transgression...But this work (atonement) was not finished on the cross."{7}

"Isaiah 53 is a picture of the substitutionary sufferings in our stead. It is neither mental nor physical suffering. It is suffering in the spirit."{8}

"It is hard to understand how he [Jesus] became sin, but I know he did. Satan would become his master." {9}

"Jesus Christ took upon himself our sin nature...the nature of spiritual death, that we might have eternal life." {10}

"In the spirit world we are free, because Jesus Christ shed his blood 2000 years ago on Golgotha's Hill...went to the very pit of Hell, and was chained with the chains of sin, disease, and all the evil of the enemy. I can almost see Him in my mind as his feet were enshackled in those chains and He dragged them as an emissary of the pits led Him through hell itself. But on the third day God...bellowed down through the atmosphere...It is Finished the supreme sacrifice has been paid. The prison is open I have paid the price. All you have to do is accept it and walk out to freedom. Jesus Christ signed your pardon..." {11}

"Because He was made sin', IMPREGNATED with sin, and became the very essence of sin, on the cross He was banished from God's presence as a LOATHSOME THING. He and sin were made synonymous...Justice demanded that the full penalty for every sin of all mankind be paid by someone. This meant that it was not sufficient for Christ to offer up only His physical life on the cross. His pure human spirit had to descend into hell'...The Father turned Him over, not only to the agony and death of Calvary, but to the satanic torturers of His pure spirit as part of just desert of the sin of all the race. As long as Christ was the essence of sin he was at Satan's mercy in that place of torment where all finally impenitent sinners are imprisoned upon leaving this life...If Jesus paid the full penalty of sin on the cross only, that is, by His physical death alone, then sin is wholly a physical act. If sin is wholly a physical act, then every man could pay for his own sin by his own death. Because sin is basically or primarily in the spirit realm and of the spirit, therefore Jesus' work was NOT FINISHED when He yielded up His physical life ON THE CROSS. It was not completed until He descended into hell, paid once and for all the eternal consequences of the aggregate sin of the world." {12}

The topic of the ATONEMENT is THE CARDINAL DOCTRINE OF THE BIBLE. No matter what other beliefs may be embraced, if you get this one wrong, then ALL IS LOST! What we believe with regard to this subject can not be underestimated.

Jude 1:3 says...that you should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 says...Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

In 1 Timothy 4:16 we read, Take heed unto yourself and unto the doctrine; continue in them; for in doing this you shall both save yourself and them that hear you.

I believe that the reason for the vast majority of all wrong teaching today can be traced to a wrong understanding of the Atonement. By carefully examining the statements of key Word of Faith teachers and the revealed Scripture let us determine whether this teaching can be supported and defended in the light of reason and God's Word.

I want to say upfront that while there are multitudes of sincere Christians who identify themselves with the Word of Faith teaching, nevertheless, the basis of the doctrinal error, if embraced, will LEAD THE SOUL TO PERDITION. It is my intention that with love and truth, to my best ability, present the light concerning this most sacred and holy subject, THE atoning death of Jesus Christ.

Let's first summarize the Word of Faith teaching on the Atonement.

1) The physical death of Christ did NOT CONSTITUTE THE ATONEMENT. His physical sufferings are INSUFFICIENT and INCOMPLETE to reconcile man to God.

2) Jesus LITERALLY BECAME A SINNER or sin was imputed to him. SATAN was his MASTER ON THE CROSS.

3) His SPIRITUAL SUFFERING IN HELL constitute the redemption of man. A LITERAL PAYMENT was required to be made to SATAN on man's behalf. This was ACCOMPLISHED IN HELL.

4) After three days and three nights Jesus had PAID A RANSOM to the DEVIL for man. God looked down from heaven pronounced It Is Finished, and then Jesus was BORN AGAIN IN HELL subsequently overcoming the devil and rising from the dead.

5) The sin problem has been wiped away. As far as God is concerned ALL MANKIND IS PARDONED, FORGIVEN in his sight.

6) Man's responsibility is only now to RECEIVE this JUDICIAL PARDON from God.

In defining and correctly understanding the Atonement we can say the following.

"Properly understood, an atonement is an arrangement by which the literal infliction of the penalty due to sin may be avoided; it is something which may be substituted in the place of punishment; it is that which will answer the same end which would be secured by the literal infliction of the penalty of law. It is not a commercial transaction - a matter of debt and payment, of profit and loss. It pertains to law, to government, to holiness; not to literal debt and payment. Sin is crime, not debt; it is guilt. The Atonement pertains to love and mercy, truth and kindness, as well as to justice. It regards a race of offenders with compassion; it seeks to alleviate and lessen suffering; and it is not, therefore, the cold and stern business of paying a debt, of meeting the mere demands of justice and law. It seeks to bring back wanderers by the consideration that God loves them - that they may be forgiven - that salvation is free for all men if they choose to avail themselves of it. It is real, not imaginary salvation." {13}

So then the Atonement is something substituted in the place of the penalty of the law, which will answer the same ends as the punishment of the offender himself would. It is instead of his punishment. It is something which will make it proper for a lawgiver to suspend or remit the literal execution of the penalty of the law, because the object or end of that penalty has been secured, or because something has been substituted for that which will answer the same purpose. In other words, there are certain ends proposed by the appointment of a penalty in case of a violation of the law; and it these ends are secured, then the punishment may be remitted and the offender may be pardoned. That which will secure these ends is an atonement." {14}

Man, due to his love of sin and his unwillingness to be reconciled to God, enlists himself in defying and warring against the Creator of the universe. This defiance and rebellion must be overcome if reconciliation is to be accomplished, and a return to obedience and devotion put in its place.

"On the part of man, the object to be accomplished is to bring him to willingness to be at peace with God." {15}

"This is contemplated in the atonement. It is an essential idea in its nature that it will secure this effect - that in the gift of the Saviour, in His character, in the manifestation of His love, and in His sufferings in behalf of others, there is that which will secure repentance and reformation on the part of the sinner. By the greatness of the suffering of him who made it, the atonement is adapted to convince the sinner of the evil of those sins for which he died; by the manifestation of love...it is fitted most deeply to the heart of the guilty." {16}

"We are deeply affected by the suffering of others if they are the consequences of our own offences." {17}

"The great instrument in bringing men to repentance and securing their reformation has been the story of the Redeemer's love." {18}

"On the part of God. The obstacles to reconciliation on His part did not arise from any unwillingness to be at peace with man...but solely from the fact that He is the Lawgiver of the universe, and that His Law has been violated; from the fact that the law has a just penalty, threatening death to the violator...from the fact that if the transgressor was released from the penalty of the law there would seem to be a total disregard of the law and its threatenings; from the fact that, if the sinner was admitted to the favour conferred on those who had not sinned, it would seem as if God was regardless of character and treated the good and the bad alike...and destroy...the interests of justice." {19}

"In the idea of the Atonement...these difficulties have been removed, and that God is in all respects now is free to bestow His favour on those for whom it was made as he is on those who have never violated his law." {20}

"Reconciliation is in fact produced between God and man by the atonement. God becomes the friend of the pardoned sinner. He admits him to His favour and treats him as a friend. The sinner becomes the friend of God. He changes his view of the character of God; he submits to his arrangements; he no longer opposes His plans; he is pleased with His government and His laws. He loves Him as he loves no other being. He lives to promote His glory. He loves what God approves, defends what He has stated to be true, advocates the plans which He has formed, vindicates the doctrines which He has revealed; trusts in trial to the promises which He has made, flies to Him in times of trouble and sorrow, leans upon His arm in death, finds in the mortal agony his highest consolation in the belief that God is his friend, and expects to find felicity in the future world only in God. There is no friendship so strong, so sincere, so tender, so enduring, as that between God and the reconciled sinner. {21}

The essential points to be established from the Scriptures are as follows:

1) The atoning death consisted solely in the physical death of the Saviour; it was the giving of His life represented by His blood.

2) Reconciliation is effected through Christ as a result of his substitutional death and sufferings. That not only was He Himself a substitute, but that His sufferings were substituted sufferings, and not the literal penalty of the law.

3) He suffered and died as a substitute in the place of sinners. The innocent was treated as if He were guilty. This work was accomplished on the cross.

