Here are all seven videos together on one page for you to view at your leisure. I highly recommend this teaching series for anyone who wants to know what the Word of Faith teaches and especially for those ex-Word of Faithers who need to deprogram themselves and learn correct biblical doctrine. Although the videos are 45-60  minutes in length, they are well worth your time as Brother Jeff is a really good teacher and very biblical.

I am sure this video series will be beneficial to anyone who watches it.

Damon Whitsell

==================================================================

Wolves in Wool – Introduction from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

Wolves in Wool 2 – The Revelation Knowledge of WoF from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

Wolves in Wool 3 – Faith, the Omnipotent Entity from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

Wolves in Wool 4 – The Elevation of Man from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

Wolves in Wool 5 – The Demotion of God from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

Wolves in Wool 6 – Word of Faith Atonement Flaws: Kenoticism from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

Wolves in Wool 7 – the WoF “Jesus in Hell” Apostasy from Jeff Kluttz on Vimeo.

==============================================================

DON”T FORGET: You can follow along using Pastor Jeff’s original articles HERE.

I and other bloggers have been grouped here. Check it out, there are some wonderful bloggers here you should read. And vote for the good ones! 

http://whatisthewordoffaith.blogspot.com/2009/06/theo-scribes.html

Understanding that sin carries the penalty of death, separation and God’s extended wrath toward the sinner brings one to the natural yearning to understand the nature of the provision God has made for the restoration of man from this condition.  Obviously, this series is concerned with such illumination; God has made atonement available.  The details concerning God’s provision of atonement is both something so simple that a child can grasp it, yet so complicated than a man can spend his entire life attempting to systematize it fully.  The child can understand that “Jesus died for my sins,” yet the theologian may spend years trying to fully understand how exactly the provision of Christ was applied to the account of the sinner.

From this pursuit have been born numerous “theories” of atonement which attempt to answer these looming questions:  ”What exactly what happened when Christ died on the cross for the sins of man?”  “What was the nature of his death?”  “How was his work applied to the account of the sinner?”  While the lack of answers to such questions do not hinder even the young child from receiving his gift of salvation by grace through faith, they are indeed questions which yearn for understanding from the mind of the redeemed and for which scripture devotes substantial insights toward their clarification.

This section will focus on a number of theories which have been postulated and put to theological testing through the millennia since the atoning work of Christ has been applied.

The Recapitulation Theory

One of the earliest theories was the Recapitulation Theory, proposed by Irenaeus (125-202 AD).  The primary scriptural basis for Irenaeus’ theory is exemplified in Romans 5.

Romans 5:18-21 (NIV)
¹⁸ Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. ¹⁹ For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. ²⁰ The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, ²¹ so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

The essence of the Recapitulation Theory is that Jesus reclaimed (recapitulated) the perfect original human condition through his incarnation and successful living out of the human life without sin.  Properly recognizing that Adam’s sin brought death to all men, that sin was infused into all men after him and that all are separated from God because of it, he goes quite off course shortly thereafter.

Arguably, Irenaeus places the true “work” of the atonement in Jesus’ incarnation rather than in his crucifixion and resurrection, which is inescapably contrary to the message of the gospel found throughout the New Testament.  He notes that Jesus, being God incarnate, had brought his divine attributes to man by the mere action of having become human, as if God had infused righteousness back into humanity through the advent of the incarnation.  Jesus lived as a man through every state of life; yet without sin- therefore achieving a full and righteous life which the first Adam had failed to do.  In this view, Jesus, as the second Adam, “lived humanity” properly where Adam had failed, and thus restored man to God’s good graces.

This, however, is not at all what Romans 5 indicates.  Romans 5 indeed refers to Christ as the one man who made right that which the original man had corrupted, but in no way relegates the nature of that work to his mere incarnation or his righteous life; though both were certainly pertinent and necessary.

The problems with this theory are numerous.  Most noteworthy, this theory misses the true purpose of the incarnation; Christ’s death.

Isaiah 53:5 (NIV)
⁵ But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.

It was this substitutionary death which paid the demanded price for sin.  Yet, to Irenaeus, Jesus was more of a “do-over” for humanity, which does not meet the requirements God himself placed upon sin; that the guilty should perish, or have an acceptable blood sacrifice vicariously applied to his account.

There is a measure of merit to some observations of his theory, however.  It is true that Jesus brought life to man out of his own work.  It is true that he defeated the curse of original sin, that he lived a perfectly sinless life which is applied to the account of man and that his incarnation was of chief consequence.  However the application of his redemptive work is misappropriated.

Lastly, it should also be noted that the Recapitulation Theory seems to place man as man’s own enemy, rather than God.  It is as if man had messed himself up, but could be properly “adjusted” and then be right with God.  This theory understands that Jesus “corrected” mankind, yet makes no provision for God’s wrath for the sins which man had committed beforehand.  Even if Jesus had “infused” himself into man in the manner which Iranaeus notes, man’s former sin would have been left unpunished by the God who articulately proclaimed that sin would yield death – and his wrath- to all who partake in it.

As a model for understanding the nature of the atonement, the Recapitulation Theory is severely misguided and is deficient even in the few observations which are correctly articulated.

The Ransom Theory

The Ransom Theory was proposed by Origen (185-254 AD) and was the first widely held atonement theory.  While it is quite contrary to the Recapitulation Theory, it, too holds an exceptionally skewed view of the atonement, bordering on dualism in the opinion of the author.

The bases for the Ransom Theory are several passages which refer to Jesus’ sacrifice as a ransom, while certainly not fleshing out the specifics of such in the ways which Origen understood them.  Primarily, Mark 10 and 1 Corinthians 6 reveal the essence of the scriptural platform from which this theory has its foundation.

Mark 10:45 (NIV)
⁴⁵ For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

1 Corinthians 6:19-20 (NIV)
¹⁹ Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; ²⁰ you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.

A ransom, by definition, is the price paid for the release of a captive.  In a ransom scenario there are three necessary participants:  one who makes the demand, one who is held captive, and one who pays the demands for release.  According to Origen, these three are represented by Satan, man and God respectively.

This theory essentially claims that Adam and Eve had sold themselves to Satan by their sin at the fall of man.  As such, the crowning glory of God’s creation had now changed hands, and Satan subdued man.  Ostensibly, he “owned” man and God would have to bargain with Satan to reclaim man for himself.  Satan then presumably set the price for man’s release as that of the shed blood of Christ incarnate.  Jesus’ death, then, paid the fee to Satan, who promptly released man back into God’s hands.  Yet, Jesus’ resurrection made Satan a double loser, as death was unable to hold Christ under Satan’s control.

There are simply not enough words to proclaim how erroneous this theory was and is.

The primary issue is that of the purported Satanic “ownership” of man.  While it is true that mankind is noted in scripture to be under Satanic dominion in his sins, this does not equate to an ownership of man which must somehow be bartered for by God himself.  Rather, this dominion has to do with the lack of God’s protection of man from Satan’s power.  Satan, as an angelic being, is superior in power to any man for whom God does not protect. To that end, men are noted to “belong” to Satan in scripture and to be in his service; due to their lack of ability to resist him.  The book of Acts notes,

Acts 26:17-18 (NIV)
¹⁷ I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them ¹⁸ to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’

The “power of Satan” which man is under does indeed relegate him to Satan’s service, but this is more akin to a weakling that succumbs to a bully than to a product which is owned by a legal right of sale.  Indeed,

Psalms 24:1 (NIV)
¹ The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it;

Yet, the scripture does equate Christ’s atoning work as that of a ransom which has been paid.  The question must still be answered, “who, then, is he that makes demand of the price to be paid?”  The answer is, “God himself.”  God demanded the atonement, and God provided the atonement.  He had formerly pronounced his judgment upon sin,

Genesis 2:17 (NIV)
¹⁷ but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.”

Romans 2:8(NIV)
⁸ But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.

It is God himself who had determined the valid price for man’s sin.  That fee is death.  It is God’s own wrath which has separated man from himself.  The payment which Christ afforded – was death- and was paid to God as the One who demanded the ransom noted in Mark and 1 Corinthians.

Furthermore, the captivity from which man was ransomed was not Satanic control, but God’s penalty for sin.  It was sin which held man away from fellowship with God- not some wily scheme of Satan.  As Hebrews notes the very same ransom,

Hebrews 9:15 (NIV)
¹⁵ For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance–now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

The true nature of the ransom portrayed in scripture is that God paid his own price vicariously through Christ that man may be free from sin, which God’s righteousness and justice demanded the penalty of death for.

Romans 8:3 (NIV)
³ For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering….

Origen’s ransom theory completely changed the nature of the atonement from something which satisfied the righteous requirements of God to something which paid off Satan – a fellow recipient of God’s wrath- for the restoration of mankind to God.  This attributes power and ownership to Satan which he simply does not have.  Indeed, Satan will himself endure God’s eternal judgment and be subjected to the very penalty of those who follow his example, as Jesus noted.

Matthew 25:41 (NIV)
⁴¹ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Sin is universal, as is its punishment.  All who have sinned – including Satan himself- are condemned to an eternal destructive death as God has sentenced.

It was God who was the recipient of the ransom Jesus paid.  It was God incarnate, in Christ, who paid the ransom.  The prison from which man was sprung was that of the condition and consequence of sin.  God is payer and payee, while man is the recipient of God’s grace.  Satan has absolutely no part of the transaction.

Sadly, there are many today who continue to develop and teach the false premise of the Ransom Theory.

It is a remake of the Ransom Theory which is the basis of the Word of Faith movement’s counterfeit gospel, claiming that Jesus was born a mere man, that he was born again spiritually, and that he served man’s sentence in Hell.  It is this theory which has led to a somewhat dualistic understanding of Satan; that he is somehow an equal and opposite god, who is to be appeased in his own right.  Proponents of this theory today continue to malign the true gospel of scripture by completely disregarding the application of God’s wrath upon Christ for sin.

There is no merit to the Ransom Theory of atonement as a valid representation of the truths of the gospel.  Many have argued that Origen never intended its understanding to lead to a dualistic view of Satan.  Yet, such conclusions are drawn from simply following Origen’s position to its logical conclusion.  The theory is simply unsound.

As it has been demonstrated that an apostasy must precede the tribulation, and an utter “anti-gospel” is to be the characteristic of a singular religious system during the great tribulation, it only stands to reason that one may trace the roots of the former apostasy to the latter full-fledged abomination which is spawned from it.  As noted, I cannot positively contend that our current growing apostasy in Christendom is indeed the apostasy which scripture warns will precede the day of the Lord.  Yet, I am compelled to examine such possibilities.

If a man, for example, sincerely believes his life to be in danger by one of his associates, he would surely watch for signs of such growing antagonism toward himself.  He may become quite paranoid, in fact, and pre-occupied with an investigation concerning the possible playing out of his fears.  I do not desire to become paranoid nor to anxiously accuse every false theological principle as a precursor to the coming worship of Antichrist.  Yet, I do wish to heed Jesus’ own warnings concerning our need to be watching for the proper signs of such coming events.

Matthew 24:32-33 (NIV)
³² “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. ³³ Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door.

Indeed, as the leaves are a sign of summer, apostasy will be a sign of the advent of the day of the Lord.  While I am not certain that this present apostasy is “the” final warning sign of pending tribulation, I do find plenty of scriptural indication that it indeed may be.  As such, I’m compelled to evaluate the possible threads of further degradation of these current apostate movements and ask the question, “how may these current renegade trends lend themselves to a future disintegration into the final blasphemous religion of Antichrist?”

The Destination of the Emergent Path

Beginning with the liberal Emergent movement, one trend that can easily find itself an ally in the hands of Satan as preparation for Ecclesiastical Babylon is the massive shift toward universalist beliefs in Emergent practice.  It seems that the crux of Emergent theology is to be kinder and less dogmatic in the application of Christian theology.  For a group which claims disdain for systematic theology they are doing an exceptional job of re-writing it in their own image.  Among other things, soteriology (the doctrine of salvation) is being increasingly re-cast in this movement to be something which does not demand an affiliation with Christ.  In fact, it seems that Emergent soteriology doesn’t even necessarily demand one to believe in Christ at all. 

McLaren claims that people can be a follower of Jesus while sharing their religious affection with false gods.

…I don’t believe making disciples must equal making adherence to the Christian religion.  It may be advisable in many(not all!)circumstances to help people become followers of Jesus and remain within their Buddhist, Hindu, or Jewish contexts. 
Brian  McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, (Grand Rapids, MI:  Zondervan), 2004, page 260.

Alan Jones relegates Jesus to a position among “all great spiritual teachers” as he notes,

“Jesus is the way to a new kind of life.  Jesus and Buddha have this in common with all great spiritual teachers– to make human beings more conscious of themselves, to get to be more real.”
Alan Jones, Reimagining Christianity, p. 194

And Rob Bell at least honestly describes his (shared) views in terms of a universal nature of the gospel.

“So this reality, this forgiveness, this reconciliation, is true for everybody. Paul insisted that when Jesus died on the cross he was reconciling ‘all things, in heaven and on earth, to God. This reality then isn’t something we make true about ourselves by doing something. It is already true. Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making.”
- Velvet Elvis p. 146

He later articulates more fully, “If the gospel isn’t good news for everybody, then it isn’t good news for anybody” (p. 167).

If one can follow Christ, Buddah or Hindu gods and yet still be assured salvation, what motivation is there for anyone to resist whatever “new” doctrines Oprah is teaching this week?  What motivation should prevent them from joining in with Antichrist when he calls for the allegiance of man?  Such is the heart and soul of the false gospel of universalism.  The Jesus of their minds (and only of their minds) is one who requires no repentance- even from those who reject him outright and serve other gods.  Indeed, their attempt to make the gospel “relevant” has landed them in a place where any and all religious practices are acceptable, providing that the proponents of such practices are “doing what Jesus did.”  Bell notes,

“Jesus tells a parable about the kind of people who will live with God forever. It is a story of judgment, of God evaluating the kind of lives people have lived. First he deals with the ‘righteous’, who gave food to the hungry, gave water to the thirsty, welcomed the stranger, clothed the naked, and visited the prisoner. These are the kind of people who spend forever with God. Jesus measures their eternal standings in terms of not what they said or believed but how they lived, specifically in regard to the hell around them”
-Velvet Elvis (p. 148).

In this understanding, one’s beliefs are irrelevant to his salvation.  While Bell does attempt to leave some wiggle room in his writings that he can claim not to be universalist, in the end it is clear that Emergents simply do not equate salvation with the name of Christ alone.  If not everyone is saved in this weird theology, at least anyone can be- without submission to the Lordship of Christ, or even believing on him.  Bell’s eternal “standings” are appropriated “in terms of not what they said or believed but how they lived.”

This view, of course, has led to the new ecumenicism between this group and all others who are willing.  Indeed, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Baha’i, Wiccan, and anyone else need not worry about the content of their creeds, but only the actions which are deemed as living rightly.  As noted, Emergents pride themselves for the adoption of the religious practices of other groups, such as transcendental meditation, which has found its way into every major world religion.  As such, new bonds of fellowship are now being established between mutually exclusive religions, serving to systematically destroy all lines of division which formerly existed between these groups.  As Jones so kindly notes,

“Our first task in reimagining religion, then, is to move from the narrowly tribal, where our story is the only story, to a wider definition of “tribe” that can embrace stories other than our own, told by people who are different from us.” 
Reimagining Christianity, Page 16

As this discourse on Emergent practice has unfolded, then, it has been demonstrated that they embrace the teachings, practices and beliefs of other religions with open arms.  They have no doctrinal issues with paganism, believing that all can be saved without confessing the lordship of Christ.  They indeed have a new fellowship with the proponents of other gods.  And, all of this new fellowship is now neatly bonded together by the glue of mystic practice.

With Emergents fully enslaved by transcendental meditation, they have indeed increased the strength of their ecumenicism with every idolatry imaginable.  And, this is seen as a good thing, being viewed as a sort of common ground with these who reject Christ.

Paul unconditionally disagreed as he noted,

2 Corinthians 6:14-17 (NIV)
¹⁴ Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? ¹⁵ What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? ¹⁶ What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.” ¹⁷ “Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you.”

The apostle mandates that a yoke of such fellowship is not to be entered into with those who do not believe in Christ.  He affirms rhetorically that there is no fellowship which can be obtained with paganism.  He quotes God’s own command from the law, affirming it as an enduring New covenant principle, “come out from them and be separate…and I will receive you.”