4) Man is still guilty, separate, and enemy of God. Repentance from dead works and faith towards God are necessary conditions which must be met, without which there can be no granting of pardon or forgiveness.

5) That the benefits of His suffering may become ours as a ground of our salvation; that is, a public and sufficient reason why God should treat sinners as if they were righteous.

FIRST POINT

The physical death of the Redeemer or the giving of His life that constituted the atonement. Some passages from the New Testament on this doctrine are unequivocal.

Revelation 5:9 "Thou hast redeemed us unto God by thy Blood."

Revelation 7:14 "These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

1 John 1:7 "The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin."

1 Peter 1:18,19 "Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ."

1 Peter 2:24 "Who his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed."

Hebrews 10:10 "By which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once."

Hebrews 13:12 "Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the gate."

Colossians 1:14 "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins..." v 20 "...and having made peace through the blood of his cross..."

Ephesians 1:7 "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.

Hebrews 9:12 "Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his won blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."

Hebrews 10:19 "Having, therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus."

1 Peter 1:2 "Elect...unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."

Acts 20:28 "Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."

Romans 3:25 "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood."

Ephesians 2:13 "Ye, who sometime were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ."

"The doctrine of the Hebrews was, that the blood is the seat of life, or that the life is in the blood; and hence to shed blood became synonymous with taking life. Leviticus 17:11 "The life of the flesh is in the blood." {22}

"The plain doctrine of the New Testament, therefore, is that the blood of Christ - that is, that the giving of his life - was the means of making the atonement, or of securing reconciliation between man and his Maker. In other words, his life was regarded as a sacrifice in the place of sinners, by means of which the penalty of the law which man had incurred might be averted from him...and treated as if he had not sinned. This is the doctrine of the atonement." {23}

SECOND POINT

What is needed to be established is that the sufferings of the Redeemer were substituted suffering or that they were not the literal penalty of law. The point we have looked at is that Christ was the substitute, that is, it was not the person who violated the law that had suffered, but another in its place. So also we need to show that His sufferings themselves were substituted suffering.

A "substitute" is "one person put in the place of another to answer the same purpose." - Webster

Christ is never spoken of as being guilty or deserving of punishment. He always has been regarded as the object of God's highest love. We must take note how carefully the Scripture states this and guards against the view of the imputation of sin which would regard a literal transfer of guilt to Him and thus speak of Him as a sinner - as suffering "justly".

The following Scriptures fortify this truth.

1 Peter 2:22 "Who did no sin; neither was guile found in his mouth."

Hebrews 4:15 "But in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

Hebrews 7:26 "Who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners."

1 Peter 3:8 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sin, the just for the unjust."

Isaiah 53:9 "Because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth."

v 11 "By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many."

Matthew 3:17 "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."

"The passage in 2 Corinthians 5:21 - "he hath made him to be sin for us" - cannot be intended to be literally true...in no proper sense can it be true that he was made to be a sinner; for this would be contrary to the teaching of the passages just quoted, that he "knew no sin", that he was "holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners", and that he "died the just for the unjust". We must therefore look for some other interpretation that the literal one; and that is found in the doctrine that the word here rendered sin, in accordance with Hebrew usage, is employed in the sense of sin-offering." {24}

Leviticus 6:25 "This is the law of the sin offering: in the place where the burnt offering is killed shall the sin offering be killed before the Lord: it is most holy. Whatsoever shall tough the flesh thereof shall be holy..."

The Old Testament atoning lamb was the type, which pointed to the Lamb, which was Christ. Just as the type was most holy so also Christ the substance was most holy. There was no literal transfer of sin.

Similar passages occur in Galatians 3:13 "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." The word here properly means cursing malediction, execration, a devoting or dooming to destruction. It occurs in the New Testament in the following places: Colossians 3:13,13 rendered curse; Hebrews 6:8, James 3:10, rendered cursing. Applied to a lost sinner, it would mean that all saving influences were withdrawn and that he was given over to the malediction of God. But what is its meaning as applied to the Redeemer in the passages now before us?

A) It cannot mean that he was made a curse in the sense that His work and character were displeasing to God; for as we have seen, just the contrary doctrine is everywhere taught in the New Testament.

B) It cannot mean that He was the object of the divine displeasure, and was therefore abandoned by Him to deserved destruction.

C) It cannot be employed as denoting that he was in any sense...blameworthy; for this is equally contrary to the teachings of the Bible.

D) It cannot mean that He was guilty in the usual and proper meaning of the word, and that therefore He was punished; for this would not be true.

E) It cannot mean that He bore the literal penalty of the law; for, there are parts of that penalty - remorse of conscience, and eternity of suffering, which He did not, and could not, bear.

F) It cannot mean that He was sinful, of a sinner, in any sense; for this is equally contrary to all the teachings of the Bible in regard to His character.

G) There is but one other conceivable meaning that can be attached to the passage, and that is that, though innocent, He was treated in His death as if He had been guilty; that is He was put to death as if He had personally deserved it. He was suspended on a cross, as if He had been a malefactor. He was given up by God and man to death as if He had Himself been such a malefactor. He consented to die in the same manner as the vilest malefactor, in order that by His substituted sorrows He might save those who were personally guilty. The idea which makes the atonement so wonderful - the idea which made it an atonement at all - is, that innocence was treated as if it were guilty; that the most pure and holy and benevolent being on earth was treated as if He had been the most vile and ill deserving.

Were it true, that sin had literally been transferred to the innocent it follows that guilt also would have been transferred. Man no longer would be required to repent. Only guilty individuals are or can be required to repent. Of course the Scripture abundantly affirms that God calls all men to repentance. Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30

THIRD POINT

Concerning point three, the work of the Redeemer was accomplished on the cross. The following Scriptures suffice.

Colossians 2:14,15 "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; having spoiled principalities and powers, he hade a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it."

1 Corinthians 1:18 "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved, it is the power of God."

Ephesians 2:15, 16 "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances to make in himself of two one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby..."

Metaphorically the Apostle Paul identified himself as being crucified with Christ on the cross. The entire basis of his new life was what his master had accomplished for him on the cross.

Galatians 2:20 "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."

This too was the reason for his boasting.

Galatians 6:14 "But God forbid that I should glory, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."

Man is not forgiven by God subsequent to the death of Christ. The death of Christ is God’s provision for the forgiveness of sin. Men must repent from dead works and turn to God, exercising faith that Christ's death was on man's behalf, before they can receive pardon.

Acts 2:38 "...repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Acts 3:19 "Repent therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come..."

v 23 "And it shall come to pass that every soul, who will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people."

Matthew 16:24,25 "Then said Jesus unto his disciples, if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it."

Luke 13:3&5 "I tell you, Nay, but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish."

Acts 20:24 "Testifying both to the Jews and also the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ."

Acts 26:20 "...that they should repent and turn to God, and do works fit for repentance."

FOURTH POINT

The merit of the Redeemer's death is a proper and just cause for God to pass over the repentant sinner's penalty. We may avail ourselves of the benefits of His sufferings as if those sufferings had been our own.

"Their deeds are not, indeed imputed to us. They are never reckoned as in any sense ours. There is no transfer of character or of honour. There is no confounding of identity. There is no confusion in the estimate which is formed in regard to meritorious services. But in respect to the results we are regarded and treated as if all that valour...had been ours. The same thing is also true in respect to the sufferings of martyrs. We enjoy the avails of all those sufferings as though they had been our own. It is true that we have not been laid on the rack; that we have not been imprisoned, scourged, stoned; that we have not been bound to a stake or stretched on a cross; that we have not been thrown to wild beasts in the amphitheatre; and it is true also that in the estimate of moral character and real worth there is no confusion of character, no transfer of moral worth; but in regard to all that is valuable in the religion for which they suffered, we enjoy the avails of their sufferings as really as they would themselves have done had their lives been prolonged to the present hour.

The principle, therefore, that we may avail ourselves of the sufferings and trials of others for our own benefit, or may be treated as if those sufferings and trials were our own, enters into the very structure of all social life. It is difficult to see why, under a law that is so universal in reference to our fellowmen, it may not also be a principle in the Divine administration in reference to the toils and sufferings of the Redeemer." {25}

"The merit of the Redeemer is unexhausted by time. The stream of salvation never runs dry. As healing fountains flow from age to age, no matte what numbers apply for healing; and as they retain their power, no matter what the forms of disease which are healed; and as they flow in large abundance above all that is needed and is applied; pouring their streams on the sands of the desert, or mingling with other waters, so it is with the waters of salvation.

"The fountain ever flows, by day and by night, in seed-time and harvest, in summer and winter. It is ample for all that apply. It is unexhausted by the numbers that come, and by the nature of the maladies that are healed. It flows in large abundance above and beyond all that is needed, and though it seems to be useless or wasted, it is neither; for, whether men avail themselves of it or not, it is a standing proof of the inexhaustible and illimitable benevolence of God. It will flow on to the end of time. When all the fountains that now pour forth healing waters for the cure of the sick shall - if they ever do - exhaust the source of supply, the streams of salvation will still pour forth their unexhausted floods over a lost world. Never till time shall end will the sentiment of the beautiful stanzas with which this Treatise on the atonement may appropriately close, cease to be true:-

"There is a fountain, fill'd with blood,
Drawn from Immanuel's veins
And sinners plunged beneath that flood
Lose all their guilty stains.

Dear dying Lamb, they precious blood shall never lose its power,
Till all the ransom'd church of God be saved, to sin no more." {26}

CONCLUSION:

We have seen that the heart of the Gospel message is Jesus Christ and Him crucified; that it was His physical suffering or the giving of His life represented by His blood constitute our Redemption. The sufferings of Christ were substituted sufferings and not the literal penalty which the law breaker himself would have received. The problem of reconciling man to God, as well the justice of the law, is solved through the atonement.

The Word of Faith teaching, completely passes over the heart of the Gospel; that is, the physical suffering and death of the Saviour. Instead, by shifting and perverting the reason for man's Redemption, (from the cross to being born again in Hell) they introduce a damning heresy. They charge Jesus as the vilest and most perverted sinner of the human race, and will justly incur the wrath of the most holy, pure, and righteous Son of God. This teaching not only brings disgrace to the Son of God with respect to his Righteous character, but it pollutes the high value of the Kingdom of His Father, which He represents.

This teaching is a new hybrid of an age-old heresy called Universalism which says all the world has been pardoned, "you just don't know it"! This is what Kenneth Hagin Jr. meant when he said "In the spirit world we are free..." The new twist is that you just have to receive it, or repent!

Knowingly or unknowingly, this teaching says:

1) The physical death of Christ can't save you.

2) All of man's sin was transferred to Jesus (except the sin of unbelief, and the sin against the Holy Spirit, he missed those) all men are pardoned [forgiven].

3) Jesus is a sinner, of the worst kind. He bore the sin of the world in His spirit.

4) Jesus was born again in Hell and overcame the devil.

5) Jesus paid a ransom to the devil being in torment by him in hell. This regained man's right to have authority over the devil, and the sole author of his circumstances. Redemption is now finished.

6) God would be understood to be harsh and vindictive to require a payment in the exact amount before he would consider granting pardon.

7) it can not be said that forgiveness if freely by his grace, since Jesus paid the devil what was coming to him.

FINALLY:

I charge those who embrace this teaching with the sin of unbelief. You have made the death of Christ of none effect. Those of you who have changed the Gospel of the Grace of Christ whereby God is willing to pass over transgression, to a payment to the Devil have perverted the Gospel of the Grace of God. You must repent of this hellish doctrine. The truth is that Christ bore your sin in his body on the tree. 1 Peter 2:24. (This is the reason you can be forgiven, not that you are, and you just have to receive it.) The Apostle Peter wrote, Acts 3:19 "Repent therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come..."

RESOURCES:

1. Kenneth Copeland, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne." (Tape) Classic Redemption Series, Forth Worth: Copeland Ministries, #00-0303.

2. E.W. Kenyon, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" p.46.

3. Kenneth Copeland, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" (Tape) side 2.

4. E.W. Kenyon, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" p.89.

5. Charles Capps, "Authority in Three Worlds" Tulsa Harrison House, 1982, p.159.

6. Kenneth Copeland, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" (Tape) Classic Redemption Series. Forth Worth: Copeland Ministries, #00-0303.

7. E.W. Kenyon, "What Happened from the Cross to the Throne" p.60.

8. Ibid., p.61.

9. Ibid., p.33.

10. Kenneth Hagin, "The New Birth" Tulsa, OK. pp.13,14.

11. Kenneth Hagin, Jr., "The Prison Door is Open - What are You Still Doing Inside?" Tulsa, OK. pp26.28.

12. Paul F. Billheimer, "Destined for the Throne". Christian Literature Crusade, Forth Washington, Pennsylvania, p.94.

13. Albert Barnes, "The Atonement", Bethany House Publishers, Minneapolis, MN p.230.

14. Ibid., p.244.

15. Ibid., p.265.

16. Ibid., p.266.

17. Ibid., p.266.

18. Ibid., p.267.

19. Ibid., p.263.

20. Ibid., p.263.

21. Ibid., p.263.

22. Ibid., p.301.

23. Ibid., pp.302-3.

24. Ibid., p.294.

25. Ibid., pp.295-6.

26. Ibid., pp.305-6


Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 1/18/18 2:19 pm; edited 1 time in total
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/18 2:04 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey... Aaron Scott
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Aaron - you appear to cross into Nestorianism in your reply to OTCP. Could you take a step back and expound on your view/understanding of the hypostatic union so that you are not misinterpreted?


There MUST be a distinction between the human nature and the divine nature of Christ UNLESS you are willing to claim that God died.

Or that God was tempted with evil (which the Bible says cannot happen).

Further, as you might know, Nestorius did not like calling Mary "The Mother of God." I don't either, even though there is some reason for calling her that in a roundabout way.

If by Nestorianism, you mean that I make a distinction between Jesus' human nature and His divine nature, then, yes, I do. He was ONE BEING, but of two natures. There was the human spirit that did not want to die...and there was the divine nature which could not die.

As for the hypostatic union (I had to look that up), I don't propose to know how it all happened...and neither does anyone but God. Besides, if you don't solve it "correctly," you are a heretic, and if you solve it the accepted way, you win only ad baculum.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
1/18/18 2:08 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt... Aaron Scott
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
The WoF concept of the atonement is in reality just a crude application of the unscriptural penal substitution (PS) theory. PS was indeed taught by the Magisterial Protestant Reformers, and is still pretty much the majority, default view in evangelicalism today, as unscriptural as it is.

That said, WoF teachers take PS to, shall we say, new depths. In doing so, they reduce it to a total absurdity, insisting that Christ literally became sinful, impregnated with evil itself, and that His ‘spiritual death’ required that He be born again in Hell. The thing that WoFers even fail to acknowledge, however, is that for Jesus to have fully paid the penalty due us for sin, He would have of necessity had to remain in absolute torment in Hell for all eternity, not just three days.



Now, I don't believe Jesus burned in hell, even though the Bible says He went to hell.

BUT...to say that Jesus would have had to burn in hell forever to have fully paid the penalty for sin would mean that it follows (it seems) that Jesus would have to REMAIN dead or REMAIN "made sin" for it to be effective for us.

I don't think we can get away with criticizing the WOF for not believing that Jesus had to stay in hell forever if we don't explain why Jesus didn't have to stay on the cross, in the grave, etc. forever to effect salvation, etc.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
1/18/18 2:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Dave Dorsey... Dave Dorsey
Aaron Scott wrote:
There MUST be a distinction between the human nature and the divine nature of Christ UNLESS you are willing to claim that God died.

Or that God was tempted with evil (which the Bible says cannot happen).

Further, as you might know, Nestorius did not like calling Mary "The Mother of God." I don't either, even though there is some reason for calling her that in a roundabout way.

If by Nestorianism, you mean that I make a distinction between Jesus' human nature and His divine nature, then, yes, I do. He was ONE BEING, but of two natures. There was the human spirit that did not want to die...and there was the divine nature which could not die.

As for the hypostatic union (I had to look that up), I don't propose to know how it all happened...and neither does anyone but God. Besides, if you don't solve it "correctly," you are a heretic, and if you solve it the accepted way, you win only ad baculum.