Yet, as Tony Campolo sees it,

…a theology of mysticism provides some hope for common ground between Christianity and Islam. Both religions have within their histories examples of ecstatic union with God, which seem at odds with their own spiritual traditions but have much in common with each other. Tony Campolo, Speaking My Mind , p.149

He continues,

I don’t know what to make of the Muslim mystics, especially those who have come to be known as the Sufis. What do they experience in their mystic experiences? Could they have encountered the same God we do in our Christian mysticism?…The founder of this movement was Hasan Al Basri (A.D. 642-728)…[Basri's] attempt to bring about religious reform very much paralleled the path of Francis [of Assisi], both in style and spiritual direction. Both men sensed a sacred presence in everything and claimed to have experienced a mystical union with God.
P. 149, 150

In the end, this new spiritual alliance is quite well poised to lead a lost world into the welcoming arms of Antichrist.  Supposed “Christians” are now teaching that anyone can be saved within the confines of their own religious system, and without having to take any actions of allegiance toward Christ whatsoever.  They are teaching that “to do the things Jesus did” is synonymous with “following Christ.”  As such, any religious order which, for example, feeds the hungry, is easily able to ascribe themselves to this guaranteed salvation.  Couple that with every major world religion now engaging in massive experimentation with mystic meditational practices in which participants “hear from God” while voices of demons guide them into “new” revelations.  The end result is a religious soup in which all are simply free to believe and do as they choose in light of their new fellowship of acceptance.

In light of this continually merging religiosity of our times, one can see how easily the text of Revelation 13 can be brought to fruition.

Revelation 13:11-15 (NIV)
¹¹ Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon. ¹² He exercised all the authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. ¹³ And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men. ¹⁴ Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. ¹⁵ He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.

This false prophet will draw the entire world worship Antichrist by performing great and miraculous signs.  What better mechanism than the current state of growing religious ecumenicism to support such a truly global acquiescence of a one world religion.

Revelation 13:8 (NIV)
⁸ All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast–all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world. 

The Destination of the Word of Faith

While the Word of Faith movement is not inclined to such obvious fellowship (at least yet) with paganism, they are certainly establishing themselves as solid candidates for acclimation into the new world religious order of Antichristianity.  As noted earlier in this series, their “ready to believe you” attitude concerning just about every strange doctrine spoken by anyone wearing an Armani suit will certainly not help them to detect a false christ when they see one.  Let’s face it: if they believe Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland and Creflo (give me a) Dollar they’ll believe anyone.  They have literally been trained to do precisely that by a never-ending host of arrogant spiritual superstars.

For decades the collective congregation of Word of Faith-ers has been taught several things which will come in quite handy for an up and coming new world deceiver.  Among others, they have been taught to readily receive “revelation knowledge” without resistance.  When Benny turns his head, squints his eyes and says, “I’m getting revelations from the Lord,” they are poised to hear and obey without question.  There is no outcry for scripture to affirm such revelations, as has clearly been demonstrated in this series.  All that is needed is the promise of some grand spiritual benefit and perhaps some stage antics which feign “the movement of God.”  To date, the best that Team TBN has had to offer are some people falling on themselves on Benny’s stage or perhaps barking like dogs when Todd Bentley screams obscenities at them.  What will such a gullible audience do in response to the incredible demonic prowess of the false prophet? 

Revelation 13:13 notes that he (the false prophet) will have the ability to call fire down from heaven.  Verse 15 notes that he will cause an idol of Antichrist to come to life and speak!  By whatever means people fall and quiver while Benny’s man-handlers assist, it will be of no comparison to the supernatural call to worship of Antichrist.  Couple such depths of demonic power with Antichrist’s own utterance of “revelation knowledge” and this group will be instantly converted.

2 Thessalonians 2:4 (NIV)
⁴ He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

The “new revelation” of this day will be Antichrist’s claim to be God in the flesh.  He will assume the counterfeit role and identity of Christ having returned to the earth, as Jesus warned.

Matthew 24:15-25 (NIV)
¹⁵ “So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel–let the reader understand– ¹⁶ then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. ¹⁷ Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. ¹⁸ Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. ¹⁹ How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! ²⁰ Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. ²¹ For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now–and never to be equaled again. ²² If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. ²³ At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. ²⁴ For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect–if that were possible. ²⁵ See, I have told you ahead of time.

What on earth will dissuade people who have been subjected to decades of unverifiable revelation knowledge from believing such proclamations from Antichrist – miracles included?  The Word of Faith wolves have played an exceptionally key role in the preparation of the soil for this final abomination.

Moreover, the WoF visionaries have established power and success as key components by which a supposed man of God is to be distinguished.  Their false claims are continually focused on God’s desire for his people to be powerful, wealthy, and able to perform any actions which their own word of faith can envision and “speak into reality.”  How will such a deceived mass of people respond when the new TV preacher can literally rise himself from the dead?

Revelation 13:3-4 (NIV)
³ One of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was astonished and followed the beast. ⁴ Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?”

Antichrist may very well be viewed as the ultimate example of the Word of Faith in action by this deceived group.  He will have more money than Paul Crouch and will be more powerful than even Bob Jones’ fantasy-tales of heavenly vacations.  While Benny Hinn claims to have raised the dead (though the ever-present cameras were mysteriously turned off), Antichrist will do it while the entire world watches.  He will be the epitome of what a Word of Faith disciple would expect to see in the returned Christ he will claim to be.  He will be wealthy, influential and will exhibit supernatural power through sings and wonders.  What is there for a Word of Faith student not to love about this coming deceiver? 

Conclusions

In conclusion to the matter of the continued pillaging and degradation of the church at large by Emergents, Word of Faithers and many other smaller groups who are equally determined to change the glory of our Lord into images made to look like mortal man, truthfully only one exhortation needs to be given. 

Know God’s Word.

2 Timothy 3:12-17 (NIV)
¹² In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, ¹³ while evil men and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. ¹⁴ But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, ¹⁵ and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. ¹⁶ All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, ¹⁷ so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

May the reader of this series make a very simple choice at this time.  Choose to believe Paul the Apostle rather than Paul Crouch.  Believe Paul instead of Rob Bell.  Believe Paul over Tony Campolo. 

The Word of Faith group teaches that God’s word is not necessary for spiritual truths to be passed down.  They teach revelation knowledge and every form of fanciful story as proof enough of their false doctrines.  Yet, Paul said that it is scripture which is able “to make you wise for salvation.”  It is scripture which is the measure of truth.  It is the proof of a man’s testimony.  It is the essence of what is valid theology.

The Emergent teachers claim that community acquiescence is the required litmus test for spiritual revelation.  Being suspicious of scripture, they often re-write it and more often misquote it, all the while adding random flecks of inspiration from other world religions (which apparently are much more trustworthy).  But, Paul said that “all scripture is God-breathed.”  It is theo pneustos – directly from God’s Spirit.  As such it is useful “for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.”  It is trustworthy, regardless of whether Rob Bell has faith in it or not.  It is sufficient.  It is not lacking in relevance.  It is the essence of spiritual revelation.

Believer, you have an obligation to the One you call Lord.  That obligation is not to follow anyone who claims to be his servant here on this earth, but to follow Him.  No spiritual teacher can give you anything outside of what God’s word has established.  Scripture is given to us “so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”  The teachers who present wild speculative theologies which cannot be demonstrated from scripture are not from among us.  They are wolves in sheep’s clothing.  The teacher who distrusts scripture and requires it to be deconstructed by his own community is not from among us.  These men are the imposters who “will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”  They are creeps in the church.

But as for you- your instruction is clear: “continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.”  Speaking both to the WoF and the Emergent liberals, Paul’s assertion is that the Word which was sufficient yesterday is sufficient today.  

The next time someone appears on television or a YouTube video with some great “new” revelation, consider Paul’s words.  The next time a weird book attempts to “reimagine” your faith, think of Paul’s words.  The next time someone touts a great new “word for this generation,” consider Paul’s words.  

The same Word of God which was sufficient in first century Israel is sufficient here and now.  It is the fact that it has not changed which gives it credibility.  Read the Word instead of the New York Times latest spiritual challenger.  Meditate on the Word instead of the practices of gurus who will die in their sins.  Believe the Word which led you to salvation instead of the latest buzz from the masses, for wide is the road which leads to destruction.

The Word of God will save you from error, teach you the truth and guide you into spiritual maturity.  To the apostate religious rulers of his own day,

Matthew 22:29 (NIV)
²⁹ Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.

May this not be the verdict when you stand before Him.

http://www.returningking.com/?p=439

Skipping ahead from the slow-burn apostasy which permeates Christendom today, scripture also clarifies the finality of this degradation of worship and truth.  While scripture specifically notes that apostasy is a characteristic of the latter days, it further demonstrates the fruition of such apostasy; being characterized as a great harlot of world-wide influence. 

In Jewish thought, there existed two ages.  “This” age referred to the age before the advent of Messiah’s reign, and “the age to come” referred to the age of Messiah’s reign.  Such thinking is what prompted the disciples to ask Jesus in Matthew 24,

Matthew 24:3 (NIV)
³ … “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

To ask Jesus concerning the signs of the “end of the age” demonstrates clearly that the disciples understood Jesus’ second coming to be the catalyst which will bring about the coming “age” of their traditional understanding.  While the disciples had faith that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, they also understood that he had not yet established his kingdom, but would do so at his second coming.  Thus, their question, “what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age,” emphasizes their understanding of the nature of Christ’s return:  he will return to establish the prophesied Messianic kingdom of God on earth.  Jesus ends his answer in chapter 25 with his analogy of the sheep and the goats.  The goats are separated out for eternal destruction.  The sheep are told (Matthew 25:34), “Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.”

In following a literal interpretation of scriptural prophecy, it can be understood that the coming Messianic Kingdom of Christ will directly follow a period of great distress, as Jesus noted in verses 21-24 of his answer.

Matthew 24:21-24 (NIV)
²¹ For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now–and never to be equaled again. ²² If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. ²³ At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. ²⁴ For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect–if that were possible.

This season is commonly referred to as the Great Tribulation.  Throughout scripture, the Great Tribulation is given another name much more frequently.  That name is “the day of the Lord,” or one of numerous variations on that phrase.  It is this very same Tribulation period which Paul speaks of when he noted,

1 Thessalonians 5:1-3 (NIV)
¹ Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, ² for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. ³ While people are saying, “Peace and safety,” destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.

Indeed, the “day of the Lord” refers to this tribulational season of God’s wrath against the continued rejection of his Son throughout history.  From the oldest Old Testament reference to the New Testament notes, the “day of the Lord” refers to this end-time season of great despair and judgment from the Lord.

It is this coming day of the Lord which Paul wrote in our earlier examination concerning a pending great apostasy.  Paul noted,

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 (NIV)
¹ Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, ² not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. ³ Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

As noted earlier, the day of the Lord cannot come until “the rebellion” (Gk. apostasia) occurs and “the man of lawlessness is revealed.”  As such, the rebellion demonstrates the nature of circumstances on the earth leading up to the time of the great tribulation.  Likewise, Paul noted,

1 Timothy 4:1 (NIV)
¹ The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.

Jesus noted in Matthew 24 in his answer to the question, “what will be the sign of your coming and the end of the age:”

Matthew 24:12-14 (NIV)
¹² Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, ¹³ but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. ¹⁴ And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

Emphatically, scripture asserts that the season prior to the end of this age is one characterized by an increase of wickedness and apostasy.  While this assertion has been strongly demonstrated in this series thus far, it has not yet been fully developed, for this apostasy is further noted in scripture to arrive at a future point of full fruition; an imminent point of maturity which will culminate in not a mere state of error, but a full-blown antithesis of the true gospel.  It will be an anti-gospel, fitting for an anti-Christ.

The Great Harlot, Babylon

Concerning the full-blown fruition of this apostasy during the tribulation, the book of Revelation gives this religious program a symbolic name and further description.  The entire chapter of Revelation 17 is devoted to the portrayal of this religious system.  The introduction to this neo-church system notes,

Revelation 17:1-2 (NIV)
¹ One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters. ² With her the kings of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”

“The great prostitute” is spoken to John as something of previous reference.  “The” great prostitute is obviously something which John has already encountered in his vision, as no further explanation is given as to what is spoken of.  While the terms “great prostitute” do not appear earlier than Revelation 17, a description of what this prostitute represents does. 

Chapter 13 notes the actions of “the Beast,” commonly known as Antichrist, during the tribulation as he installs himself as the god-head of a world religious system. 

 Revelation 13:1 (NIV)
¹ And the dragon stood on the shore of the sea. And I saw a beast coming out of the sea. He had ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on his horns, and on each head a blasphemous name.

Revelation 13:5-8 (NIV)
⁵ The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. ⁶ He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. ⁷ He was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them. And he was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation. ⁸ All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast–all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world.

Antichrist is indeed a fitting name for this person, as he will literally attempt to establish himself as Christ-incarnate.  He will blaspheme God, slander his name and will be given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation on earth.  In the end, “all inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast–all whose names have not been written in the book of life.”  This worship of the beast is accomplished by his own liaison, commonly known as “the false prophet.”

Revelation 13:11-17 (NIV)
¹¹ Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon. ¹² He exercised all the authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. ¹³ And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men. ¹⁴ Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. ¹⁵ He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. ¹⁶ He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, ¹⁷ so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.

This false prophet will make “the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast.”  As such, the false prophet will serve as a sort of counterfeit Holy Spirit for the counterfeit Christ.  Assigning an identification system, inhabitants of the earth are forced to worship the beast, or else starve for lack of ability to purchase food or goods.

A full depiction of the events of the tribulation are beyond the scope of this work.  The author’s book, The Return of the King, however, goes into a much deeper examination of such tribulational events.

What is of chief concern for this study is that a world-religious system is clearly taught in scripture to exist during the final days of the tribulation.  Specifically, for “forty-two months” (v5) Antichrist is demonstrated to have an utter monopoly on the worship practices of earth.  It is this understanding which brings the description of the great harlot, Babylon, into focus.

Re-examining Revelation 17, it is noted,

Revelation 17:1-2 (NIV)
¹ One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters. ² With her the kings of the earth committed adultery and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”

In the context of John’s overall vision, the nature of the prostitute is easily discernable.  John sees her, having “committed adultery” with the kings and the inhabitants of the earth.  While the imagery John sees is clearly not a physical manifestation, it does teach a literal set of circumstances.  Such is the nature of the entire book of Revelation; commonly using figurative imagery to depict real-world events which will occur on the earth in latter times.

Prostitution, when used symbolically in scripture, always refers spiritual deviance, particularly the worship of false gods and the turning away from the true “husband” of Israel, God, unto others.  Examples of this metaphorical usage are seen in Hosea and Jeremiah.

Hosea 1:2 
When the LORD began to speak through Hosea, the LORD said to him, “Go, take to yourself an adulterous wife and children of unfaithfulness, because the land is guilty of the vilest adultery in departing from the LORD.”

Jeremiah 2:20
Long ago you broke off your yoke and tore off your bonds;
     you said, ‘I will not serve you!’ Indeed, on every high hill
     and under every spreading tree you lay down as a prostitute.

Also, Ezekiel 16:15-41; 23:5-44, and numerous other texts note a metaphorical usage of prostitution.  In each case, a metaphorical prostitute is one who “cheats” on God with a false god.  Israel was identified in the Old Testament as the wife of Jehovah.  Symbolic prostitution, then, is when the metaphorical wife has an affair with another god.

In keeping with literal biblical interpretational methods, then, this Harlot represents a religion or a religious system which deviates from the Lord and gives his glory to another; a false god.  In this case, Satan’s own campaign entices the people of earth to follow a false god, Satan’s counterfeit christ; Antichrist.  In verse 2 the “kings of the earth” are noted to have also committed adultery with her, signifying that the full acquiescence of the earth’s political system is involved in the worship of Antichrist through this religious order. 

It apparently is also a tremendously provocative venue of worship, as, “the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”  Intoxication is indicative of excess.  The excess in this text is “the wine of her adulteries,” referring to the obvious stupor which one revels in during the worship practices of this religion.  All who believe or teach that “experience” is a suitable affirmation of the validity of one’s religious beliefs should consider this phrase very carefully.  At this point in time the whole earth will worship Satan vicariously through his agent of Antichrist.  Yet, the experience will be one of drunken delight.

In verse 3-5 the nature of this religious system is further described.

Revelation 17:3-5 (NIV)
³ Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a desert. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. ⁴ The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. ⁵ This title was written on her forehead: MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

“Mystery Babylon” is commonly referred to as “ecclesiastical Babylon” because of her “church-like” nature.  This prostitute will sit upon the same beast which was described in Revelation 13, the Antichrist, who was “covered with blasphemous names,” indicating his defamation of God, and “had seven heads and ten horns.”  Thus, the beast that gave rise to the religious system in chapter 13 is the same beast upon whom this prostitute is carried along.  She is the fruition of Antichrist’s earlier demand for worship by humanity. 

She is also noted to be wealthy, being dressed in purple and scarlet, the colors of royalty and sinfulness, and “glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls.”  It is unimaginable the wealth an utterly global religious system, of course, especially one whose “god” is not the least bit interested in reinvesting ministry funds into evangelistic and community programs!

While much more can be gleaned concerning the nature of the tribulation worship system, it is beyond the course of this series.  What is important within the context of the study of Wolves in Wool, is the knowledge that a latter day apostasy is noted in scripture to rise up, and that the ultimate fruition of such apostasy is a literal one-world super-church which worships a false christ.  This false christ is not just “different” from the true Christ, but is one who is characteristically the opposite of the true Christ, all-the-while claiming himself to be just that.