You're making a couple of very significant mistakes (perhaps unintentionally), but aside from that, you're basically correctly arguing against the very thing you're trying to defend.

You are correct to make a distinction between Christ's two natures. This is orthodox teaching. However, it is error to extend that to mean Christ had two spirits, one of which died and one of which did not. You seem to be making "nature" and "spirit" synonymous; they are not, and this is not only Nestorianism but hyper-Nestorianism, the belief that Jesus essentially consisted of two persons, one human and one divine. (You seem to concede by implication one body and one soul, but error in assuming two spirits.)

Aside from that... yeah. You make a solid argument about why Christ could not have died spiritually.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
1/18/18 2:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Quiet Wyatt... Quiet Wyatt
Aaron Scott wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
The WoF concept of the atonement is in reality just a crude application of the unscriptural penal substitution (PS) theory. PS was indeed taught by the Magisterial Protestant Reformers, and is still pretty much the majority, default view in evangelicalism today, as unscriptural as it is.

That said, WoF teachers take PS to, shall we say, new depths. In doing so, they reduce it to a total absurdity, insisting that Christ literally became sinful, impregnated with evil itself, and that His ‘spiritual death’ required that He be born again in Hell. The thing that WoFers even fail to acknowledge, however, is that for Jesus to have fully paid the penalty due us for sin, He would have of necessity had to remain in absolute torment in Hell for all eternity, not just three days.


Now, I don't believe Jesus burned in hell, even though the Bible says He went to hell.

BUT...to say that Jesus would have had to burn in hell forever to have fully paid the penalty for sin would mean that it follows (it seems) that Jesus would have to REMAIN dead or REMAIN "made sin" for it to be effective for us.

I don't think we can get away with criticizing the WOF for not believing that Jesus had to stay in hell forever if we don't explain why Jesus didn't have to stay on the cross, in the grave, etc. forever to effect salvation, etc.


Only those who affirm the penal substitution view of the atonement must explain how this theory does not require eternal damnation as the penalty. As I have said, I find the PS theory to be something the inspired Scriptures do not teach. So then, I can indeed criticize the WoF caricaturization of PS, on much the same basis as I can criticize and refute the PS theory.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/18 2:25 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Jesus provides some interesting insight: bradfreeman
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Brad's appeal to Calvin is in error. He is quoting Institutes II.16.10, in which Calvin is commentating on the Apostles' Creed. A closer reading, specifically of II.16.12, will make it clear that Calvin is not referring to spiritual death in the same way that WoF theology does. II.16.11 brings into proper context Calvin's statement about Christ wrestling with evil in Hell.

II.16.8-12 can be read here:

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/christdecended.html


Thanks for your take on Calvin, Dave.

Here's the quote:

10. THE "DESCENT INTO HELL" AS AN EXPRESSION OF THE SPIRITUAL TORMENT THAT CHRIST UNDERWENT FOR US
But we must seek a surer explanation, apart from the Creed, of Christ’s descent into hell. The explanation given to us in God’s Word is not only holy and pious, but also full of wonderful consolation. If Christ had died only a bodily death, it would have been ineffectual. No — it was expedient at the same time for him to undergo the severity of God’s vengeance, to appease his wrath and satisfy his just judgment. For this reason, he must also grapple hand to hand with the armies of hell and the dread of everlasting death. f439 A little while ago f440 we referred to the prophet’s statement that "the chastisement of our peace was laid upon him," "he was wounded for our transgressions" by the Father, "he was bruised for our infirmities" [Isaiah 53:5 p.]. By these words he means that Christ was put in place of evildoers as surety and pledge — submitting himself even as the accused — to bear and suffer all the punishments that they ought to have sustained. All — with this one exception: "He could not be held by the pangs of death" [Acts 2:24 p.]. No wonder, then, if he is said to have descended into hell, for he suffered the death that, God in his wrath had inflicted upon the wicked! Those who — on the ground that it is absurd to put after his burial what preceded it — say that the order is reversed in this way are making a very trifling and ridiculous objection. f441 The point is that the Creed sets forth what Christ suffered in the sight of men, and then appositely speaks of that invisible and incomprehensible judgment which he underwent in the sight of God in order that we might know not only that Christ’s body was given as the price of our redemption, but that he paid a greater and more excellent price in suffering in his soul the terrible torments of a condemned and forsaken man.
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
1/18/18 2:30 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Jesus provides some interesting insight: bradfreeman
Mark Ledbetter wrote:
As Jesus hung on the cross with thieves on either side, one thief made this request, "Jesus, remember me when You come in your kingdom!"

To this request Jesus replied, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:42-43).

Paradise doesn't seem to be a place of torment. I don't see Satan and demons dragging Jesus in to hell, especially when Jesus willing laid down His life for the ransom of men from sin. And, especially when we erroneously see hell as Satan's domain - that comes later when he is judged in Revelation.

Death does not necessarily result in immediate judgment of "fiery Gehenna."

Death results in the "descent" into Hades/Sheol, the "land of the dead" without any connotation of torment.

However, Hades can be described as being compartmentalized: The rich man went to hades and was tormented by flames, but Lazarus was "carried away by the angels to Abraham's bosom, a metaphor for the the abiding place of the righteous awaiting the resurrection.

So, it is possible the connotations of "hell" can include both a place of torment (fiery Gehenna) and abiding in Paradise/Abraham's bosom until the resurrection.


I agree that "hell" can include both. But 1 Peter 3:18, 19 seems to indicate that, at some point, Jesus went where the crowd that drowned in Noah's day were held.
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/


Last edited by bradfreeman on 1/18/18 2:43 pm; edited 1 time in total
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
1/18/18 2:33 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post bradfreeman
Old Time Country Preacher wrote:
I gave an informed exegetical response, Brad/Aaron. Aaron, you asked for a scriptural challenge and I offered one. Lots a stuff can be said to have scriptural support, like Mormonism's baptism for the dead. But you boys know the good Book has gotta be handled correctly, i.e., hermeneutically and exegetically solid.


The shedding of His blood accomplished all that was needed to remove our sin and all that sin entailed - punishment, curse, death. When Jesus said "It is finished", our sin was gone. However, His resurrection marked the beginning of our new life.

Rom 4:25 He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Rom 6:4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.

But, I am curious how to interpret the scriptures I cited to earlier and the questions they raise. Any thoughts?
_________________
I'm not saved because I'm good. I'm saved because He's good!

My website: www.bradfreeman.com
My blog: http://bradcfreeman.tumblr.com/
Acts-dicted
Posts: 9027
1/18/18 2:35 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Quiet Wyatt... Dave Dorsey
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Only those who affirm the penal substitution view of the atonement must explain how this theory does not require eternal damnation as the penalty. As I have said, I find the PS theory to be something the inspired Scriptures do not teach. So then, I can indeed criticize the WoF caricaturization of PS, on much the same basis as I can criticize and refute the PS theory.

I do not want or intend to hijack into a PS debate -- but, Christ's eternality is the answer to the question. PS doesn't require an eternal atonement (in duration) because there was an eternal atonement (in being). A three day penal substitution is likewise nonsensical, so this is an issue for WoF from both PS and non-PS views.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
1/18/18 2:45 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Dave Dorsey... Aaron Scott
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Aaron Scott wrote:
There MUST be a distinction between the human nature and the divine nature of Christ UNLESS you are willing to claim that God died.

Or that God was tempted with evil (which the Bible says cannot happen).

Further, as you might know, Nestorius did not like calling Mary "The Mother of God." I don't either, even though there is some reason for calling her that in a roundabout way.

If by Nestorianism, you mean that I make a distinction between Jesus' human nature and His divine nature, then, yes, I do. He was ONE BEING, but of two natures. There was the human spirit that did not want to die...and there was the divine nature which could not die.

As for the hypostatic union (I had to look that up), I don't propose to know how it all happened...and neither does anyone but God. Besides, if you don't solve it "correctly," you are a heretic, and if you solve it the accepted way, you win only ad baculum.

You're making a couple of very significant mistakes (perhaps unintentionally), but aside from that, you're basically correctly arguing against the very thing you're trying to defend.