The clear cry of scripture to our generation, however, is that an apostasy will begin prior to the day of the Lord and will come to maturity during the same seven-year season as a full-blown worship of a man aptly named, Antichrist.  

It seems impossible to some that today’s apostasy may have such a formidable and evil destination.  After all, no one would relegate the teachings, for example, of the Word of Faith movement and the liberal Emergent movement to that of anti-christ status, would they?  Well, yes, some would, merely for the understanding of the nature of apostasy to endure into such monstrosities.  But, whether one is comfortable making such a call today isn’t really the issue.  The issue is the nature of apostasy.  It grows.  It develops.  It continually changes and degrades.  Once something has gotten off course there is literally no estimating the degree of its future error.  If a spaceship were orbiting the earth only one degree off of a perfect course, it would in time gyroscope itself 180 degrees away from its intended original target.  Luckily, in the case of the spherical earth, it would then correct itself.  Apostasy is based on a two dimensional plane, however.  There is only truth, and error, to whatever degree.  The slightest margin of error will continue to take that which is wrong further away from the truth.  In geometry, a short line can be drawn from the same starting point as another line, but one-half of a degree off course.  If the line is very short, the distinction will be virtually unnoticeable.  Yet, the greater distance that line travels, the more visible it becomes that its error is unyielding. 

The error of these two groups (Emergents and the Word of Faith) is already relegated to “no gospel at all” by those who are serious about contending for the faith of the written Word of God.  Yet, in time, doctrines which have been “tweaked” for the sake of the consumerism of the gospel will indeed enter the waters of utter antithesis of Christianity.  Even today Emergents are co-worshipping with other religions; Muslim, Hindu, Baha’i, and whatever other weird mystic belief is out there.  How can Christianity merge itself with untruth and end up anywhere other than the complete opposite of truth once enough time has passed?

In the final observation, I would be hard pressed to positively define the heretical positioning of the Word of Faith and/or the Emergent movement as the final apostasy which will yield the earth to the whims of God’s enemy.  Yet, considering other signs of the times, one who is honest would have a difficult time demonstrating that in fact we are not in the final days of this age and that the heretical course of these groups may not very well be the forerunners of ecclesiastical Babylon.

The observation of the migration of Christendom into the one-world religious system of the tribulation will be the subject of our next and final post in this series.

http://www.returningking.com/?p=410

Concerning today’s massive population of false teachers, scripture also offers several texts which warn us of the propensity of these teachers to teach outside of the Word of God.  While these texts do not speak specifically about a latter day apostasy, they do speak volumes concerning the very nature of false teachers; namely, where their doctrines come from and why they are to be avoided.

Peter, in speaking about the sufficiency and trustworthiness of the scriptures notes,

2 Peter 1:16-18 (NIV)
¹⁶ We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. ¹⁷ For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” ¹⁸ We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

Peter first asserts the nature of his own testimony concerning the Lord Jesus.  He was an eyewitness of his majesty.  Peter, being an apostle of the Lord Christ, being with him on a daily basis during his earthly ministry, wrote what he saw with his own eyes concerning the work and ministry of Christ.  He then establishes the framework for the admonition he will momentarily speak against false teachers as he notes, “we did not follow cleverly invented stories.”  Indeed, Peter speaks what he saw in person, while in the presence of Christ.  His testimony is further validated by James and John who were with him. 

The event Peter speaks of is the transfiguration of Christ, found in Matthew 17 and Luke 9.  On this particular day, these men had a supernatural experience, witnessing the transfiguration of Christ before their very eyes, and hearing the very words of God confirming that “this is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”  Indeed, such an experience could easily be taken on its own merit to have been a revelation from the Lord.  Yet, Peter does not relegate the validity of his testimony to his experience alone.  Personal observation, followed by the affirmation of other witnesses was the test of his testimony.

He further notes,

2 Peter 1:19-21 (NIV)
¹⁹ And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. ²⁰ Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. ²¹ For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Peter states two important facts concerning his experience.  First, he notes that “we have the word of the prophets made more certain.”  This is the third characteristic of Peter’s testimony.  Peter’s experience was validated by scripture.  The prophets had noted the coming of the Messiah.  Peter’s mountaintop encounter served to affirm what he had already known from the prophets.  Secondly, he notes that “no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation.  For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man….”  Peter understood that his experience, validated by scripture, was legitimate precisely because of that fact.

Peter’s testimony concerning the mount of transfiguration is the backdrop for the doctrine which he next proclaims.  Peter understood that there are men in all ages who would not accept the scriptures as the foundation of their experience and their doctrines.  They would feel it necessary to embellish scripture, or to completely make up their own postulates concerning the truths of the faith.  He continues his discourse,

2 Peter 2:1-3 (NIV)
¹ But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them–bringing swift destruction on themselves. ² Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. ³ In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

Peter articulates a warning to his readers that false prophets will exist among them.  He stipulates the nature of their work very simply, “these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up.”  Unlike Peter’s own testimony, which was validated by scripture and eyewitnesses, the false teachers he warns of are those who simply “make up” their “stories.”  They will not have scripture as the basis of their doctrines.  They will not have eyewitnesses who will validate their exceptional claims.  Such was Peter’s verification of that which he professed as truth.

From the time of the apostolic age, the burden of proof has greatly strengthened.  The book of Revelation, written in roughly 90 AD, contains this warning to those who would presume to add or take away from God’s revelation in that book:

Revelation 22:18-19 (NIV)
¹⁸ I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. ¹⁹ And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

The warning of this text was certainly regarding this particular book of Revelation.  It does reaffirm, however, God’s attitude toward all of his written word.  That God had given his word to reliable, tested prophets was no accident.  He fully intended it to be protected and preserved, with the full warning of severe judgments to those who changed it.  Peter himself affirms the same principles concerning doctrine.  He notes that those who “exploit you with stories they have made up” will experience “condemnation [which] has long been hanging over them.”  Such warnings permeate scripture.  It is not to be added to, changed, or taken away from.  While Jesus’ warning through John in Revelation may be relegated to the handling of that particular book, the scriptures as a whole repeat that warning to anyone who would dare twist them for alternative consumption.  The Lord makes a similar warning to Israel concerning the Law of Moses:

Deuteronomy 4:2-4 (NIV)
² Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you. ³ You saw with your own eyes what the Lord did at Baal Peor. The Lord your God destroyed from among you everyone who followed the Baal of Peor, ⁴ but all of you who held fast to the Lord your God are still alive today.

Likewise, in this warning, God noted a severe penalty for the addition to or subtraction from his given Word.  Indeed, scripture thoroughly affirms John’s testimony of punishment to those who change God’s word to be a condition applicable to the entirety of the Word.  Paul notes of the “false apostles” in 2 Corinthians 11, “their end will be what their actions deserve.”  He further notes in Galatians (a text which will be observed in the next post) that those who preach “another gospel” are to be “eternally condemned.”  He writes in 2 Timothy 3 that they are “men of depraved minds” who “as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected.”  And Peter continues his discourse concerning false teachers, noting,

2 Peter 2:21 (NIV)
²¹ It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

The prohibition against adding to or taking away from the Word of God pervades scripture.   Thus, the very teachers which exploit the church with “stories they made up” are without excuse.  They “have known the way of righteousness,” but have abandoned it for their own purposes. 

This, once again, is the very definition of apostasy.  Such is our very day.

Concerning the invention of doctrine, there is perhaps no group in history which have been as prolific at the occupation as the modern day Word of Faith movement.  (For a more thorough investigation of this group, read this whole series.)  These men not only teach doctrines which are without prophetic reference or eyewitness verification, they do so openly and without excuse.  Even in light of the completed canon of scripture these teachers find reasons to regularly make additions to God’s word via their self-proclaimed “revelation knowledge.”  Joyce Meyer unashamedly admits,

“The Bible can’t even find any way to explain this. Not really. That’s why you’ve got to get it by revelation. There are no words to explain what I’m telling you. I’ve got to just trust God that He’s putting it into your spirit like He put it into mine.”
Joyce Meyer (What Happened from the Cross to The Throne? audio

READ MORE HERE

The great falling away is further demonstrated in scripture by what can best be understood as a “consumerization” of the gospel.  A further indication of a future apostasy is noted in 2 Timothy.  In this text, Paul does not specify a specific apostasy which will precede the tribulation, but he does note a later time in which men will refuse sound doctrine.  And, as will be demonstrated, his teaching clearly articulates the very same elements of apostasia as were noted earlier.

2 Timothy 4:3-4 (NIV)
³ For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. ⁴ They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

Concerning the mentality during this coming age, Paul makes several assertions.  First, he notes the consumerism of the Word of God.  He states that “men will not put up with sound doctrines,” but will instead choose those which “suit their own desires.”  As if doctrines can be “shopped” for discriminately, these men hear the legitimate truth and simply make a decision not to accept it in light of the error which they prefer.  Such is the nature of consumerism.  If I want a blue car, I do not have to purchase a red one, for blue ones are readily available.  If, likewise, I want to serve a God who lives to please me, I can make such a choice as well, for men are available readily who will preach such a gospel to my ears.  Paul notes, “to suit their own desires” they will accumulate such teachers.  Thus, it is the desires of man himself which will orient doctrines in this coming age.  What man desires to hear as “truth” will be given to him as such.  Welcome to custom-built theology 101.

Noted in the text is that there are “a great number” of teachers who will provide such self-tailored theological services.  As such, it is clear that a great quantity of people will desire to hear such doctrines, and will give validation to the false teachers which propagate them.  It is at this point the reader should take great caution concerning the nature of how religious truth is noted to be validated in our culture.  Simply because the masses affirm it to be true does not make something true.  Clearly the times will come when the masses will align themselves with false teachings over legitimate doctrine.  However, unlike a made-to-order hamburger, which is built for man’s personal demands of consumption, doctrine is by definition something which belongs to its creator. 

We live, however, in a culture of consumerism.  Even our very governmental system is so designed that men get what the ultimately want (at least ideally) by voting for candidates which represent their desires.  This culture has proven to be a fertile ground for the propagation of such false doctrines by the itchy ears of the crowd.  Both the Word of Faith Movement and the Emerging Church movement are beacons of opportunity for those seeking a consumerized gospel.

The Word of Faith has made itself exceptionally proficient at promising the desires of men’s hearts.  Their doctrinal position is precisely crafted to scratch the ears of their willing constituency.  They teach that man can have anything he wants if he learns how to properly utilize the “word of faith.”  How ingenious!  Without the necessities of a litmus test or focus group studies, these men literally promise that men can have their own desires regardless of what they happen to be.  Do you want healing? 

“You may have sickness in your body; you need to call in health.”
“Your circumstances will line up with your words.”
“Joel that sounds like wishful thinking. No, that’s using your words to create what you need.”
“You can change your world by simply changing your words.”
Joel Osteen (“Speaking Faith Filled Words”, Tape # 223, May 2, 2004)

Do you want money? 

“What do you need? Start creating it. Start speaking about it. Start speaking it into being. Speak to your billfold. Say, “You big, thick billfold full of money.” Speak to your checkbook. Say, “You, checkbook, you. You’ve never been so prosperous since I owned you. You’re just jammed full of money.”
Marilyn Hickey (Claim Your Miracles audiotape #186, side 2)

Indeed, whatever man wants to acquire for his own glory, there is a Word of Faith teacher prepared to instruct him (for the price of admission) on how to use “faith words” to receive it.  Rest assured, “Think Your Body Thin” and “Command Yourself to Beauty” are soon to follow, as these men are masters at scratching ears which itch.

In the end, their bogus systematic theology puts man literally in the driver’s seat, being equal with God himself.  After all, if man can “speak” whatever his heart desires into existence, what power or purpose remains for God himself?  Fred Price rightly defines their position as ne notes,

“Yes! You are in control! So, if man has control, who no longer has it? God.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (“Prayer: Do You Know What Prayer Is … and How to Pray?” The Word Study Bible, 1990 p. 1178)

Returning to the original sin of Satan himself, WOFers have indeed recognized and responded to the greatest itch man has ever had; his desire to be his own god.  Their demonic dogma aligns loyal followers with Satan himself as they ascribe to “be like the Most High.”  According to Paul Crouch,

“He [God] doesn’t even draw a distinction between Himself and us. . . . You know what else that’s settled, then, tonight? This hue and cry and controversy that has been spawned by the Devil to try and bring dissension within the body of Christ that we are gods. I am a little god! . . . I have His name. I’m one with Him. I’m in covenant relation. I am a little god! Critics, be gone!”
Paul Crouch (Praise the Lord, TBN? July 7, 1986)  [with Ken Copeland nodding in agreement]

Itch, be scratched.

The nodding Copeland fully affirms this teaching as he notes,

“You don’t have a god in you, you are one”
Kenneth Copeland (The Force of Love, 1987, audiotape #02-0028, side 1)

When I first began investigating the incredulous doctrines of this group, I must admit that I didn’t really get what they were all about.  I just thought Word of Faith preachers were run-of-the-mill tares in the wheat; simple misguided and half-baked theologians who got way too much attention.  I’ve learned that they are much more than that.  They are master deceivers who know what men want to hear.  They are opportunists who gladly will contort God’s eternal Word to suit the greed of their followers, which in turn feeds their own greed through donations and fiction book sales.  They are the systematic fulfillment of scripture; those who men gather around themselves to “say what their itching ears want to hear. ⁴ They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.”  

Not to be overshadowed, the liberal end of the Emergent pool has perhaps outdone even the creepy doctrines of the WOF.  While the WOF attempts to corrupt God’s word for their own purposes, the Emergent left have devised a system where such creative theological twisting need not even be agreed upon during limousine rides between preaching gigs. Indeed, the “lesson” at the next venue may be completely different, depending upon the local opinions.

By shrugging off systematic theology and embracing a purely narrative approach to scripture, God’s Word is now read as poetry by the Emergent ear scratcher.  It says to you what you want it to say, like your copy of Kubla Khan.  The more radical Emergents have systematically deconstructed scripture, resulting in each individual congregation holding the interpretational “rights” to it through community acquiescence.  They claim that one cannot understand scripture fully, but only through the collective imaginative opinions of the group can its meaning be put into proper practice.  As Rob Bell so eloquently doubts,

This [that the biblical canon was not settled until the 4th century] is part of the problem with continually insisting that one of the absolutes of the Christian faith must be a belief that “Scripture alone” is our guide. It sounds nice, but it is not true. In reaction to abuses by the church, a group of believers during a time called the Reformation claimed that we only need the authority of the Bible. But the problem is that we got the Bible from the church voting on what the Bible even is.
Rob Bell (Velvet Elvis, – Rethinking the Christian Faith, Zondervan: Grand Rapids, 2005, pp. 67-68)

Thus, the church trumps the Bible in its own authority.  Because the Bible was penned and affirmed by men, it can only be rightly interpreted by community pool.  One community reads their Bible and concludes (by general consent) that homosexuality is good and right.  Another reads the same Bible and concludes that homosexuality is wrong.

Frankly, many of us don’t know what we should think about homosexuality. We’ve heard all sides but no position has yet won our confidence so that we can say ‘it seems good to the Holy Spirit and us.’ That alienates us from both the liberals and conservatives whom seem to know exactly what we should think. Perhaps we need a five-year moratorium on making pronouncements. In the meantime, we’ll practice prayerful Christian dialogue, listening respectfully, disagreeing agreeably. When decisions need to be made, they’ll be admittedly provisional. We’ll keep our ears attuned to scholars in biblical studies, theology, ethics, psychology, genetics, sociology, and related fields. Then in five years, if we have clarity, we’ll speak; if not, we’ll set another five years for ongoing reflection.
Brian McLaren (online source:  christianitytoday.com/le/currenttrendscolumns/leadershipweekly/cln60123.html)

With the validity of theology relegated to “what we should think,” men need only find a church which “thinks” their own doctrinal position to be validated by the whole of the Emergent position.  Relativity is not seen as incompatible with scripture.  Truth for me may or may not be truth for you, though it flows from the same fountain.

Scritch, scritch, scritch.

Paul’s wisdom, inspired by the Holy Spirit, should cause all who fear God and respect his word to reconsider the validity of all such foolishness.  He could no more clearly have stated what is obviously at large in today’s open-minded theological soup of the WOF and Emergent movements.  “The time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.” 

The term translated for “sound” (doctrine) is the Gk. hygiaino, which literally means “healthy” or figuratively means “uncorrupted.” 

How interesting. 

Being “uncorrupted” is precisely the antithesis of apostasia, as was observed in the last section.  That which is apostate is that which was at one point healthy and uncorrupted, but has now been rendered unhealthy and corrupted.  Furthermore, it is clear that it is indeed such apostasy that he speaks of here in 2 Timothy 4, as he notes in verse 4, “⁴ They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.”  The ears of those who formerly heard the truth are turned aside.  They know and have heard good theology in the past, but choose to no longer put up with it. 