You are correct to make a distinction between Christ's two natures. This is orthodox teaching. However, it is error to extend that to mean Christ had two spirits, one of which died and one of which did not. You seem to be making "nature" and "spirit" synonymous; they are not, and this is not only Nestorianism but hyper-Nestorianism, the belief that Jesus essentially consisted of two persons, one human and one divine. (You seem to concede by implication one body and one soul, but error in assuming two spirits.)

Aside from that... yeah. You make a solid argument about why Christ could not have died spiritually.


Well, then, apparently I am a Nestorian. I do not believe there is a good solution to Jesus being both God and man unless we posit that there was a part of Him that was NOT human, but divine. Otherwise, I think we are not far afield of some form of "inspiration"--that is, like a prophet getting a word from God. But that is not Jesus, is it?

The reason there was ever any issue over this matter is precisely BECAUSE it cannot be easily reasoned or solved. In fact, the ONLY WAY to solve it is--you guessed it--declare the other side to be heretics and kick them out of the church (or perhaps just kill them--works both ways).
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
1/18/18 2:55 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Quiet Wyatt... Quiet Wyatt
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Only those who affirm the penal substitution view of the atonement must explain how this theory does not require eternal damnation as the penalty. As I have said, I find the PS theory to be something the inspired Scriptures do not teach. So then, I can indeed criticize the WoF caricaturization of PS, on much the same basis as I can criticize and refute the PS theory.

I do not want or intend to hijack into a PS debate -- but, Christ's eternality is the answer to the question. PS doesn't require an eternal atonement (in duration) because there was an eternal atonement (in being). A three day penal substitution is likewise nonsensical, so this is an issue for WoF both from PS and non-PS views.


Yes, PS theorists sometimes try to assert that, as Christ was eternal, his temporal sufferings were somehow equivalent to eternal punishment. But one may as well say His incarnation itself was likewise unnecessary, since, on account of His eternality, His desire to redeem was equivalent to any real-time act which might have been required. Further, the attempt to somehow reduce the penalty for sin from eternal damnation to the crucifixion (or as suffering additionally for three days in Hell, as WoF teaches) is to really admit that the penalty was not required to be paid “to the penny” by Christ. An atoning sacrifice is to allow for a substitute in place of the literal penalty being required.


Last edited by Quiet Wyatt on 1/18/18 3:06 pm; edited 1 time in total
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/18 3:02 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
There was a part of Jesus that was not human -- His divine nature. Except it wasn't a part; He is both fully God and fully man, two complete natures in one person. This is the hypostatic union. Likely none of us will understand it this side of glory, but serious Christological error inevitably results from any doctrinal variation concerning the hypostatic union.

I think you may not actually be expressing that Christ was not fully human, though it does read like that. Nevertheless, extreme precision is required to discuss such things without erring.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
1/18/18 3:02 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
The Word which was God became flesh, and dwelt among us. He did not cease being God on the Cross. Nor could He have. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/18 3:04 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
It would be unfair to Aaron to hijack into a PS debate. My only point is that PS is not a life preserver for WoF. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
1/18/18 3:04 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
The Word which was God became flesh, and dwelt among us. He did not cease being God on the Cross. Nor could He have.

Thumb Up Thumb Up
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
1/18/18 3:05 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
I am definitely not attempting a hijack of the discussion. I do find the PS theory is very relevant to a discussion of the WoF concept of atonement. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/18 3:09 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
Unless his views have dramatically changed recently, I would have to characterize Aaron’s view of Christ as Arian or perhaps semi-Arian. This I base on numerous discussions I have had with him, most of them right here on Acts, over the past 17 years. I would be VERY happy to find that Aaron now affirms the full Deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/18 3:13 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
I am definitely not attempting a hijack of the discussion. I do find the PS theory is very relevant to a discussion of the WoF concept of atonement.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were. I felt like I was.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
1/18/18 3:20 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt--I guess I just made your day! Aaron Scott
Quiet Wyatt wrote:
Unless his views have dramatically changed recently, I would have to characterize Aaron’s view of Christ as Arian or perhaps semi-Arian. This I base on numerous discussions I have had with him, most of them right here on Acts, over the past 17 years. I would be VERY happy to find that Aaron now affirms the full Deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity.


I have ALWAYS affirmed the full deity of Christ. ALWAYS.

The trinity? Well, beyond the fact that no one can actually articulate how it works, cannot get beyond that multitude of verses that don't permit themselves to be easily characterized as Trinitarian, and the such, well, I simply cannot, in good conscience, make it a theological litmus test.

Anyone that claims that the trinity is absolute in scripture...doesn't know what they are talking about (and QW, as a scholar of scripture, you, of course, know this very well). The trinity is a POSSIBLE solution to just how the Father and the Son can both be God...and there still be only one God.

Oneness believers don't do any better (worse, actually, I think). They hold that there is one God due to Jesus being manifested in a multitude of ways, etc.

You can be pretty sure that most of the people who believed on the Lord for salvation did not know--nor every come to know, in this life--just how the Father and the Son are two persons, but only one God.

In fact, although I can state it by rote, the standard articulation of the trinity--namely, one God in three persons--doesn't make a lick of sense to the human mind. That, along with the problems it has in meeting all the scriptures about God, make it a belief that must be accepted on faith...or, really, because way back in 325 A.D., it was decided that to NOT believe it was heresy (oddly enough, R.G. Spurling felt that it was there that the church began to go astray from the law of love).

We don't have to agree on the trinity for us to BOTH agree that Jesus is the Son of God, and is as fully divine as His Father.

I don't understand it--no one here does--but we do KNOW that there is ONE God...and Jesus is the Son of God. Anything beyond that...we have to play some games.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
1/18/18 3:39 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post What Word of Faith teachings posit 1 of 2 Rafael D Martinez
The Faith Message: A Closer Look

According to the Faith movement, salvation brings not only forgiveness of sin to the Christian, but a unique variety of pre-resurrection glorification to man’s nature. This glorification is seen as the literal birthing of a new race of mankind, “sons of God” who walk as kings and priests in this present world order. At the moment of their conversion, the spirit of the individual in the process of redemption is so thoroughly recreated, perfected and endued with a new nature by the Holy Spirit that the only thing lacking in their life is their glorified resurrection body. They are destined to enjoy the will of God which decrees that all of His children walk in perfect ("divine") health and wealth, free from "the curse of the law." Irrevocable "spiritual laws" guarantee blessing to those who master them, including Almighty God, who Himself must exercise faith in these "spiritual laws" to rule the universe. (2)

Those in this world who do suffer sickness, privation and financial problems actually demonstrate spiritual deficiency, either lack of faith or secret sins. Faith teachings also claim that the death and resurrection of Jesus paid the price for their deliverance from the effects of the fallen world order around them. In light of the redemptive act just described, the curse placed upon the world by God in the garden of Eden through entrance of sin into mankind has actually been actually lifted. This deliverance, of course, is legally applied to the Christian to the extent they hold fast to audible positive confessions of what one teacher called “faith in your faith.”

In our last article, I detailed a brief summary of what the Faith movement “names” and “claims.” In this article we will take a detailed look at are three central claims of the gospel according to the Faith movement which become apparent after studying its literature that we should be aware of to understand what it proclaims. These summaries are culled from the widely available sources of Faith teaching and preaching found today.