Thus, what Paul reveals concerning “sound” theology bears the identical definition of what he noted (in the last section) in 2 Thessalonians concerning the coming apostasy of the last days:

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NIV)
³ Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion [apostasia] occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Those who will not put up with sound doctrine, but instead choose that which scratches their ears are of the very same essence as the apostasia.  In both cases, men who have heard, known and understood valid theology will turn it aside in lieu of what is deemed more desirable for their own consumption.  Paul’s warnings continue to point to an increasing rebellion from the very body of Christ as time progresses.  Particularly, the last days are noted to be a time of such manifestations of false doctrines.  I am not comfortable making presumptions concerning our current state of apostasy in the church.  I’m not going to announce half-cocked that the last days are upon us.  Yet, I can- and must- acknowledge that the modern church is uniquely poised as a candidate for those days prior to the end.  The fat lady may very well be warming up in the greenroom.

Matthew 24:12-14 (NIV)
¹² Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, ¹³ but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. ¹⁴ And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

(NOTE:  This is a continuation of the Wolves in Wool Series.  This post assumes the prerequisite reading of earlier posts)

In concluding this series on false doctrines in the church, a return to its beginning is in order; once again examining the scriptures which warn of such coming practices.  In retrospect, the teachings of the Word of Faith and the Emergent movements find themselves fully uncovered in light of numerous scriptures which have rightly predicted their rise in the latter days, their unbiblical basis of “truth” and the true motivations for their practices.

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul articulates events concerning the future rise of Antichrist and the season of the coming Great Tribulation.  Apparently, some had attempted to delude the church into believing that such events had already begun.  Paul sets the record straight that such cannot be the case until several key events have taken place.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 (NIV)
¹ Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, ² not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.

Initially, Paul notes that the “day of the Lord” has indeed not yet come, as has apparently been reported. 

“The day of the Lord” is an exceptionally recurrent theme in scripture.  In every case this phrase is used, in both the Old and New Testaments, it refers to what is commonly known as “the great tribulation,” a period of great distress upon the earth during which God’s judgments are to be poured out.  The Great Tribulation is aligned historically with the last seven years prior to the return of Christ to establish his Kingdom upon the earth.  Most commonly, the designation “day of the Lord” refers generally to the entire seven year season, though rarely it refers to the very end of the tribulation; the time of Christ’s return.  An example of this more common “general” usage are found in Isaiah.

Isaiah 13:9-10 (NIV)
⁹ See, the day of the Lord is coming –a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger– to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it. ¹⁰ The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.

Noted of this “day of the Lord” are several indications as to its nature in this text.  First, it is a day of God’s wrath and anger.  Secondly, it is a day which will make the land desolate and will destroy the sinners in the land.  These designations can easily be aligned with the Great Tribulation from Revelation 6, which describes the seal judgments, the first of three separate groupings of judgments which will be unleashed during the tribulation season.  After the sixth seal is released, it is noted,

Revelation 6:15-17 (NIV)
¹⁵ Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. ¹⁶ They called to the mountains and the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! ¹⁷ For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”

Clearly, the judgment program of the Great Tribulation is seen as a day of God’s wrath and a day which is aimed at destroying the unrepentant of the earth.  Clearly the people who will be judged in this day understand its nature, as they note to the mountains, “fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb!”  Additionally, they reference this time as the “day of the Lord” when they stipulate, “for the great day of their wrath has come.” 

Also noted in Isaiah 13 are drastic changes in nature which will accompany that day.  Verse 10 notes “the stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light.  The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.”  This “blackout” of the heavens is demonstrated on several occasions in Revelation’s accounting of the tribulation as well.  The fourth trumpet judgment will render a one-third reduction in the time which the lights of the heavens will shine (Revelation 8:12).  Likewise, the fifth bowl judgment will plunge the majority of the earth into darkness, as the entire kingdom of Antichrist will be affected (Revelation 16:10).  Thus, “the day of the Lord” in Isaiah fits perfectly within the descriptions of the judgments of the tribulation in Revelation.

The “day of the Lord” passages in Lamentations, Ezekiel, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Zechariah, Malachi, and throughout the New Testament each depict the same general season of the Great Tribulation.  (For more detail on “the day of the Lord,” see the author’s book, The Return of the King.

Continuing Paul’s discourse in 2 Thessalonians, he notes,

2 Thessalonians 2:3 (NIV)
³ Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

Clearly, the “day of the Lord” will not come upon the earth until two things occur: the revealing of the man of lawlessness (Antichrist) and “the rebellion.”  While other scriptures note other occurrences which will also precede the tribulation, it is this “rebellion” which is of interest at this time. 

The terms, “the rebellion,” in this text are translated from the Greek term, apostasia.  Apostasia is where the English term “apostasy” finds its origins.  This term does not speak to generalized theological error, which has been common throughout history.  Instead, apostasia refers specifically to theological error which arises out of legitimate doctrine.  As such, the KJV renders this term as, “a falling away.”

Paganism has existed from very near the creation itself, being observed even in the book of Genesis.  Throughout the Old Testament are observed the practices of every sort of demonology imaginable.  None of these are what the term “apostasy” refers to.  Rather, apostasy is observed when the legitimate doctrines of the faith are distorted into ungodly teachings.  Those who once understood and taught rightly concerning the principles of God’s Word become corrupted to the point that their teachings are no longer identifiable as Christian doctrine.  The term literally means, “a defection from the truth.”  Apostasia is when one abandons the principles of the legitimate faith in lieu of another form of teaching.

Paul makes an iron-clad prophetic assertion that the prelude to the end times will be characterized by such apostasy.  The former teachers of the legitimate truth will systematically fall to doctrines which are in no way affiliated with God’s Word.   Understanding the necessity of an apostasy to occur before God’s “day of the Lord” program can unfold is perhaps the most disconcerting disclosure of this entire study.  As much as we may fight against the growing defection from truth in the church, such events are guaranteed.  The church will endure this rebellion prior to the day of the Lord.  I believe whole-heartedly that we are witnessing such at these current times.

Teaching Doctrines of Demons

Paul’s pre- “day of the Lord” reference to apostasy is also noted in his numerous appeals to Timothy:

1 Timothy 4:1 (NIV)
¹ The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.

Here, these same “later times” are referenced to be days when people will “abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.”  To “abandon the faith,” one must have at one point been observing the faith with some measure of demonstration.  Such is the nature of apostasy; to be following legitimate doctrines at one point, and fall away at a later point to deceptive, unbiblical practices.  Interestingly, these apostate teachings are not only noted to be deceptive, but literally the subject matter of demons.

That the coming apostasy is characterized as “things taught by demons” should cause each of us to stop in our boots in light of the preceding chapter detailing the nature of the contemplative prayer model of the emergent leaders.  Understanding that these men are having spiritual encounters with “higher beings” as a part of their routine religious worship experience sheds much needed light onto the origins of their weird and unbiblical theological conclusions.  Should one expect a man who engages a spirit guide in his regular prayer life to come up with any other conclusion than that “there is no distinction between Islam and Christianity?”  Should we be surprised that men who listen to random voices in their “prayers” conclude that there is no literal Hell?  

The ramifications of Paul’s assertion are startling.  The designation, “taught by demons,” leaves no room for misinterpretation.  Those of the apostasy are those who must consort with demons on a regular basis in order to receive their indoctrination.  Sadly, such is the case in an enormously popular and growing community within the church today.  Every time an Emergent leader instructs his giddy, “cutting-edge” congregation in a season of listening prayer (or contemplative prayer, or transcendental meditation), one must seriously question who or what exactly is being listened to.  These men who attempt to redefine orthodoxy as something which is mystical, unclear and deconstructed by communal acquiescence are well into the nature of the apostasy which Paul warned.

Likewise, in light of this text one should assert great critical analysis to the Word of Faith teachers in our culture today.  Commonly, these false prophets proclaim to teach valid theology by the use of “revelation knowledge.”  They claim to hear from God “new” teachings which were not included in the biblical writings.  They claim to have a direct doctrinal pipeline of new teachings which are for a new generation.  Yet, I have strong objections to this methodology of supposed “revelation.” 

Essentially, such “latter revelation” presumes that God was either short-sighted or somehow otherwise incapable of including all necessary revelation concerning himself in the Bible as written.  Is God forgetful?  Is he the bumbling Lieutenant Columbo who turns around after he has spoken eternal truth to his true prophets and says, “oh yeah… just one more thing?”  If God had planned a “later” revelation (which could only be heard by Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland), would he have not prepared his faithful – from scripture – to be prepared to hear such latter teaching?  Yet, quite the opposite is true.  The Bible does warn that future prophetic vision will come, but that such future vision is to be avoided!  Jesus said, “many false prophets will appear and deceive many people” (Matthew 24:11) in his statement concerning the signs of the end times.  Such is also the very point of Paul’s warning (above) in 1 Timothy, that,

“in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.” 

Yes- a future “vision” will indeed arise.  But it is no vision from God, via revelation knowledge.  Such “revelation” comes not from God at all.  John noted in Revelation,

Revelation 22:18 (NIV)
¹⁸ I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

Biblical references concerning all such coming teachings categorically note them as apostate and ungodly in nature.  As Paul noted,

Galatians 1:8 (NIV)
⁸ But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!

My friends, understanding that demonic doctrines will be introduced to destroy the work of the legitimate gospel in the latter days should create a sense of utter dependence upon God’s word as the final and unfailing test of that which is legitimate, good and godly.  At no point in history has it been more clear that sola scriptura (scripture alone) should be the defining trait which distinguishes between the theological men and boys.  The conclusions of scripture are solid and clear: demonic doctrines will permeate the last days.  Therefore, by default, when someone attempts to teach me something which is not clearly defined in the scriptures, my first assumption is that such teachings are demonic, ungodly and invalid.  Indeed, a stark paranoia should be the mark of true disciples of Christ concerning the introduction of “new” theological ideas which are not readily understandable from scripture alone.

Romans 16:17 (NIV)
¹⁷ I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

A lot of good has come out of the Charismatic Movement but at the same time there are some serious issues that need to be looked at and need to be addressed within Charismatic churches today. In this series I take a look at some of the dirty bath water issues that need to be addressed to help the church move forward to maturity.

http://johnmarcus.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/the-charismatic-movement-getting-rid-of-the-dirty-bath-water/

Charismatic Movement (1)

Charismatic Movement (2)

Charismatic Movement (3)

Charismatic Movement (4)

Charismatic Movement (5)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A Wolf’s Guide to Fool Sheep Into Giving

So everyone in Church has more money than you huh? Well, there’s only one way to get more for yourself. Convince others to give it to you. Here are 11 tricks you can use to convince God’s sheep to give you their money.

1. Be a Good Salesman
There is one thing for certain, you need to be a good salesman/woman. If you do not sound sincere about persuading your victims into giving, then people will not give as much. The fight for money is a war that you must win! Pick up a sales technique book. There are many tips and tricks that will help you hone your scandalous techniques.

2. Show Off Your Own Bling
The fact is, people want to see the truth in order to believe the truth. They don’t want to believe that giving makes you rich. They want to see it. So take this time to show off your bling. Perhaps you should wear diamond cufflets(if you don’t have any you can wear CZ’s). Or perhaps you can wear Armani suits and drive a Bentley. Perhaps you can fly a private jet. . . just make sure it’s in the Church’s name. Whatever it is, just make their eyes razzle and dazzle.

3. Pay for Actors to Give and Write Testimonies
People want to see examples of ordinary people who have a testimony of extraordinary things. Your audience will want to know that any Joe Schmoe can be blessed by giving. Just write some letters and come up with a good story. Start out by saying, “this letter is from Suzie Q. in Phoenix Arizona”. After all, nobody knows who Suzie Q is from Phoenix Arizona. People will want to see how another person in the same financial situation that they are in can afford to give so much. Make sure you praise yourself in this letter, because people will also want to see how joyful and cheerful these people are as well. The goal is to get your victims to want to be just like Suzie Q. from Phoenix Arizona.

4. Start Crying
Emotions play a large part in convincing people to give. People need a little more than logical reasoning to motivate them. This is where your acting skills come into play. When you are swindling money from people, you need to find your inner self. Think of something that would help you cry. Maybe the joy of being so rich will overwhelm you and bring tears to your eyes. Maybe the thought of not affording a new Rolex will bring tears to your eyes. Everyone has different ways that make them cry. I’ve even seen someone wipe onion juice on their mustache to help them cry. Whatever it is for you, you should do it.

5. Feed People’s Greed by Promising a 10 Fold Return.
Ah, yes. Money is the universal language. It breaks down all barriers. Just flash something gold or green in somebody’s face and you could turn a frown upside down without saying a word. In this case you want to turn your frown upside down, so you need to convince people that giving to you really is a benefit for themselves. Learning how to tithe is like playing the lottery, but in God’s lottery, everyone is the winner. This is one of the best ways to convince others to give because they not only are convinced they will see more in return; they are also cheerful.

6. Have Poses of You Handing Out Food to Starving Kids with Bloated Bellies
People want to know that you have a heart, so we are going to have to do some Public Relations work here. You are going to have to take 1 week every year and get your hands dirty. I know it’s not fun, but it ensures that your pocket stays full. Make sure you keep a smile on your face because the cameras are rolling. Just think about all the money you can ask for just because you help starving children with bloated bellies and flies all around them. A wise old wolf once said, “If you touch people’s hearts, you will also touch their pocket books.”

7. Show a Slideshow of an Evangelism Rally in a 3rd World Country
As long as your victims know that people are getting saved because of your efforts then they will continue to give. This swindling technique is also one of the most effective. Each soul that you save (well actually, they are just pictures of some random person praying to God), is considered priceless. Who can put a price on someone’s soul? People will dig the deepest in their pocket just to have souls saved. Some might even empty their lifetime savings accounts. For every picture that you show of someone praying to God or lifting up their hands, consider it an extra thousand in your pocket. Take pictures of people from all different races, because whether it is black, white, yellow, brown, or red, all ethnicities want their nationality to be saved. Also multi-cultural pictures make you look like a well diversified and multi cultural ministry.

8. Install a coffee shop or some TV’s to show their money is being put to good use.
There may be times when people start questioning what you are doing with all this money. At this time you need to do something to pacify them. Install a coffee shop, or some flat panel TV’s. This will keep them happy and is an integral part of keeping the cash-flow steady. I know, it may cost money, but consider it an investment. You thought that you convinced them earlier about giving their money, but their cognitive dissonance has settled in. Make sure you spoil them. The things that you buy for them will keep them appeased and they will feel rewarded for giving.

9. Hire an Architect to Build a 3D Models of Potential Building Projects for the Church
Getting money based on people’s dreams and your promises is one of the oldest tricks in the book, but it still works today. People want something to look forward to, so make sure your building plans for the future are as extravagant and lavish. All you have to do is convince them that this will happen if they sacrifice enough money. Your victims will ooooh, and ahhhh at the magnificent structure while you ooooh and ahhhh at the money coming in.

10. Have a Time Limit and Make it Urgent
Whenever you are beginning a giving campaign make sure you set a time limit, and make it urgent. The salesman always wants you to buy now. They don’t need time to think about the decision, they just need to pick up that phone or offering envelope and commit their money now. The longer they wait, the longer God will wait to bless them.

11. Just Scare Them Into Giving
You might want to save this one as a last resort. There are many Biblical examples that you can bring into this. First, you have Annanias and Saphira being killed for lying about giving. Then there is Malachi 3:8, where you are cursed for robbing God. Scaring people into giving is a bit cynical, but is a necessary evil in order to convince people to pay for your new mansion. You can even use personal testimonies that show how people were cursed for not giving their tithe.

http://churchtithesandofferings.com/blog/a-wolfs-guide-to-fool-sheep-into-giving/

Continuing in their pursuit of “get what you want” theology, the next major assault of the Bible in the WOF teaching concerns their doctrine of wealth.   This doctrine teaches that each believer in Christ should expect to be wealthy and have the absolute best of everything our culture offers.  And, to not be wealthy puts one in the same esteem as one who is not healthy in their world view: a spiritual failure.

“Yeah, God has pleasure in the prosperity. So he must have displeasure in the poverty. So if he does, then poverty couldn’t be from God. Yeah, but Brother Price, but God allows it. God lets it happen. You’re right, he does. He does, because you do. He can’t do anything about it.”
Fred Price, (Ever Increasing Faith 11/16/90).

God wants all believers to be wealthy

The essence of this doctrine begins, of course, with the idea that God wants his children all to be wealthy.  For, according to these teachers, wealth is a God-given right. 

“He wants His children to eat the best, He wants them to wear the best clothing, He wants them to drive the best cars, and He wants them to have the best of everything.”
Kenneth Hagin, Sr. (Quoted by D.L. McConnell, A Different Gospel p.175)

While this sounds both appealing and desirable, it is completely contrary to the teachings of scripture. 

Paul serves as a firm rebuttal witness to this idea, as he says,

1 Timothy 6:6-11 (NIV)
⁶ But godliness with contentment is great gain. ⁷ For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. ⁸ But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. ⁹ People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. ¹⁰ For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs. ¹¹ But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.

According to Paul, God’s children are to be content with food and clothing alone!  And, contrary to Hagin’s premise, Paul notes that the desire to get rich leads men into destruction, rather than God’s good graces.  He concludes the matter with the true biblical position concerning the pursuit of wealth, “ But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.

It is important to note that neither Paul, nor any other biblical writers teach that wealth is inherently evil, or that to have wealth is to be in a sinful state.  What Paul teaches, however, is quite contrary to the WOF position, namely that God wants everyone to be rich.  Paul teaches that God wants everyone to be content with what God has provided for them.  One’s pursuit is not to be oriented toward riches, but righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.

Yet, Fred Price insinuates that believers are somehow on God’s payroll, and should expect a financial reward from their service to God!

“most employers at least have enough common decency about them that they don’t ask somebody to work for them for free…. If a man has enough nicety about him to do that, can’t you at least believe that the Father God is not asking you to serve Him for free either?”
Fred Price,  (D.L. McConnell p.170 op. cit. F. Price Faith, Foolishness, presumption p.7)

To “serve him for free???“  Does Price have no understanding of the scriptures?  Do they really think God owes them something?  Indeed, he does, but it is not a reward.  It is death to all who have sinned.  Man does not serve God for free or for pay, but in response to God’s goodness.    Because God has not given us what we have earned – the wages of sin (death) – Romans says,

Romans 12:1 (NIV)
¹ Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God–this is your spiritual act of worship.

Our service to God is a response to his mercy!  He saved believers from an eternal destiny of destruction and Hell.  That is all we have ever earned.  Yet, Jesus died on a cross to pay for our sins!  How can my service to him be considered as “free???”  To serve him is ”your spiritual act of worship,” or, as the KJV states it, “your reasonable service.”  Worship, or service to God, is a response, not an occupation which yields a wage.  God’s gift of eternal life has already been accepted by his worshippers, and it can never be repaid by one’s service.  Service, then, is one’s response to what God has already done.  It is not a means to a paycheck!  In fact, to preach service to God as a means to financial gain is the biblical marker of a false teacher!

1 Timothy 6:3-5 (NIV)
³ If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, ⁴ he is conceited and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions ⁵ and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.

At least Price, Hinn, Hagin and others make our jobs easy.  By proclaiming service to the kingdom as a means to financial gain, they have firmly established to the true church what they are.  Paul states clearly that they are those who teach such doctrines are “men of corrupt mind,” and those “who have been robbed of the truth.”

Yet, this text doesn’t stop the prosperity preachers from dictating contrary doctrines, out of their own extra-biblical sources.

“Poverty is from the devil and that God wants all Christians prosperous.”
Benny Hinn, (TBN, 11/6/90)

Once again, Benny, could we have chapter and verse, please?  One can only assume this teaching to come from the book of 1 Benny. 

Friends, any teacher, including myself, Billy Graham or Martin Luther, should establish their teachings on the basis of biblical exegesis.  The very definition of preaching and teaching within the confines of the Christian church necessitates that a teacher teaches that which comes from the Bible, rather than from their minds, culture, historical hand-me-downs or other extra-biblical sources.  To teach that which is added to the Bible, in fact, is the very essence of the definition of a cult.  Mormons, for example, are considered a cult by the bulk of Christianity because they have added to the scriptures their own book of rhetoric.  

Jesus was wealthy

A major supposed “support” for the WOF wealth doctrines comes from the twisting of scriptures which attempts to identify Jesus, himself, as being a wealthy man.  As Prices says it,

“The whole point is I’m trying to get you to see–to get you out of this malaise of thinking that Jesus and the disciples were poor and then relating that to you- thinking that you, as a child of God, have to follow Jesus. The Bible says that He has left us an example that we should follow His steps. That’s the reason why I drive a Rolls Royce. I’m following Jesus’ steps.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (Ever Increasing Faith, TBN December 9, 1990)

Price at least asserts that we are to follow Jesus!  Sadly, he has no concept of what that truth reveals.  According to him (and the rest of the WOF gang) the church has historically misunderstood Jesus financial status.  Jesus, they say, was in fact quite wealthy, which is why Price drives “a Rolls Royce.”

 John Avanzini goes the extra mile on this false doctrine, damaging at least three different biblical texts; falsifying them into their exact polar opposite that he may teach Jesus was rich.

Jesus had a nice house, a big house – big enough to have company stay the night with Him at the house. Let me show you His house. Go over to John the first chapter and I’ll show you His house…. Now, child of God, that’s a house big enough to have company stay the night in. There’s His house.”
John Avanzini (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN January 20, 1991)

The first example is his deduction that Jesus was rich because Jesus had a nice, big house.  Avanzini invites us to challenge him via the rare reference to a chapter and verse.  I do appreciate that change of pace.  Let’s accept that challenge, shall we?

John 1:35-39 (NIV)
³⁵ The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. ³⁶ When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” ³⁷ When the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus. ³⁸ Turning around, Jesus saw them following and asked, “What do you want?” They said, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” ³⁹ “Come,” he replied, “and you will see.” So they went and saw where he was staying, and spent that day with him. It was about the tenth hour.

Avanzini’s conclusions are that 1) Jesus had a house, 2) it was a nice house, 3) it was a big house.

John 1 teaches none of these conclusions.  The question asked of Jesus in verse 38 is not “do you own a house,” but rather, “where are you staying.”  My children do not own a house, but they stay in my house freely.  Nothing in the text indicates that Jesus owned this house, but only that Jesus had a place to stay in Bethany.  Additionally, there is absolutely nothing in the text that indicates the niceness of the home where he was staying, nor is there anything which notes the size of the home.  Verse 37 notes that two men went to stay with Jesus that day, not specifically even indicated that they stayed the night.  Yet, we’ll assume that they did stay the night, which very well may have happened.  If this is the case, just how large does a home need to be to accompany two additional men?  Could not a 500 square foot efficiency apartment in the South Bronx accommodate two additional people for an evening?  What about a small tent, for crying out loud?  Aside from the fact that this was not Jesus’ home, it is an asinine presumption to conclude a home to be “large” because two additional men stayed an evening in it. A grass hut in the poorest African village could accommodate the same.

Far more important than Avanzini’s egregious eisegesis (reading into the text), however, are Jesus’ own words on the subject.

Matthew 8:18-20 (NIV)
¹⁸ When Jesus saw the crowd around him, he gave orders to cross to the other side of the lake. ¹⁹ Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, “Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go.” ²⁰ Jesus replied, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.”

In response to a disciple offering to travel with Jesus, his comment was simple, “the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.”  In effect, Jesus warns this disciple that he had no home, and that following him is no picnic.  While Jesus surely had accommodations with his family in Nazareth, he personally had no home of his own; the supposed sign of his wealth given by WOF teachers.  One must only decide whether to believe Jesus’ own testimony or Avanzini’s.

Another infamous Avanzini perjury concerns Jesus’ supposed wearing of “designer clothing.”

“John 19 tells us that Jesus wore designer clothes. Well, what else you gonna call it? Designer clothes – that’s blasphemy. No, that’s what we call them today. I mean, you didn’t get the stuff He wore off the rack. It wasn’t a one-size-fits-all deal. No, this was custom stuff. It was the kind of garment that kings and rich merchants wore. Kings and rich merchants wore that garment.”
John Avanzini (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN January 20, 1991)

Sadly, what Avanzini refers to is nothing short of a mockery of Jesus’ shame on the cross. 

John 19:23-24 (NIV)
²³ When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. ²⁴ “Let’s not tear it,” they said to one another. “Let’s decide by lot who will get it.” This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled which said, “They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing.” So this is what the soldiers did.

The context of John 19, of course, is Jesus’ crucifixion.  As was customary, the soldiers took the clothing of the victims for themselves.  In Jesus’ case, only one garment was noted to be special; his undergarment.  The other clothes were distributed without issue, but the undergarment was noted to indeed be unique.  It “was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom.” 

Indeed, scripture teaches that Jesus did have a very nice undergarment.  It was apparently beautifully and impressively made.  Avanzini’s assertion, however, only communicates his lack of knowledge of historical biblical background.  All clothing was hand-made in those days.  None of it was likely to have come “off the rack,” but rather from a family member whose job was to make clothing for the household.  To have a garment which was unique by merit of it’s being “woven in one piece from top to bottom” speaks not to the expense of it, but rather the craftsmanship of its maker.  Mary, or any other woman in Jesus’ family would likely have made this garment.  Any of Jesus’ close friends may have made it.  The uniqueness of it speaks only to the skill and possibly the time invested in its construction, however.  It says nothing of the expense of the materials.  Yes, it was custom made, as most all garments were in that day.  Yet, the portrait of Jesus getting measured for one of Avanzini’s Armani suits is not being depicted in the text at all.

A third claim to Jesus’ supposed wealth is said to be the fruits of Jesus’ supposedly affluent ministry. 

“Jesus was handling big money because that treasurer He had was a thief. Now you can’t tell me that a ministry with a treasurer that’s a thief can operate on a few pennies. It took big money to operate that ministry because Judas was stealing out of that bag. If you have a treasurer, that means you have a lot of money.”
John Avanzini (Praise the Lord, TBN, September 15, 1988)

Once again, Avanzini speculates a very sloppy conclusion.  He states that Jesus must have been handling big money because 1) ” If you have a treasurer, that means you have a lot of money” and 2) ” because that treasurer He had was a thief.” 

To “have” a treasurer only denotes that a person has been assigned the responsibility of keeping the finances of a group.  It in no way demands a certain sum of money to exist, but only an accountable party to have been established to oversee a group’s cash flow- however large or small.  Boy Scout troops and community watches have treasurers.  They certainly would not be construed to be handling “big money” for that reason alone. 

Likewise, to have a treasurer who is a thief also does not indicate a large sum.  It only indicates the acquisition of a dishonest treasurer.  A treasurer who steals $5 from a $50 kitty is as much of a thief as one who embezzles millions.  Being “a thief” is not defined by a compulsory dollar amount which one must have stolen.  A thief, by definition, is one who takes something which does not belong to him; regardless of the amount. 

Actually, Avanzini’s reference to Judas’ greed serves more to prove that Jesus’ itinerate ministry did not have “big money,” for Judas gave up his ongoing treasury theft for a singular payout of thirty silver coins. 

Matthew 26:14-15 (NIV)
¹⁴ Then one of the Twelve–the one called Judas Iscariot–went to the chief priests ¹⁵ and asked, “What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?” So they counted out for him thirty silver coins.

These silver pieces were most likely shekels or drachmas.  The shekel, being the larger, equated to roughly 1/2 ounce of silver, or a total of 15 ounces of silver for all 30 pieces.  Mathew’s readers would have readily understood the price of 30 pieces of silver to equate to the compensatory price of a slave some fifteen hundred years earlier in accordance to the Law of Moses.

Exodus 21:32 (NIV)
³² If the bull gores a male or female slave, the owner must pay thirty shekels of silver to the master of the slave, and the bull must be stoned.

Thus, by all practical understanding, Jesus was sold cheap by Judas; the price of a common slave.  In today’s market, silver sells for about $10 per ounce, to put it in some perspective.  It Jesus’ day, the 30 pieces of silver were perhaps worth a bit more, but not a huge sum of money, none-the-less.  The question that must be asked then, is simple.  If Jesus was handling “big money,” and Judas was stealing regularly from that “big money” stockpile, why would he sell Jesus off for what amounts to a few hundred bucks???  Judas, a thief, was clearly an opportunist.  It makes no logical sense that he was stealing from a pot of “big money” yet sold Jesus for 30 pieces of silver.  This is especially true coming from the mouth of John Avanzini, who can afford to drop that entire amount in a single meal.

Scripture teaches quite contrary to the WOF assertion of Jesus’ wealth.  Jesus was in fact, poor, as numerous scriptures indicate.

He was in fact poor from birth, being designated by God to be raised by virtual paupers.

Luke 2:22-24 (NIV)
²² When the time of their purification according to the Law of Moses had been completed, Joseph and Mary took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord ²³ (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every firstborn male is to be consecrated to the Lord”), ²⁴ and to offer a sacrifice in keeping with what is said in the Law of the Lord: “a pair of doves or two young pigeons.”

Jesus’ parents offered a pair of doves for Mary’s purification.  Normally, one offered a lamb.  Yet, Luke informs the reader that Joseph and Mary gave either doves or pigeons, the offering of the poor.

Leviticus 12:7-8 (NIV)
⁷ He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood. “‘These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. ⁸ If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’”

The law clearly states that the normal purification was to be a lamb.  Only if the mother is too poor to afford a lamb is she allowed by the law to offer doves or pigeons.  Mary, clearly, was just such a woman. 

Furthermore, as has been established by Jesus’ own confession, he had no home of his own, but lived an itinerate lifestyle.  The fact that Avanzini claims he had a home is only contradictory to Jesus’ own words, proving that Avanzini is willing even to call Jesus a liar for his unrighteous goals.

Another scriptural proof of Jesus’ financial standing is seen in that Jesus was buried in another man’s (a truly rich man’s) tomb rather than his own.

Matthew 27:57-60 (NIV)
⁵⁷ As evening approached, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who had himself become a disciple of Jesus. ⁵⁸ Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body, and Pilate ordered that it be given to him. ⁵⁹ Joseph took the body, wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, ⁶⁰ and placed it in his own new tomb that he had cut out of the rock. He rolled a big stone in front of the entrance to the tomb and went away.

If Jesus had “big money,” why was he not put in his own tomb?  If Jesus had money for his own tomb, why would a rich man put Jesus in his own tomb?

Every scriptural teaching which hints at Jesus’ financial position is consistent.  Jesus was not rich.  He was the son of a poor father, a carpenter by trade, followed by a three year itinerant preaching ministry during which time he had no home nor a regular income beyond the donations of some of his followers.  He died with only one possession of noted envy; a nicely woven undergarment.

The Apostles Were Wealthy

Continuing this charade of wealth being the divine right of believers, WOF teachers furthermore present the apostles as wealthy men, heavy hitters and financially influential in their time.

(the) “apostles were businessmen they were rich men had plenty of money, I’m going to show you that Jesus was a wealthy man had plenty of money and see all of that completely foreign to us from a traditional point of view.” “Jesus and the disciples were rich, only rich people could take off for 3.5 years.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (Ever Increasing Faith, TBN November 23, 1990)

Price poses an interesting hypothesis (though he speaks it as if it were truth.)  “Only rich people could take off for 3.5 years.”  I’m sure this seems clever to Price, who certainly could take off for 3.5 years, which would benefit everyone.  Yet, this quote only serves to demonstrate Price’s misunderstanding of the very nature of the calling of the apostles.  The simple facts are that they chose to quit their jobs, follow Christ and be poor!  It speaks not of their wealth, but rather of their lack of the love of money, something Price cannot fathom.

Matthew 4:18-20 (NIV)
¹⁸ As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon called Peter and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the lake, for they were fishermen. ¹⁹ “Come, follow me,” Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.” ²⁰ At once they left their nets and followed him.

Peter and John were fishermen.  They were common, blue collar worker bees, who left their boats, nets and money making ability on the ground to follow Jesus, as were James and John:

Matthew 4:21-22 (NIV)
²¹ Going on from there, he saw two other brothers, James son of Zebedee and his brother John. They were in a boat with their father Zebedee, preparing their nets. Jesus called them, ²² and immediately they left the boat and their father and followed him.

Matthew was a tax collector, and may have been wealthy when Jesus called him, as may have been Luke.  Yet, these men gave up their incomes to follow Jesus. 

Avanzini speaks of the later years of the apostles, asserting that successful and financially bloated ministries were attributed to them.

“Paul had the kind of money that could stop up justice.”
John Avanzini (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN, January 20, 1991)

Yet, Paul himself testified quite the opposite about himself and the other apostles.

1 Corinthians 4:9-13 (NIV)
⁹ For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men. ¹⁰ We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored! ¹¹ To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. ¹² We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; ¹³ when we are slandered, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world.

Does Avanzini know Paul better than Paul knows his own situation?  In Paul’s own testimony, he was hungry, thirsty, wore rags, hard working, persecuted and homeless!  How can Avanzini presume to be a biblical teacher and make such outlandish assertions in clear denial of the scriptures?  Perhaps the more important question should be, “what is the purpose of attempting to reconstruct Jesus and the disciples as wealthy?”  It is for no other reason than to defend their dishonest doctrines and paint themselves as godly and biblical in their continual lust for wealth.

It is Sinful to be Poor

The natural conclusion of this doctrinal mirage lends WOF teachers to preach that all should be wealthy who are in Christ.  If you are not wealthy then, you are a failure as a Christian and are living in sin.