The Faith Gospel's Claim # 1 : Covenant Coverings

First of all, the Faith movement teaches that the New Covenant of Christianity which was established by the life and teachings of Christ contains a charter of spiritual laws that govern the relationship between God and His people. The Abrahamic covenant recorded in Genesis 17:1-9 is the most dominant one. To the Faith movement, the relationship of the New Testament church to this covenant is a central theme of their doctrine of salvation, the atonement of Christ and the relationship of God to the redeemed. The fall of mankind bestowed spiritual death upon mankind and a transfer of the “legal” dominion of man over the earth directly to Satan’s control. Kenneth Hagin explains:

After the fall of mankind, the human race steadily fell away from the knowledge of God. The harvest of sin became more and more apparent. The broken law exacted its penalty of increasing sin, sickness and disease in mankind. God looked down from on high and said, "I created my man to be a companion to me. Sin has stolen him away. I will formulate a plan to bring man back to me; back to where he was supposed to be." God looked down into a place called Ur of the Chaldees and found a man by the name of Abram, whom He renamed Abraham. .. it is through Abraham's seed that you and I come forward in faith to receive the best God has to offer His man. (3)

The fall from Eden made man a slave to sin and subject to physical death, poverty, pain and suffering and, as Kenneth Copeland adds, even severed God from connection with his creation on earth:

After Adam's fall in the Garden, God needed an avenue back into the earth. He needed some way to break the union between Satan and mankind. Since man was the key figure in the fall, man had to be the key figure in redemption; so God approached a man named Abram. .. God offered Abram a proposition and Abram bought it" (emphasis mine). (4)

The "agreement" that God went on to negotiate with Abraham became a pivotal point in his work of salvation throughout history, for this covenant, Faith teaching asserts, has legally bound God to bestow blessings upon all who are in Christ. "God will set or fix this covenant with you and me in our day to such a degree that the promise cannot be altered," wrote Gloria Copeland. "The covenant cannot be established in your life unless you believe God's Word concerning prosperity. Let there be no doubt about God's will. God's will is to establish His covenant in the earth. Prosperity is a major requirement in the establishment of God's will" (author's emphasis). (5)

So therefore, a Christian may come to Christ through confession of sin, repentance and faith in Christ alone for redemption, therefore, and yet be completely found to be out of God's will by not being found in "divine wealth and health." This well known Faith doctrine principle is echoed worldwide through the claims of many “Faith people” who insist that to “be broke” is a sign of living beneath one’s privileges – at best – as a “King’s Kid.” And Rickey Singleton, a Faith teacher from suburban Chicago, concisely explains how this fine point of Faith theology is by no means lost on the rank and file of the Faith movement:

What you must do is learn how to walk in the Spirit. And you want to know what living right really is? Living right means that you are prosperous, you are blessed, you are applying the principles, the rules of faith in your life. That is living right! (6) (Click to listen to Singleton's claim here by Real Audio)

Salvation, therefore, brings a special measure of God’s grace that empowers the believer to live a life of absolute control over their own life as Copeland explains in another of his seemingly innumerable publications: "When you make Jesus the Lord of your life, you receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness to enable you to reign in life as a king! You will be in a position to reign over your life and the circumstances surrounding you the same as a king reigns over his kingdom." (7)

The Faith Gospel's Claim #2: Spiritual Laws Operated By A "God Kind Of Faith"

The second central point of Faith teaching is that the New Covenant is governed under various "spiritual laws" that God himself must follow as well. There are two primary spiritual laws which are described in Romans 8:2 that govern human existence, these being the "law of sin and death" and the "law of the spirit of life." Adam's fall introduced the first into the world, but the resurrection of Christ introduced the second, and our faith is a spiritual force that activates the effects of the latter. Sin and unbelief, of course, empower the former. As we've seen in our previous article, the concept of determinative spiritual laws that control everything in creation is not a unique one and was introduced through the direct influence of Christian teachers who were influenced by occultic teaching.

How these spiritual laws work is explained, according to Faith teaching, through a unique interpretation of Galatians 3:13-14, 29. These verses, it is claimed, show how the lifting of the "curse of the law" which are referred to in Deuteronomy 28 has been done by the redemptive work of Christ. In the saving work of Christ on the Cross, the "blessing of Abraham" then extends to those who are "Abraham's seed, and heirs to the promise." Since the Body of Christ is referred to in the New Testament as “spiritual Israel,” as the Gentiles grafted into the vine of natural Israel who are to receive the blessings of Abraham’s natural children, its’ heritage is meant to include these divine blessings beyond measure. So according to 2 Corinthians 8:9, the atonement provides incalculable riches of healing, blessing and prosperity available to all believers. These choice blessings can only be released through trust in the covenant and personal confessions drawn from a familiarity with it. Kenneth Hagin’s exposition on this is clear:

We find that the curse (of the law, mentioned in Galatians 3:13-14, 29), or punishment, for breaking God's law is threefold. It is poverty. It is sickness. And the second death. (8)

Kenneth Copeland is even more explicit:

A man without God in the world is a man without a covenant. He has nothing to believe. He has nothing to rely upon. .. You as a believer have God's covenant, God's Word. .. if you don't put it to use, you are on the same level as the man who does not know salvation is for him. He is hell-bound. You are poverty bound or bound in some other area where the Word gives you freedom. If you do not use the covenant, you will live in defeat (emphasis mine). (9)

Since the believer has been given freedom and new life as a member of the New Creation, it is then easy to understand the triumphal tenor that Faith life should be lived in. Since the power of the curse over mankind has supposedly been broken, Christians will live only as victoriously as their level of mastery of these spiritual laws makes them. Their dominion and Christian liberty, as Kenneth Copeland states, totally depends upon it:

We are creatures of the world of the spirit, and we need to know how to walk under the laws that govern this spiritual world instead of continuing to walk under the laws that govern the natural, physical world. When we learn the laws, rules and regulations that govern the world of the spirit, we will gain the knowledge of how to govern the world of the natural. (10).

Access to the covenantal birthrights of divine health and wealth can only be achieved by a firm understanding of spiritual laws which govern the operation of the covenant. The importance of these spiritual laws to Faith doctrine can’t be overstated. With an inexplicably mystical bent common to many Faith teachers, Kenneth Copeland explains that "the spiritual world and its laws are more powerful than the physical world and its laws. Spiritual law gave birth to physical law." (emphasis mine) (11). Just how the Faith movement precisely arrived at this rather cryptic conclusion has never been explained. However, it is accepted as Gospel truth with no Biblical basis at all. They go on to further declare that there are variations within the law of the spirit of life such as the “law of genesis” ("every thing was created by God to produce after its own kind .. man takes on the nature of his spiritual father or lord."), the law of “reaping and sowing”, and the “law of love,” among others (12). But the main point to bear in mind is that both the physical and spiritual world are governed by various spiritual laws that are all binding and all powerful. In the work of Christ on the Cross, Faith teaching claims, the “law of life” superseded the “law of sin and death”: how people live in accordance with these laws determines their physical as well as spiritual destiny.

The access to these laws is through a level of faith which Faith teachers continuously exhort their students to seek. It is popularly called the "God-kind of faith," and Christians are to aspire to the same level of perfect faith that God supposedly has. As startling as it is, the Faith movement unblushingly asserts that even the majestic sovereignty of God is subject to these spiritual laws. "God is a faith being," writes Copeland. "You are born of God. You are a faith being. God does not do anything outside of faith. With His faith living in you, you are to operate the same way." (13). Frederick Price, in a classic and concise example, states that "Jesus said, in (Mark 11:22), 'Have faith in God.' In the literal Greek, that statement should be rendered, 'Have the faith of God.' Or, in the vernacular of today, 'Have the God kind of faith'" (author's emphasis). (14).

The late Kenneth Hagin flatly stated in one of his newsletters that "evidently God had faith in his faith, because He spoke words of faith and they came to pass. Evidently Jesus had faith in His faith, because He spoke to the fig tree, and what He said came to pass." (15). Faith teachers also point to Hebrews 11:3 to supply further light upon how God accomplishes his will: by using the only kind of faith that God could possibly use, the "God kind."

God believed in His heart that what He said with His mouth would come to pass, and He dared to say it. In the presence of angels, of Satan, of everything then in existence, God stepped out on space and said, 'Let there be. .. God must first of all believed in his heart that what He said with His mouth would come to pass; otherwise, there would have been no reason for Him to say it. (16).

It is just this sort of level of faith that believers are called to aspire to, since being sons of God, they have been supplied the same ability of accomplishment by the utilization of faith. How then, are “Faith people” to express their “God kind of faith” in ways that achieve success, blessing and victoriously “abundant Christian life?”

The Faith Gospel's Claim #3: Creative Confession Of "Words Of Faith"

This leads us into a discussion of the third central tenet of the gospel according to the Word of Faith movement, the belief in the creative power of the spoken Word. Any casual examination of virtually any Faith teacher's material will immediately reveal the profoundly high value they place upon the confession of "faith-filled words," and the rejection of any "negative confession" whatsoever. It is through the trust in the power of confession that the “God kind of Faith” brings triumph to the believer.