“For you to sit in physical bondage is to deny the power of the gospel. Most people would have no trouble shouting whatsoever if I said, “To remain in the bondage of sin and death is to deny the power of the gospel.” If I said the same thing about poverty and financial bondage, it would get as quiet as a tomb. If I said that for you to live from paycheck to paycheck is to deny the power of the gospel, many of you would get angry. In Luke 4:18, Notice there was an anointing to preach good news to the poor. A lot of people don’t like to look at that because good news to a poor man is that he doesn’t have to be poor anymore. We have multitudes saved, delivered and filled with the Holy Ghost, and many are healed, yet over 90% of the church of Jesus Christ are living in absolute financial bondage. All the while, Jesus is saying, “I’ve been anointed to preach the good news to the poor.” You have held back the flow. You have denied the perpetual propulsion of power that could deliver you from not only sin and sickness but from the horrible stench of poverty.”
Rod Parsley (God’s Answer to Insufficient Funds, 1992 pps 46-47)

According to Parsley, living paycheck to paycheck is denying the power of the gospel.  I agree that living in this manner is unbiblical, as one should manage his income more properly than that.  Yet, “the power of the gospel” has nothing to do with financial increase.  Parsley’s contention is that if one lacks financial means he has “held back the flow.  You have denied the perpetual propulsion of the power that could deliver you…from the horrible stench of poverty.”

I wonder what James meant when he said,

James 1:9-10 (NIV)
⁹ The brother in humble circumstances ought to take pride in his high position. ¹⁰ But the one who is rich should take pride in his low position, because he will pass away like a wild flower.

It sounds as if the poor are the ones encouraged by their high position.  He further asserts that we should not show favoritism to the rich, for

James 2:5-7 (NIV)
⁵ … Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? ⁶ But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? ⁷ Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?

 It seems almost preferable to James (one of the supposed “wealthy” apostles of the early church) to be poor materially while being rich in the faith.  Similarly, Jesus said,

Luke 18:24-25 (NIV)
²⁴ … “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! ²⁵ Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

One might expect a perversion of scripture to lead one to the conclusion that being rich is a sin rather than being poor.  Scripture does not teach this, yet it comes far closer to teaching it than it comes to teaching one that being poor is a sin. 

WOF teachers continue to preach their doctrines, however, in spite of a wealth of biblical evidence to the contrary.

The Means of Attaining Wealth

So, if one is to conclude that being wealthy is the natural state for the believer in Christ, the question which remains is, “How does one attain this wealth?”  Should we begin a preaching ministry on TBN?  That certainly seems to generate great wealth.  Should we make up doctrines that tickle the ears of thousands and write books from them?  That clearly works, too.  But, the WOF teachers do not desire competition.  Instead, the source of a believer’s wealth is taught to come from two sources: speaking the Word of Faith, and giving generously to the ministry of the WOF teacher.

Of the first form of payout, Marilyn Hickey is quick to rehearse her students on the methodology.

“What do you need? Start creating it. Start speaking about it. Start speaking it into being. Speak to your billfold. Say, “You big, thick billfold full of money.” Speak to your checkbook. Say, “You, checkbook, you. You’ve never been so prosperous since I owned you. You’re just jammed full of money.”
Marilyn Hickey (Claim Your Miracles audiotape #186, side 2)

As with all other areas of WOF doctrine, when all else fails the pronouncement of the word of faith will come to your rescue.  As Kenyon stated, “what I confess I possess” is the battle call for one’s miracle to form.  Apparently, money literally appears in one’s wallet!

Copeland echoes,

“What you are saying is exactly what you are getting now. If you are living in poverty and lack and want, change what you are saying. The powerful force of the spiritual world that creates the circumstances around us is controlled by the words of the mouth.”
Ken Copeland (The Laws of Prosperity, 98).

Just as healing is presumed to be manifest by words, so is one’s financial position.  Ironically scripture teaches one’s financial position is somehow tied to one’s work ethic and good stewardship.

Ephesians 4:28 (NIV)
²⁸ He who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with his own hands, that he may have something to share with those in need.

Proverbs 10:4 (NIV)
⁴ Lazy hands make a man poor, but diligent hands bring wealth.

Matthew 25:26-27 (NIV)
²⁶ “His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? ²⁷ Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.

What a novel idea… work hard and spend wisely.  Hardly fitting for the lifestyles of the rich and faithless, however.  Instead, money is seen as a means to self gratification and is gained through the utterance of unbiblical mantras.

The second way one is to attain this “guaranteed” wealth from the Lord is to support one of his faithful WOF preachers’ ministry.  Those who support the false teachers are noted to be unleashing a “seed” of faith, which the Lord will reward generously!

“Do you have a need? God’s law is simple and clear: Plant a seed – just like God did when He had a need. God needed sons and daughters, so He planted His very best – His only begotten Son – God could not have given more! As we have taught often, what did He receive? You know: MILLIONS of sons and daughters. Give God a seed – your best – and watch Him meet your need, great or small.”
TBN Newsletter – (August 4, 2004)

Apparently, another of God’s unwritten “laws” are known commonly by the TBN Word of Faith crew.  This law is “plant a seed.”  Upon having planted said seed, all that lacks is to “watch Him meet your need.”

Or, as Rod Parsley says it,

“Ask your biggest need, go to the phone and put a seed to your need!”
(Rod Parsley, TBN, Praise-A-Thon, March 31, 2004)

Even at this point those of an innocent mindset could find themselves confused.  What exactly is this “seed” that one is to plant?  Do you really have to ask?

If people make the 2000 dollar faith pledge to TBN, not only will God give them the 2000 dollars before the year 2000 but he will also make them totally debt free AND their WHOLE family will be saved before the year 2000.
(R.W. Shambach, Praise The Lord, TBN, Nov. 2, 1999)

The “seed” of course, is cold hard cash (or credit cards suffice in most cases). 

There is no mistake:  God can be bribed into meeting your needs by simply sending your money to one of his “anointed” televangelists.

“Yes, Lord, I’ll do it. I place a curse on every man and every woman that will stretch his hand against this anointing. I curse that man who dares to speak a word against this ministry. But any man and any woman that raises his or her hand in blessing towards this ministry, I bless that man. I bless that home! I bless that family. Under this anointing, the words I speak cannot fall to the ground. Under this anointing, everything I say, happens.”
Benny Hinn (TBN September 10, 1999)

One may think that such a teaching encourages “giving for greed.”  Yet, according to these teachers, it is not greedy at all to harvest from God’s “spiritual law.”  It is in fact, just!

“If I give $1,000 I deserve to get back $100,000 because I am just; that’s not greed!”
Jesse Duplantis (“The Just Shall Live By Faith”, TBN, December 19, 2003)

Nor is it to give in a wrong motive:

“Giving dosen’t cost, it pays!”
(Joyce Meyer, Daystar Spring Share-A-Thon, March 2, 2004)

This raises the greatest question of all concerning the WOF teachers.  If their doctrines are true, why do they ask people to give at all?  Are they not empowered by the word of their faith to “create” their own wealth?  Why do they insist on building it from their acknowledged congregations of financially struggling people?  If, like Marilyn Hickey, they are able to simply “speak to [their] wallets,” why do they not do so and leave the rest of us quite enough alone?

Dear friends, do not follow these teachers.  Scripture has warned us about those who consider financial gain to be the aspiration of one’s spiritual practice.  Their end is not pretty, and to be their follower puts you on the same path.

Philippians 3:18-21 (NIV)
¹⁸ For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. ¹⁹ Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things. ²⁰ But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, ²¹ who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.

Matthew 6:19-21 (NIV)
¹⁹ “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. ²⁰ But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹ For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

Another entire category of defective doctrines stemming from the Word of Faith movement are those doctrines concerning physical health.  While most Christians believe God is capable of healing- and does heal, the WOF doctrine teaches that healing is a divine right of every believer in Christ; from the simple headache to heart disease, all are to be healed in the life of a Christian.  In fact, the essence of the teaching is that a believer living rightly will not even encounter sickness and disease.  If one does, it is the fault of the believer himself, for God has granted the ability for each believer to be free from such physical limitations.

Sickness does not belong to you. It has no part in the Body of Christ. Sickness does not belong to any of us. The Bible declares if the Word of God is in our life, there will be health, there will be healing – divine health and divine healing. There will be no sickness for the saint of God. If Moses could live such a healthy life, so can you… He promises to heal all – every one, any, any whatsoever, everything – all our diseases! That means not even a headache, sinus problem, not even a toothache – nothing! No sickness should come your way.
Benny Hinn (Rise & Be Healed!, p. 14, 32)

The source of this doctrine is noted to come from two sources; the Bible itself, and the workings of one’s exercise of his “word of faith.”

Scriptural Healing according to WOF

As to the scriptural evidence of their doctrines, the most proclaimed passage supposing to teach that healing belongs to every believer is found in Isaiah 53.

Isaiah 53:4-6 (NIV)
⁴ Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. ⁵ But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. ⁶ We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Normally, using the KJV version of verse 5b, “by his stripes we are healed,” the WOF teacher asserts “healing” as a foundational element of the atonement of Christ.  We are healed, they say, by the atoning work of Christ on the cross.

There is no debate that Isaiah 53 speaks of the coming Messiah, Jesus, nor is there any debate whether healing is fundamentally established in his atoning work.  The issue which must be addressed, however, is the definition of the term “healing” in Isaiah 53.

Healing is clearly established in the text.  Verse 4 notes, “he took up our infirmities.”  “Infirmities” comes from the Hebrew term, ḥolî (kho-lee’), which can refer to sickness or calamity.  The term “healed” in verse 5 comes from Hebrew, rāpāʾ (ra-fah’), which means healed or repaired.  The question that needs to be answered is, “healed from what?”  The answer, of course, is found in the context of the passage.

If one had a conversation concerning his athlete’s foot problem and noted that he had “been healed” by a certain product which was used, another would not for the reason of the statement “I’ve been healed” think that the person had unilaterally received healing from a cold which he may have had at the same time.  The context of the reported healing is the limit of what the term was intended to refer to.  Stated another way: if you’re discussing athletes foot and note that you’ve been healed, one would not presume you to also mean that you were healed of all other ailments.  You were healed only from the ailment which you referred to within your context. 

The context of Isaiah 53 specifically notes a healing or a cure of a specific item from its context.  That item is sin.  The healing of Isaiah 53 is painfully obvious to one who takes time to read and understand the text!

Isaiah makes four statements.  Each statement is a parallel of the others.  And, each statement contains the exact same subject matter.

He states in verse 5 a singular truth, using parallelism.  Part one of the parallel notes that Jesus paid for our sins.  Part two of the parallel stipulates that by his payment, we are free, or “healed.”

§  Jesus paid for our sins:

·         “He was pierced for our transgressions”

·        

§  Because of his payment, we are free:

·         “The punishment that brought us peace is upon him”

·         “By his wounds we are healed.”

The entire context of this text relates to sin and Jesus’ coming atonement for sin.  Other than the use of the term “healed,” there is nothing in the text which would make one consider sickness to be an element of what Jesus was to do for mankind.  However the term “healed” does not merely refer to sickness.  One can be healed from a broken bone.  One can be healed from an oppression.  Likewise, one can be healed spiritually, as Isaiah 53 speaks of.

Hebrew parallelism is a poetic device whereby a statement is made twice to reaffirm its meaning in verse.  In this parallel, “pierced” is equated with “crushed,” “transgressions” is equated with “iniquities,” “punishment” is equated with “wounds,” and “peace” is equated with “healed.”

The healing in the text speaks nothing about earthly illness, but rather a healing from the penalties of sin.  Verse 6 confirms the context as it notes,

Isaiah 53:6 (NIV)
⁶ We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

There is no question concerning Isaiah 53′s intended meaning to one who practices legitimate biblical interpretive method.  In fact, in order to get the idea of “healing from sicknesses” from Isaiah 53, one must deliberately misrepresent the text to an audience which is ill-equipped to interpret it for themselves.  Isaiah 53 tells one dynamic story from beginning to end:  Messiah would come and pay the penalty of man’s sin, as verse 12 concludes the matter,

Isaiah 53:12 (NIV)
¹² Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Jesus “bore the sin” of the world and made “intercession” for transgressors.  The “healing” noted in verse 5 was a healing from sin.  The healing was spiritual in nature, not physical.  In fact, the penalty of sin is death.  It has been death from the very beginning.  God did not say to Adam and Eve “the day you eat of it you will surely get sick,” but “the day you eat of it you will surely die.”  If this healing of sin were to be understood as physical in nature in Isaiah 53, one would expect that men would stop experiencing physical death!  But they do not- because Isaiah 53 speaks of the healing of man’s spiritual condition.  He is healed from sin, being given a substitutionary atonement through the stripes of Christ’s vicarious suffering.

Yet, according to WOF teachers, it is physical healing which Isaiah 53 speaks, and that healing is inherently available to all believers through the suffering of Christ on the cross.  If you are a believer, then you have healing at your disposal.

“Salvation and healing are two gifts wrapped up in the same package. For God, healing is just as important and necessary as Salvation.”?
Rod Parsley (The Backside Of Calvary, Results Publishing, Columbus, OH, 1991, p. 55)

The “package” Parsley speaks of is that of atonement.  He believes that the blood which brought spiritual restoration to mankind also brought healing to the bodies of believers in this lifetime.

Scripture does teach that all believers will receive a new, glorified body which will never get sick and die.  But, scripture teaches that the reception of that body is upon the believer’s resurrection from this life, rather than upon one’s salvation.

1 Corinthians 15:50-53 (NIV)
⁵⁰ I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. ⁵¹ Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed– ⁵² in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. ⁵³ For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.

According to Paul, mortality is the nature of the bodies in which we live.  To that end, one must understand that the penalty of sin given at the garden of Eden, “the day you eat of it you will surely die,” is something which will endure until that time when one receives the immortal body.  Sickness and death came together into existence in a package deal.  Sickness is the state of this human body.  To that end, one can say that Christ’s atonement will bring healing upon the completion of one’s life on earth.  However, Isaiah 53 speaks nothing of the sort, but refers uniquely of the atonement for sin.

  “Claiming” healing using the word of faith

The second way, then, one receives whatever one wants, it so use one’s inherent abilities via the force of faith to achieve one’s goals.  If you don’t have what you think you need, such as healing, according to the WOF teacher, you can speak your creation into existence!

“Say to your body, ‘You’re whole, body! Why, you just function so beautifully and so well. Why, body, you never have any problems. You’re a strong, healthy body.’ Or speak to your leg, or speak to your foot, or speak to your neck, or speak to your back; and once you have spoken and believe that you have received, and don’t go back on it. Speak to your wife, speak to your husband, speak to your circumstances; and speak faith to them to create in them and God will create what you are speaking.”?
Marilyn Hickey (Claim Your Miracles audiotape, #186, side 2)

Hickey uses the exact same formula she uses for wealth, which will be examined in the next section.  If you lack wealth, you speak to your wallet!  If you lack healing, according to Hickey, you simply “speak to your circumstances.”

Likewise, WOF teachers teach the opposite formula is also true.  If one claims to have a headache, for example, that headache will never leave!  It is prolonged by the very “word of faith” which claims it to exist. 

“The believer should never die before the age of 70. That is the minimum and then they should live to be 120 years. This is done by faith words If you keep talking death, that is what you are going to have. If you keep talking sickness and disease, that is what you are going to have, because you are going to create the reality of them with your own mouth. That is a divine law.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (Realm, 29)

Price contends that if one speaks of sickness and disease, “that is what you are going to have, because you are going to create the reality of them with your own mouth.”  When all else fails, these teachers will go back to the rudiments of their theology and put the “word of faith” back in control of their circumstances; in spite of what scripture teaches on a subject.  Whether healing, power or cold hard cash, the confession of one’s mouth is the end-all source of receiving according to this doctrine.

Even America’s star, Joel Osteen, has endorsed this bandwagon approach to doctrine.

“Start calling in divine health….You may have sickness in your body; you need to call in health. Words are like seeds; they have creative power.”
Joel Osteen (“Speaking Faith Filled Words”, Tape # 223, 2004)

Suffice it to say, that once one has endorsed the root premise concerning the “word of faith,” one can then assume anything he desires as attainable.  In such cases, has not man become God himself?  Is it not man, with this powerful force indeed in charge of his own destiny?  Is man now God incarnate?  This is indeed the synopsis of the WOF teaching.

“As a believer, you have a right to make commands in the name of Jesus. Each time you stand on the Word, you are commanding God to a certain extent because it is His Word.”
Kenneth Copeland (Our Covenant with God, 1987, p. 32)

“Yes! You are in control! So, if man has control, who no longer has it? God.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (“Prayer: Do You Know What Prayer Is … and How to Pray?” The Word Study Bible, 1990 p. 1178)

This leads to the most tragic of all possible doctrines regarding the physical healing of believers.  For, according to the WOF teachers, your healing is entirely up to you!  If you are not healed, then, there is a problem with your faith and it is entirely your own fault!

“The Bible declares that the work was done 2,000 years ago. God is not going to heal you now — he healed you 2,000 years ago. All you have to do today is receive your healing by faith”
Benny Hinn (Rise and Be Healed, p. 44).

“Sometimes people won’t receive their healing. Sometimes they’re full of fear or doubt or unbelief, and they can’t take what God is giving them.”
Kenneth Copeland (“Believer’s Voice Of Victory”, October 1999, pg. 23).

Thus, it is your faith which heals you.  If you are not healed it is because of your own lack of faith.  And, in that case, according to Fred Price, you are choosing to live in a body which is unfitting for God’s use!

“How can you glorify God in your body, when it doesn’t function right? How can you glorify God? How can He get glory when your body doesn’t even work? What makes you think the Holy Ghost wants to live inside a body where He can’t see out through the windows and He can’t hear with the ears? What makes you think the Holy Spirit wants to live inside of a physical body where the limbs and the organs and the cells do not function right?”
Fredrick K.C. Price (“Is God Glorified Through Sickness?” audiotape #FP605)

As offensive as it sounds, any doctrine which establishes fully that God will heal any sick person if they have enough faith, or if they ask correctly or if any other number of human-initiated scenarios is done “properly,” is a doctrine which makes the believer ultimately at fault for their own sicknesses.

How would one explain this truth to Joni Ericson Tada, Tony Melendez or any of thousands of believers who serve God faithfully in spite of a debilitating illness or injury?  Is God not using their ministry?  According to Price, the Holy Spirit would not want to live inside a body that does not function right!  Does this, then, eliminate the possibility of salvation and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit for sick or injured people?

A Biblical Example of non-healing

2 Corinthians 12:7-10 (NIV)
⁷ To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. ⁸ Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. ⁹ But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. ¹⁰ That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong.

In 2 Corinthians, Paul notes the receiving of a “thorn in the flesh.”  Paul clearly does not speak of a literal thorn, but a metaphorical one.  He had an ailment of some sort.  He notes this ailment to stem from a “messenger of Satan, to torment me.”  “Messenger” is in fact the Greek term, angelos, which is frequently rendered “angel,” depending on the context.  If a person sends an angelos to another, the term is usually rendered “messenger.”  Yet, for this messenger to be from Satan, it could rightly be understood to represent a demonic affliction of illness, which is a biblical occurrence in several cases. (Matthew 12:22)  While this is problematic for some, scripture teaches that God does allow demonic affliction at times, such as Job’s illnesses.  Job was a righteous man, yet God allowed Satan to inflict his body with very painful sores.  Paul, it appears, had such an illness, himself.  It was a physical infirmity of some type, which he noted as coming from a messenger of Satan.

What is fascinating about Paul’s illness is that God chose to allow Paul to suffer with his ailment rather than healing him from it!  This is clearly in denial of the WOF teaching that healing is a God-given right for every believer.  In fact, God refused to heal Paul based on the premise that Paul could better serve God with his affliction!  He stated, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”  Translation?  God wanted Paul to have this particular ailment!  For starters, Satan would have had to have obtained permission to afflict Paul, a believer (Luke 22:21, Job 1:8-12; 2:3-6), but more importantly, God indicated that even Paul’s affliction was something He (God) desired.  As Paul notes, “I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me.”

Contrary to Fred Price’s false report, scripture teaches that God is actually glorified when a believer endures sickness or bodily malfunction by depending on Christ’s power to achieve that which their less than perfect bodies are unable to do for themselves.  How dare Price to bring humility, accusation and disrespect to those temples of the Holy Spirit; some of which could be experiencing God’s grace in their suffering, as Paul did.

The sheer volume of flaw demonstrated by WOF theology only continues to assert the real purpose of its teachers.

Titus 1:11 (NIV)
¹¹ They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach–and that for the sake of dishonest gain.

In the pursuit of that purpose, they have continually maligned God’s word and have ruined people who are physically hindered by sickness, injury or defect.  How devastating to the legitimate body of Christ it is when its weak are destroyed for the sake of the wealthy pretenders among them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As noted in the last several sections, WOF teachers maintain that Jesus was not God while on the earth, that he took on the nature of Satan on the cross and that he went into Hell (the eternal lake of fire, not Sheol/Hades) upon his death to suffer the penalty of man’s sin.

These atrocities alone are enough to make the Taliban seem biblically motivated.  Yet these false teachers are not through with their systematic untying of the knot of valid soteriology (theology of salvation).  According to them, there is still an issue remaining for Christ to be able to achieve the atonement for mankind:  he, Christ, must be born again.  Yes, read it again if necessary; there is no typo.

“He allowed the devil to drag Him into the depths of hell as if He were the most wicked sinner who ever lived … Every demon in hell came down on Him to annihilate Him … [They] tortured Him beyond anything that anybody has ever conceived … In a thunder of spiritual force, the voice of God spoke to the death-whipped, broken, punished spirit of Jesus … [in] the pit of destruction, and charged the spirit of Jesus with resurrection power! Suddenly His twisted, death-wracked spirit began to fill out and come back to life … He was literally being reborn before the devil’s very eyes. He began to flex His spiritual muscles … Jesus Christ dragged Satan up and down the halls of hell … Jesus … was raised up a born-again man … The day I realized that a born-again man had defeated Satan, hell, and death, I got so excited … !”
Kenneth Copeland (“The Price of it All,” Believer’s Voice of Victory, September 1991, p. 4)

Before scripturally mocking this quote, I must firmly establish an obvious but very important note about it.  There is not one biblical statement in this quote.  Not one.  Literally every line printed above from the mouth of Ken Copeland came directly from the imagination of Ken Copeland, or the brain of whomever fed the information to him.  Never in scripture is referenced a demon annihilating Jesus, Jesus’ being tortured in Hell, his being “punished” or his being “reborn before the devil’s eyes.”  Some actually think I’m too hard on these teachers.  Am I?  Have we forgotten how theology is formed?  Has our post-modern world, with its lack of faith in anything robbed even the church of its source of true doctrine?  Are we to contend along with the Starbucks generation that whatever one thinks is susceptible to validity simply because he thinks it?  That is not theology, friends, but is the root instead, of paganism.  Theology, to the Christian, has God as its source.  That God revealed himself to man is the essence of the discipline.

The first step, then, in achieving valid theology is to identify the valid source of theology; that means by which God rendered revelation of himself to man.  That source is scripture!  Sola scriptura (by scripture alone) was the foundational principle of the reformation.  It was because Christianity became cultic, by adding human inference and history into the “mix” of theological truth, that the very reformation was necessary.   The moment supposed “revelation knowledge” gets involved in the teaching of theology, one is turning over the reins of their relationship with God to one’s trust of another individual.  In this case, hundreds of thousands of people are allowing Kenneth Copeland to literally trump the Bible itself concerning the message of salvation, because Ken and the Bible clearly have very little to say in common regarding atonement in Christ.  If there be any doubt as to my position, let me state it more clearly:  Ken Copeland, and his Word of Faith followers are not teaching biblical theology, but cultism; defined as a teaching which adds to the truths of the Bible to define its source of revelation.

To trust Ken Copeland rather than one’s Bible in matters of theology is tantamount to asking a four year old how to spell “onomatopoeia,” while considering Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary outdated on the subject.  The Bible has remained unassailable for thousands of years.  Historically speaking, while Copeland has just walked onto the playing field.  He, nor any man alive should be granted the privilege of teaching theological truth outside of the standards of the Bible, the unchanging source of theological revelation to mankind.  In the worldview of Christianity, one who does that should be considered a cult leader, just as Jim Jones, David Koresh and Sun Myung Moon were, because they taught extra-biblical revelation.  I wonder; if Koresh had a television show on TBN would he be accepted by today’s church?  Personally, I fear that he would. 

That being said, allow me to demonstrate biblical soteriology rather than opinion in light of the WOF false doctrines.

While every part of Copeland’s above quote is false (other than perhaps Copeland “being excited”) scripture teaches directly contrary to the foundational notions of several key parts of it.

Key part number one is the assumption that Christ needed saving.  This idea is built upon the WOF teaching that Jesus took the nature of Satan, but has no basis in scripture.

Hebrews 9:14 (NIV)
¹⁴ How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

Hebrews 9 notes in plain language that Jesus’ offering of himself was one of purity.  He “offered himself unblemished to God” which enables him to “cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death.”  The idea of Jesus being “converted” to a sinner through the inventive and unbiblical “taking upon himself the nature of Satan” has no merit in the true and trustworthy account of atonement in scripture.  Jesus never sinned.  The entire point of a substitutionary atonement is that a pure and flawless blood sacrifice must be offered as a substitute for one’s sin.  Hebrews 9-10 paint a clear picture of Christ’s having vicariously become the final act of substitutionary atonement in the vein of the Old Testament sacrificial system.  Even in the Old Testament God rejected sacrifices offered by means of flawed and unworthy substitutions.

Malachi 1:8 (NIV)
⁸ When you bring blind animals for sacrifice, is that not wrong? When you sacrifice crippled or diseased animals, is that not wrong? Try offering them to your governor! Would he be pleased with you? Would he accept you?” says the LORD Almighty.

If God would not accept an  unworthy animal sacrifice, how utterly unthinkable that he would accept a sinful human sacrifice via the transformed “satanic” Christ.

Jesus was the perfect sacrifice precisely because there was no sin in him, nor was there a sin nature or a Satanic nature.  Christ “became” sin for us in a substitutionary fashion, taking the guilt of man’s sin upon himself specifically because he was sinless and worthy to do so.  Substitution cannot be made by a Satanic being,

1 Peter 1:19 (NIV)
¹⁹ but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.

Hebrews 4:15 (NIV)
¹⁵ For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are–yet was without sin.

How, then, could Jesus be said to require a spiritual regeneration?  How can one be born again when he has never sinned?  I realize Copeland would suggest that Jesus required “saving” because he “took on the nature of Satan” on the cross.  However, that assertion has been dealt with in this work already as a completely made up and unbiblical postulate.  Sadly, by men who know better.

A second key part of the quote which is clearly debunked in scripture is the notion that Jesus provided salvation by some mystical and spiritual act in Hell; that he paid some magical price after his death on the cross by which men find their salvation.  The author of Hebrews states quite the contrary.

Hebrews 10:5-10 (NIV)
⁵ Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me; ⁶ with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased. ⁷ Then I said, ‘Here I am–it is written about me in the scroll– I have come to do your will, O God.’” ⁸ First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them” (although the law required them to be made). ⁹ Then he said, “Here I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish the second. ¹⁰ And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Verse 9 firmly debunks this silly proposition, noting that, “we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.” (emphasis mine)

There was no sacrifice for sins beyond the physical, literal substitutionary death of Christ on the cross.  Hebrews states, contrary to the WOF teachers, that it was Jesus’ bodily death which provided atonement for believers.  We sing hymns about the blood of Jesus, not his Satanic transformation.  Nor is there a further action depicted in scripture; only from the cultic, extra-biblical “revelations” of those who presume such a teaching.

Thirdly, there is a foundational flaw in the sentiment of this quote; primarily that Satan himself is noted to be the one who takes wrath upon sin.  Since when did Satan concern himself with the judgment of sinners in Hell?  Is this one of those bad “Hell” jokes?  Yet, in Copeland’s world, Satan appears to be the “bad god” of the underworld while God appears to be the “good God” of the Heavens.  This belief is called “dualism,” and teaches that God and Satan are two separate but polar opposite gods which contend for the souls of man.  In the WOF view, Satan himself exercises the wrath against sin in Hell, which is laughable in light of biblical theology, for Satan celebrates sin, he does not exercise wrath against it!  If Jesus had truly taken a satanic nature, would Satan have not rejoiced?  Yet, WOF teachers continue to assert that Jesus “paid our penalty” in Hell.  To whom is the penalty paid?  Satan?  How utterly foolish.

Furthermore, Copeland teaches dualism in his idea that Satan is somehow the “god” of Hell.  In Copeland’s Hell, Satan is in control, bringing judgments against the sinners.  This is false for numerous reasons.  As has already been demonstrated in earlier chapters, Hell is not yet opened for business.  Secondly, Satan is not the “proprietor” of Hell.  It is not his abode of control, but belongs to God.  Hell is where God punishes sin, not Satan.  Thirdly, when Satan and the demonic realms do actually arrive in Hell, they will be the subjects of punishment as much as anyone else present.  Jesus informs his hearers clearly concerning the proprietorship of Hell.

Matthew 25:41 (NIV)
⁴¹ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

Hell was prepared for the devil and his angels.  The punishments of Hell are not Satan’s to inflict.  They are his to bear.  It sounds as if Copeland has been listening to too much heavy metal rock to have arrived at such ridiculous theology.  He has Satan in Hell inflicting pain on others (Jesus Christ, no doubt!) rather than receiving his own righteous judgment from God.

Copeland also asserts in his delusion that Satan and the demons have control over Christ during this three day phantom visit to Hell. 

Every demon in hell came down on Him to annihilate Him … [They] tortured Him beyond anything that anybody has ever conceived.

It’s almost fascinating that WOF teachers expect Jesus’ followers to believe that he was subject to torture at the hand of demons.  Ken, in biblical encounters between Jesus and demonic beings, it was the demons who cried out to Jesus, begging him not to torture them!  They were petrified of Jesus’ presence.  This was no ordinary spiritual being, but God incarnate, for crying out loud!

Luke 4:33-34 (GW)
³³ In the synagogue was a man possessed by a spirit, an evil demon. He shouted very loudly, ³⁴ “Oh, no! What do you want with us, Jesus from Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are—the Holy One of God!”

Did this demon beat up Jesus?  Or perhaps it was many demons…

Mark 5:7-10 (NIV)
⁷ He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won’t torture me!” ⁸ For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you evil spirit!” ⁹ Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” “My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” ¹⁰ And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

Even a group of demons, the spokesperson identifying himself as “legion” because of their numbers, pleaded with Jesus not to torture them!  A “legion” is a Roman Regiment which, “in the time of Christ consisted of six thousand, exclusive of horsemen, who were in number a tenth of the foot-men.” (Easton’s Illustrated Dictionary)  A vast group of demons, then, feared torture at the hand of Christ, asking him to swear not to harm them. 

Copeland’s hallucination of demons torturing Jesus, the almighty God incarnate, bears no resemblance to scriptural representations of demonic engagement with Christ.

The apostle Paul also had a far different understanding of the relationship between the crucified Christ and the demonic kingdom.

Colossians 2:13-15 (NIV)
¹³ When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, ¹⁴ having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. ¹⁵ And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

According to Paul’s testimony, Jesus “disarmed the powers and authorities” through his substitutionary death on the cross!  Once again, Colossians demonstrates that Jesus’ work was completed by the cross, rather than by Copeland’s testimony of a mythical vacation to Hell.  And, the book demonstrates clearly that victory over the demonic kingdom was observed through Jesus’ work on the cross.  Thus, the risen Christ had even more power over the demonic kingdom than the incarnate Christ, in whose presence the demons trembled.

Lastly, and perhaps most incredulous, is Copeland’s assertion that Jesus Christ, the spotless unblemished Son of God, was “reborn” in Hell, as other men are reborn into spiritual regeneration.

He states,

He was literally being reborn before the devil’s very eyes. He began to flex His spiritual muscles … Jesus Christ dragged Satan up and down the halls of hell … Jesus … was raised up a born-again man … The day I realized that a born-again man had defeated Satan, hell, and death, I got so excited … !”

I can’t emphasize enough how exceptionally important it is to note that Copeland is teaching a serious theological viewpoint for which no biblical reference exists.  Copeland attempts to make it sound biblical, yet scripture comes far from catching his back.  In fact, the idea is so full of incredulity that the Bible wastes no time asserting that it didn’t happen that way.  Nor does the Bible spend time informing us that if you step on a crack, you will not break your mother’s back.  It does not inform us that the tooth fairy is imaginary or that there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.  We reject these ideas because they have absolutely no basis in demonstrable truth.  Copeland’s atonement theology should be rejected for the same reasons.

Supposed scriptural references for this bogus “truth” are absolutely comical; involving the complete reinvention of the Greek and English languages.  One text inadequately used to prop up this subject is found in Colossians.

Colossians 1:18 (NIV)
¹⁸ And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

Colossians 1:18 notes that Christ is the firstborn among the dead, but speaks nothing of his being born again in the sense of spiritual regeneration.  Firstborn and “reborn” are not synonymous ideas in the least.  Yes, they sound similar enough for a good wordsmith to confuse and corrupt them.  Yet, the terms themselves are completely different.  A firstborn is the eldest born of a family or generation.  To be the firstborn among the dead, then, refers to the original recipient of eternal life via a resurrection.  Jesus was the first to be raised to life in a permanent, “from the dead” way.  Others were resurrected from the dead temporarily, such as Lazarus, but they each died again.  They were not raised to eternal life, but back to their fallen bodies of death.  Christ, in the text, is noted to be the firstborn from among the dead; to be raised to a regenerated physical body, which is eternal and cannot die, as noted in 1 Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 15:50-53 (NIV)
⁵⁰ I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. ⁵¹ Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed– ⁵² in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. ⁵³ For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.