In his most well known tract entitled Words, Kenneth Hagin raises the issue immediately when he boldly declares on the first page of his writing that

WORDS are more important than a lot of people realize. WORDS make or break us. WORDS heal us or make us sick. .. Our WORDS - the WORDS we spoke yesterday - made life what it is today. (17).

Since the Word of God is held to be inseparable from His essential nature, and since the Christian has been given the right to speak the Word with the same authority as God, the very nature and power of God can be issued forth from their mouth. Again, this teaching, restated by an army of Faith teachers over generations, overshadows the Pentecostal and Charismatic camps that have accepted Faith teaching as legitimate expressions of their faith. Charles Capps forcefully emphasizes this point to ensure his audience doesn't fail to understand this:

When God's Word becomes engrafted or infused into your spirit it has become a part of you. It cannot be separated from you! It is not only your thought and affirmation. IT IS YOU! THE WORD MADE FLESH. Then your flesh will reflect the life of that Word. When God's Word concerning healing takes root in your flesh, it becomes greater than disease and healing is the result. (18)

The spiritual oneness of the believer with God by the "law of the Spirit," therefore dictates that the word of the believer has the same creative power as God's own spoken Word. This startling claim is Gospel truth to the Faith movement's rank and file and Capps and other Faith teachers endlessly repeat this crucial point again and again. As one verbally confesses in absolute faith Scripture promises in the form of continual personal affirmations, the divine power inherent to the "God breathed" words themselves actually becomes personally incarnated within the spiritual and physical nature of the Christian. With such divine authority made manifest in the life of the Christian, they are then empowered to work miracles of increase, blessing, healing and deliverance - therefore creating "divine health" and "divine wealth." In a televised teaching session, (click to watch) Gloria Copeland elaborates on this point,

What you continually say creates an image in front of you that will come to pass. .. the Word of God and the words you continually speak create an image that comes to pass in your life. You have to change what your heart sees with the Word of God and speak in agreement with that. .. Your words are a fortress for you or a fortress against you!

What she is referring to is the same power of words that Hagin has alluded to, an innate power in the spoken word that can be used for good or for evil, a spiritual force that can be supercharged by the power of the spoken Word of God that is continually confesses. She goes on to say that

what you continually say with your mouth is what you believe in your heart .. you're sowing words all the time and you reap a harvest all the time. Now you sow the right words and you'll sow the right harvest. .. Faith has to be in two places. It has to be in your heart and it has to be in your mouth. Just in your mouth without the Word of God in your heart to back it up is just a mental confession .. it's not got the creative power of God's Word in it to change things. If you just have it in your heart, you believe it in your heart, but you don't say it with your mouth, or you say something opposite that with your mouth, than you haven't done what it takes to release that faith out of you as brother Roberts teaches .. and to apply it to the circumstances that you want to change. The word of your mouth, coming out of your heart in faith, change natural circumstances. (emphasis mine) (19).

This is the ultimate conclusion of Faith movement teachings. The believer has the same power to create through the power of their spoken word that the Father possesses. This creative agency is energized by the power of the Word of God "lined up" with their own audible confessions from both "mouth and heart." Therefore, since God has given Christians in the New Covenant the ability to use words as Christ did, then these "faith-filled words" will have the same power of the spoken Word of God itself.

This incredible claim is supposedly Biblically based. "Faith is a product of the reborn spirit," (20) a substance that is identified by Hebrews 11:1, said Kenneth Copeland in one of their telecasts. Since Jesus is the author of our faith, all who are in Christ can have that same "faith of God." In Mark 11:23, Jesus shows us that we should have whatever we say, so a "word release" of faith-filled words must precede all our actions of faith. In quoting his old mentor Kenneth Hagin, Copeland states that Romans 10:17, shows that faith comes "by hearing and hearing and hearing" the Word of God (21). It is through this lens of the Faith perspective that other verses in the Bible that refer to faith, healing and blessing from God are always viewed.

These personal declarations are the "positive confession" that has been long used to characterize Faith teaching, the "confession to bring possession." It is the common denominator of all Faith teachers across the world. This confession of "God's Words" concerning the need of the believer will generate a powerful reaction in the spirit realm that will work creative miracles. Since the "faith of God" is directly operative through the audibly confessed "faith-filled words" of the believer that affirm complete agreement with "everything the Word says" about them, it is inevitable that they can take the next logical step and exercise faith in their own gift of faith, since it is "the gift of God."(22)

The Roberts Revelation: How Oral Roberts Reinforced Faith Teaching

These three central claims of the Faith movement, expounded through earnest persuasion or fiery revivalism originating from silver-tongued Faith preachers, come straight from a three fold gale howling out of the depths of a perfect storm of astonishing power. This windstorm is seen in the work of the "Kenyon Connection" which we discussed in our last article that was advanced by Kenneth Hagin. But Kenyon's ideals, rephrased in Hagin's homespun teaching, were launched into global flight upon the soaring wings of what I will call the "Roberts Revelation" set forth by Oral Roberts, the well known Oklahoma "healing evangelist." His entrepreneurial influence was not only as formative to Faith doctrine as that of Hagin's and Kenyon but also made it possible for the Faith movement to assume the global prominence it now holds.

A "preacher's kid" and healed from tuberculosis as a teenager during a tent revival, Roberts accepted a call to ministry in the Pentecostal Holiness church in 1936 and pastored until 1947. It was then that his self-described "spiritual volcano" finally erupted and he began his own "healing" ministry. Saying God had told him "to take My healing power to your generation," and "don't be like other men .. (or) like any other denomination," (23), Roberts began to travel across the nation holding healing crusades in churches, auditoriums and tents in which tens of thousands of people were divinely healed. His evangelistic association's activities so skillfully mobilized TV and radio broadcasting as well as a publishing ministry to augment his healing crusades to a fantastically successful degree (24) that millions of people who would never have thought of entertaining Pentecostalism were able to easily access it by TV and direct mailings. The mass media were profoundly influential for the advance of the Pentecostal movement of the 1950's, which was then encountering unprecedented openness to its claims by the larger non-Pentecostal culture around it. There is much that could be said about how Roberts paved the way for the Faith movement but time will not allow us to explore this more thoroughly. What is clear that his preaching and healing campaigns, along with those of William Branham and Gordon Lindsay, opened doors across Western Christian circles for Pentecostal faith to find new audiences open to their teaching. Without this, the Faith movement might have lingered in sectarian obscurity and the Charismatic movement might never have had the impact that it did.

It is Roberts' teaching emphasis - simple, direct, and easy to understand - that drew him the attention he enjoyed. It wasn't the familiar thunder of a Pentecostal evangelist's call to "turn or burn", seasoned with references to hell and damnation, that Roberts brought to his ministry. Instead, Roberts' passionate oratory preached a revelation of a supposedly long lost spiritual truth, summarized in 3 John 2 where a good God's deepest desire for man is to bless all with prosperity "even as their soul prospered." "Third John 2 became a battering ram that began to tear down the walls for a new theology," Roberts wrote of his encounter with the verse, "That was a revelation to my soul .. I found that there was a true scriptural basis for believing that God wants man to be happy, healthy, strong and prosperous." (25) The verse, as Roberts taught with compelling enthusiasm, is to be viewed as a plain reference to Christian salvation, divine healing and material prosperity and became the cornerstone to his ministry. Roberts' emphasis on prosperity for the whole man - body, mind and soul - had a powerful appeal for his earliest audiences. They found its perspective bringing to them renewal of hope, spiritual inspiration and renewed faith in the goodness of a God who had a plan for their lives of blessing, especially when it was phrased by Roberts as cutting edge revelation that had been missed so completely by the Christian Church.

And just a few years later in 1953, Roberts articulated another unique offering concept he claimed divine inspiration for, originally calling it "my Blessing-Pact Covenant with God" but more popularly known as "seed faith." Based upon what Roberts calls a spiritual law of sowing and reaping, and depending completely on God as the "Source of your supply," offerings should be generously given "that you may receive. In this you give BEFORE you have received, not after" (26) "to claim the return Jesus promised. You sow the gift for the God of the harvest to multiply back to help others, and then yourself. Your continual giving is a continual renewing of your finances"(emphasis author's) (27). Seed faith is applicable to other commodities of offering like love and time, material goods and other things but it's financial focus gained it the greatest attention and wasn't lost on Roberts' massive audience in the 1950's and 1960's.

They responded so liberally that he was able to fund the creation of the university now named after him in fulfillment of an alleged divine commission to do so. Roberts' vision of creating an institution of higher education devoted to his Pentecostal holistic view that sought to bring divine unity of faith and science, spirituality and reason was launched dramatically as Oral Roberts University. Along with his flourishing media ministry came another vision of developing a Christian hospital where his theology of healing by the laying on of hands and prayers of faith could be integrated along side cutting edge medical technology and practice, culminating in the so-called "City Of Faith," a massive hospital venture that never became solvent, caused controversy and eventually was shut down. As for the University, Roberts' son Richard now runs it, but not without allegations of extravagant living that have resulted in a lawsuit.

3 John 2 is now the proof text of choice for generations of Faith teachers who universally view it as the infallible Biblical evidence for the validity of their doctrine. The practice of sowing to receive through seed faith is another Faith movement practice long enshrined in their own thought and practice (28). (Click here to watch Roberts' reaction at how his seed faith doctrine was interpreted by one Faith congregation as he preached) It can be argued that Roberts is singlehandedly responsible for introducing these concepts to the spiritual melting pot of Pentecostalism in the 1950's, both directly and indirectly through Kenneth Hagin's example. For it was around the same time Roberts' healing ministry launched that Hagin left an Assemblies of God pastorate to start his own itinerant evangelistic ministry. His Pentecostal pragmatism already predisposed to adapt whatever spiritual technique he came across that got "results," he was aware of Roberts' "revelations" which undoubtedly reinforced his own doctrinal innovations. It wouldn't be until the mid 1960's that his radio teaching ministry took to the air and 1974 before his Rhema Bible School also started but by then, Hagin's adoption of Kenyon's spiritual framework and its synthesis with Roberts' teachings was already well established.

It would seem that, despite his protests to the contrary (29), Oral Roberts took cues from a third source of inspiration also. Although he claims both divine revelation as well as Biblical texts for the authority of his doctrine, Roberts also seems to lean toward far less inspired source then he would easily admit - that being an alluring and all too familiar notion of "right thinking" and "right belief" that have clear implications of creative power. As part of his seed faith revelation in the early 1950's came "a thought crystal clear, Whatever you can conceive and believe you can do!" (30) Roberts expanded more upon this in his Seed Faith Commentary On The Bible :

A wish is part of receiving our heart's desire. We must have an image of what we desire in our mind. But we must take hold of the proposition and make things happen. Things have to be made to happen. If we want God to meet our needs, we must start thinking toward God. Bringing our thoughts to a climax, making our thoughts a belief .. our belief into faith .. our faith into an act. And we must cause that faith to be released, to explode within us .. until we make our faith a seed we plant (Matthew 17:20). (31)

Roberts freely interchanges his vocabulary in his writing and his definition of faith as "right belief" with a complete guarantee of freedom from fear and the creative manifestation of physical blessings "in the NOW" is a concept his ministry also has emphasized:

Faith or right believing is dominant over fear just as light is dominant over darkness. You can be totally free of fear when you put your faith in control of your life and start believing right and keep believing right. As long as you believe right, fear cannot dominate your life. .. I have never allowed my mind to entertain negative thoughts. For I firmly believe if I allowed myself to become negative in my thinking and believing, my afflictions would return to me. It took positive believing to get my lungs and tongue healed; it takes the same to keep them healed. (32)

We have already seen how the notion of "right thinking" that assures victory, success and blessing is one first pioneered by the mind science metaphysics of the New Thought movement. While there is a measured qualification in Roberts usage of the terminology that does not emphasize a Kenyon-like dogma to the degree that Hagin and subsequent Faith teachers would, somewhere in the midst of his studies, it seems that Oral Roberts used the concept as a stimulus for thought and actively promoted others to do likewise. His introduction to a testimony of Christian realtor Clifford Ford as published in one of his early books makes that clear:

In his fight he discovered a formula for success. It is because of this formula that I say this may be the most important article you have read in years. I have just finished reading it four times and plan to read it again. It has done something in me. You'll be thinking back over this one for a long time to come. (33)

And it is Ford's own testimony as to the conditions of receiving from God's "promise of prosperity" that makes Roberts' commendation even murkier and far more questionable:

.. I saw then that this promise of prosperity was based upon a fivefold condition as follows: First, we must live the right kind of life. Second, we must stand for the right kind of thing. Third, we must keep the right attitude. Fourth, we must think right. Fifth, we must believe right. .. The three things that every child of God should have are, in the order of their importance, personal knowledge of genuine salvation, health for the body, and prosperity. The Word of God gives us a formula for each. (emphasis mine) (34)

From the worse possible quarter it could come from, once more the promises of God's Word and Christian faith were being likened to elements of a formula that could be replicated easily through "right thinking," as a divinely assured certainty of blessing. And as we see, it came from the very same "healing evangelist" whose cultural influence and audience were only being equalled in those times to the Pope of Rome and Billy Graham. Therefore, the implications are disturbing but cannot be ignored.

With references to these specific concepts being made in his ministry heyday, we can see that what Roberts effectively did on a massive scale was to sensitize millions of people to receiving as Gospel truth the claims that spiritual laws based upon right thinking as a faith formula were valid propositions to live by. By using the same conceptual language that Hagin's Kenyon-tinged doctrine used, Roberts' teaching primed untold numbers of people in global Christian circles to eventually associate Hagin's work with his own. As I have already indicated, Hagin's synthesis of his own teaching with Kenyon's New Thought doctrine creation of Faith teaching dogma that explicitly advanced this claim was already established in his ministry.

So between the dual influences of both Hagin and Roberts, between Roberts' paving the way for Hagin's acceptance across global Christian circles, the die for the explosive growth of the Faith movement was cast. With the conditions being right for widespread spiritual innovation in the postwar Pentecostal world of the 1950's and the turbulent emergence of the Charismatic movement of the 1960's, the Faith movement's birth and growth were completely assured.

The Times They Were A Changin': How The Faith Movement Manifested Itself

The 1970's certainly were a time of destiny of the Faith movement. Many of the newer Charismatic constituency began to reject as antiquated - if not misguided piety - much of what Pentecostals had been teaching concerning separation from the world. This also also fed the flames of dissent over them that been emerging in the Pentecostal movement since the 1950's. To the Charismatics, the sacrificial lifestyle of those within the older Pentecostal movement was actually the fruit of exploitation used by the existing Pentecostal denominations in their expansionism over past decades.

"Many of you were brought up in a day when poverty was erroneously deemed by well-meaning preachers and teachers to be glorious and Godly! Unfortunately, the 'poverty is holy' doctrine still hangs around in the back of your mind today" (35). This accusation made by Faith teacher John Avanzini is a typical example of the minimizing of Pentecostal sacrifice that many Charismatics have done throughout the years to dismiss it altogether, as an unthinkable option to more enlightened and spiritual minds (36). Both the passage of time and the demographics of the new Charismatic constituency emboldened these teachers to teach and preach such a position.

To replace such a revulsive notion, several leading Pentecostal / Charismatic teachers began to openly advocate a new understanding concerning the grace of God that placed a unique overemphasis upon his imminence. God's desire to bless his children had been entirely underestimated, even overlooked by "religious traditionalists" (who at best were "well-meaning") who were devoted to keeping them in struggling in "defeat." So the "new revelation" that Hagin and Roberts provided about the blessings of God upon one's material concerns caught the attention and affections of a multitude of Charismatics who never understood or who outright rejected the sacrificial lifestyle of Pentecostal culture and Pentecostals whose third generation of children were wearied of and disillusioned from the extremes and rigors they had been raised in. With the benefits of a postwar economic boom that swept America to "keep up with the Jones" and a continually rising standard of living, it was inevitable that many of them found the teachings of Hagin and Roberts quite irresistible.

So why then is Faith teaching so misguided? How can so many people be so wrong? What is really wrong with the claims of the Faith movement and where does it lead a Christian who follow it? Our next article will discuss these errors of Faith movement and how its doctrinal and practical excesses clearly have departed from orthodox Christian faith and led millions into grievous imbalance in their Christian lives.
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7766
1/18/18 4:51 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.