Jesus, being born of a natural body, upon his resurrection received a spiritual body which is a glorified body – an imperishable body- which is fitting for life in Heaven.  Jesus was the firstborn from among the dead in that he was the first to be born from the temporary body of death to the eternal body of life.  Jesus, then, was regenerated physically, being the firstborn from among the dead.

Yet nothing is hinted at in the text concerning a “born again” condition, which will be examined momentarily and defined as a spiritual condition.  The text speaks uniquely of a raised literal body rather than a spiritual rebirth.  One must have first sinned and died spiritually to be enabled to be born again, or regenerated spiritually. 

A remaining issue with this doctrine is that if indeed a “born again” man is capable of paying the price of sin and providing salvation for others, then Christ is not unique in his status as our atoning sacrifice.  If one can simply be “born again” and therefore be worthy of being the sacrifice for sins, then perhaps anyone else could have been man’s redeemer?  One may think that Copeland would never make such an outlandish assertion, or that I am taking liberties with his position.  But, alas, I am not, for Copeland does make that very assertion. 

“The Spirit of God spoke to me and He said, “Son, realize this. Now follow me in this and don’t let your tradition trip you up.” He said, “Think this way — a twice-born man whipped Satan in his own domain.” And I threw my Bible down… like that. I said, “What?” He said, “A born-again man defeated Satan, the firstborn of many brethren defeated him.” He said, “You are the very image, the very copy of that one.” I said, “Goodness, gracious sakes alive!” And I began to see what had gone on in there, and I said, “Well now you don’t mean, you couldn’t dare mean, that I could have done the same thing?” He said, “Oh yeah, if you’d had the knowledge of the Word of God that He did, you could have done the same thing, ’cause you’re a reborn man too.”
Kenneth Copeland (Substitution and Identification, tape #00-0202, side 2)

In Copeland’s mind, and solely in that imaginary realm I should add, Jesus’ provision of salvation could have been granted by any born again man who “had the knowledge of the Word of God” that Christ had.  In short, if you’re theologically “smart” enough, you could be born again and counted as worthy to die for the sins of the world.

The disciple Peter must have been mistaken when he stated,

Acts 4:8-12 (NIV)
⁸ Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: “Rulers and elders of the people! ⁹ If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, ¹⁰ then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. ¹¹ He is “‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone’. ¹² Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”

For, according to Peter – and the scriptural authority by which he is enshrined and quoted – the name for which men must be saved is that of Jesus Christ alone!  He is the unique messiah.  There is “no other name.”  Not Muhammad, Krishna, Buddha, Koresh or Copeland.  Yet, if Copeland’s theology goes mainstream enough, each of these false religions will easily be able to insert themselves into the theologically deficient post-modern mindset, claiming that they, too, offer salvation to those who will follow them.  How could Copeland argue with them in his broken logic?

God did not lumber onto the playing field of eternity when Copeland and the WOF gang first woke up to His existence.  He had been planning the advent of Christ from the very beginning, and the dawn of this coming King has always had a unique personality.  In Genesis God states one will come as the offspring of woman and bash the head of the snake.  He told Abraham that a unique seed from his descendants would bless the entire earth.  He told Isaiah that this one would be afflicted for the sins of the world.  Psalm 2 calls him “the Anointed One” to fill this position.  Psalm 22 quotes his exact words on the cross “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”  In Luke, Mary was told she would have a son who would be called the “Son of God” whose kingdom will never end.  These prophesies did not align with Mohammad.  They do not align in the person of Kenneth Copeland.  There is no other name under heaven by which men must be saved but the name of Jesus Christ alone!  Neither Krishna, Benny Hinn nor José Luis de Jesús Miranda in Houston, who claims to be Christ incarnate, has the privilege of being able to biblically assert that they “know the Word of God” well enough to provide salvation for man.  That job, gratefully, has been taken.  It was assigned to the unique Son of God incarnate; one man, pre-ordained from the beginning of time and revealed at a calculated point in history, to bring God’s program of redemption to its climactic realization.  I can think of no higher blasphemy than for Copeland, or anyone else, to claim themselves somehow having the potential to fulfill the advent of the promised Messiah who would be pierced for their transgressions and crushed for their iniquities (Isaiah 53), had they only had the knowledge of God’s Word sufficiently enough. 

Yet men continue to disregard scripture for their own agendas.  And, many of the church of the risen Christ shell out huge sums of money to keep them in practice.

Another broken hermeneutic is also demonstrated in this quote.  Copeland attempts to credit his “Jesus born again” theology to Romans 8.  He states, “A born-again man defeated Satan, the firstborn of many brethren defeated him.”  He attempts to equate Romans 8:29′s “firstborn of many brethren” with the idea of Christ being “born again.”

What he actually does, is misquote a section of scripture, knowing it would sound familiar to his audience, and thus falsely attempt to give credibility to his claim. 

Romans 8:29 (NIV)
²⁹ For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

Copeland’s quote refers to Christ as the “firstborn among many brothers.”  Copeland once again attempts to associate “firstborn” with “reborn” as if the two terms are the same.  While Colossians called Jesus “the firstborn from among the dead,” here Romans refers to him as “the firstborn among many brothers.”  Yet, once again, being “firstborn” is a completely different concept than is the idea of being “reborn.”  Many are firstborn in their families but are not reborn.  Many are reborn but are not the firstborn.  The biblical idea of the firstborn is the same as that concept in modern culture; the first who is born in a given family generation.  Being reborn, however, is not a physical concept, but a spiritual one.  Rebirth, biblically, refers to the spiritual regeneration through atonement.  The two concepts are not even closely related.  Yet, Copeland says Jesus was “born again…the firstborn of many brothers,” in an attempt to make his doctrine sound biblical.  It is not. 

Romans 8, furthermore, does not have Christ as the subject of its assertion at all, but rather “those God foreknew.”  The text calls not Christ the firstborn of many brothers, but desires that those God foreknew “might be the firstborn among many brothers,” indicating Paul’s hope of a successful evangelistic ministry from each who are called by God into fellowship with Christ.  To refer to Christ as the firstborn among many brothers is completely contrary to the teaching of Romans 8:29.

Yet, in increasing measure teachers in the Word of Faith movement continue to espouse this tragically erroneous teaching.

“My, you know, whoosh! The Holy Ghost is just showing me some stuff. I’m getting dizzy! I’m telling you the truth–it’s, it’s just heavy right now on me….He’s (referring to Jesus) in the underworld now. God isn’t there, the Holy Ghost isn’t there, and the Bible says He was begotten. Do you know what the word begotten means? It means reborn. Do you want another shocker? have you been begotten? So was he. Don’t let anyone deceive you. Jesus was reborn. You say, ‘What are you talking about?’ …He was reborn. He had to be reborn. …If He was not reborn, I would never be reborn. How can I face Jesus and say, ‘Jesus you went through everything I’ve gone through, except the new birth?’”
Benny Hinn – (“Our Position in Christ, Part 1″, Orlando, FL: Orlando Christian Centre, 1991, videotape # TV-254)

Um, excuse me?  “Begotten” means “reborn?”  Since when?!  Does everything mean “reborn” to these people?

There is exactly one Greek term which is translated in scripture as “begotten.”  That term is Greek, gennao, which means “be born,” “bear” or to “be delivered.”  Begotten refers to physical birth; and uniquely a first physical birth; for there is but one physical birth for anyone.  Benny asks his ogling crowd “have you been begotten?”  What a ridiculous question!  Everyone has been begotten!  It means, to be born,  Benny!  It happens to everyone!

“Reborn,” which Benny claims to be synonymous with “begotten,” does not appear in scripture, but is rendered, “born again.”  It is exceptionally obvious that Benny Hinn has never conducted a Greek study of this term, because “born again” comes from two Greek words, the first of which is the exact same Greek term, gannao, (born) yet is coupled with a second Greek term, anothen, which means, of course, “again,” or “from above.”  “Begotten” is gannao, “born again” is gannao anothen.  The two terms simply cannot be the same, as one term adds redundancy to the first; the idea “again” is added to the picture.  The first term invokes a singular action, while the other term denotes a secondary action.

To be born is to come out of one’s mother’s womb.  To be born again is a secondary birth.  In short, born does not mean born again in any sense, as one term inherently implies that the other term has already occurred.

The biggest failure of this postulate, however, is failing to observe that being “born again” in scripture is a metaphorical terminology.  It refers to a the state of spiritual regeneration by the use of symbolic language.  This is why Nicodemus, in John 3, became confused when Jesus used the term “born again.”  To be born “again” makes no literal sense, because it is a symbolic term.

John 3:1-6 (NIV)
¹ Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. ² He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.” ³ In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” ⁴ “How can a man be born when he is old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!” ⁵ Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. ⁶ Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

Nicodemus, attempting to hear Jesus literally, does not know what to do with Jesus’ statement “you must be born again.”  He asks Jesus, “can a man be born when he is old?”  “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!”

Jesus clarifies the use of “born again” to Nicodemus as a metaphor for a spiritual condition.  Being born again is explained by Jesus in that “flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”  Thus, being “born” is a physical birth, but being “born again” is a spiritual birth as Jesus defined it.

This is why John 1 says,

John 1:12-13 (NIV)
¹² Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God– ¹³ children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

According to John 1, secondary birth is spiritual in nature rather than physical.  “Born” and “reborn” have differing meanings even in their regular literal usage.  However, in scripture, “born again” is never used in its regular, literal usage, but is always used metaphorically of a spiritual act.  Being born again, metaphorically in scripture, indicates one being born “of God.”  It is the term symbolizing spiritual regeneration, while “born” is the term of physical birth.

Peter indicates likewise.

1 Peter 1:23 (NIV)
²³ For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

Hinn’s attempt to call Jesus “born again” simply because he was called “begotten” creates quite a difficult explanation on behalf of many who have been born.  If “begotten” means “born again,” then Hitler, Napoleon, Hussein, Bin Laden and the fish I ate for dinner are all born again; because they all were “begotten,” or “born.”

Paul and Jan Crouch, the money behind the madness at Trinity Broadcasting Network which produces so many false doctrines, are always ready to lend a hand in the propagation of the unsound theses of their faithful workmen.  Jan, quoting a book by Paul Billheimer, states,

“[I]n order to be made alive unto God and restored to fellowship with His Father, He [Jesus] had to be reborn—for He had become the very essence of sin. Since sin had totally alienated Him from the Father, the only way He could be restored to fellowship with the Father was through a new birth to new life.”
Paul Billheimer – (, Destined for the Throne, special edition for TBN (Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade, 1988 [orig. 1975]), 83-84.
Quoted in affirmation by Jan Crouch – “Praise the Lord” television program, TBN (August 20, 1987).

The idea of Jesus being reborn is yet another in a series of conjectures used to influence the pocketbooks of a collective target audience.  As God continues to be demoted, man is further exalted to the position where he can control his own destiny, provided he continues to support these duplicitous teachers who will demonstrate how this spiritual manipulation of God is supposed to function.

Romans 16:17-18 (NIV)
¹⁷ I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. ¹⁸ For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.

Consider yourselves once again warned.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jesus takes the nature of Satan on the cross

As noted in the last section, the WOF teaching concerning the nature of Jesus was not the traditional church’s position, namely that Christ was man and God, but rather that Christ relinquished his divinity when he came to earth as a man.  While this is a poor beginning for an atonement doctrine, it gets much worse.

In accomplishing the work of salvation, according to the WOF movement, Jesus also took on the very nature of Satan.

“How did Jesus then on the cross say, ‘My God.’ Because God was not His Father any more. He took upon Himself the nature of Satan.
Kenneth Copeland (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN, April 21, 1991)

“He [Jesus] who is righteous by choice said, ‘The only way I can stop sin is by Me becoming it. I can’t just stop it by letting it touch Me; I and it must become one.’ Hear this! He who is the nature of God became the nature of Satan where He became sin!”
Benny Hinn (Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) 1 December 1990)

“The sinless son of God became as a serpent that He might swallow up all evil….If you will behold what happened when the sin offering was made and the fact that Jesus became a serpent upon the pole, it will change your life. . . . Jesus died spiritually, not for any of His own sin! He became the serpent on the pole, the snake on the ground, in the Old Testament type.” Charles Capps (Authority in Three Worlds, 177, 166-67)

In the WOF understanding of atonement, Jesus literally took Satan’s nature upon himself; that is to say that he became a Satanic being, so that that he may properly be able to atone for the sins of man.  This understanding seems to come from an incomplete interpretation of 2 Corinthians 5:21.

21 God made him who had no sin to be sin[1] [[21] Or be a sin offering] for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

The NIV (and most other translations) certainly seem to indicate something that could be understood to be a baseline for the WOF definition of Jesus’ “becoming sin” for us through his death on the cross.  While it says nothing whatsoever about a satanic nature, the text clearly states that he who knew no sin was caused “to be sin” on our behalf.  The question that needs to be addressed, however, is does “to be sin” parallel with the idea of Jesus taking upon himself “the nature of Satan?”

Essentially, “no.”  It does not mean that in the wildest translational variance.  Jesus did not take on Satan’s nature, nor did he become sinful, but rather, the object of God’s wrath for our sin.  The NIV leaves a footnote (left in the text above for reference) which gives a good clue as to the intended meaning of the phrase; “be a sin offering.”

The idea of Christ being without sin, yet being made “to be sin” comes from the Old Testament portrait of substitutionary atonement, which Christ himself fulfilled in his death on the cross.

The Greek term translated “to be sin” is the term hamartia.  Hamartia, itself, literally translates “sin.”  The “to be” is added in.  I some translations, words added into a text to help one understand the meaning are italicized.  One will notices such italics in the NASB and KJV in this text for the words “to be.”  In the Greek, the phrase would directly be translated “him not knowing sin, on behalf of us, he (God) made sin.”  The picture has nothing to do with Jesus taking upon himself the nature of Satan.  The “nature of Satan” attribute is a completely extra-biblical idea in atonement, created perhaps by the “revelation knowledge” of the WOF teachers, but certainly not from scripture.  Scripture teaches of a “sin nature,” but never of Christ having a sin nature, nor a Satanic nature. 

The term, hamartia, is translated “sin” 172 out of 174 uses in the New Testament.  The understanding from the text is clearly that “he who knew no sin” was made “sin” for us- the recipients of his atoning work.

In the Old Testament, the idea of “becoming sin” is attributed to the work of the sin offering, or the sacrificial animal whose blood wrought atonement through the sacrificial system.  The Hebrew terms chattath or chattaah are used interchangeably to denote “sin” or the “sin offering” in Old Testament texts, depending on the context of their usage.

Adam Clarke states,

The words ‏חטאת‎  chattath, and ‏חטאת‎  chattaah, frequently signify sin; but I have observed more than a hundred places in the Old Testament where they are used for sin-offering, and translated ἁμαρτια [hamartia] by the Septuagint, which is the term the apostle uses, 2 Corinthians 5:21: He hath made him to be sin (ἁμαρτιαν, A SIN-OFFERING) for us, who knew no sin.  
– Adam Clarke’s Commentary, Gen. 4:7  [bold brackets added]

Thus, the idea of “becoming sin” is tantamount to saying that Christ became “the sin offering” required in the Old Testament Law.  Indeed, Christ fulfilled the law as he predicted he would do.

Matthew 5:17 (NIV)
¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Jesus “becoming sin” is the same idea as the atoning blood of the sacrificial goat on the Day of Atonement “becoming sin.”  He was the blood offered which paid the demands for God’s justice against sin; for the wages of sin is death, and the day you eat of it you will surely die.  Sin has always born the penalty of death.  God’s grace provided the substitutionary atonement system, beginning with the old testament animal sacrifices, which pointed toward and was completed by the final sacrifice of Christ himself; the provision of blood for the atonement of man’s sin.

With a proper understanding of Old Testament theology, it is unthinkable that a serious theologian would suggest that Christ’s atoning work was tantamount to his “taking the nature of Satan” rather than the systematic fulfilling of his work of substitutionary atonement by becoming a vicarious sacrifice on man’s behalf.  Yet, in the fairy tale world of WOF doctrine, this is precisely the assertion.

“The righteousness of God was made to be sin. He accepted the sin nature of Satan in His own spirit. And at the moment that He did so, He cried, ‘My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken Me?’ You don’t know what happened at the cross. Why do you think Moses, upon instruction of God, raised the serpent upon that pole instead of a lamb? That used to bug me. I said, ‘Why in the world would you want to put a snake up there — the sign of Satan? Why didn’t you put a lamb on that pole?’ And the Lord said, ‘Because it was a sign of Satan that was hanging on the cross.’ He said, ‘I accepted, in My own spirit, spiritual death; and the light was turned off.”
Kenneth Copeland (What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, 1990, audiotape #02-0017, side 2)

Absolutely no biblical text teaches, infers or even hints that the eternal son of God took on the fallen and corrupt nature of Satan through his redemptive work on the cross.  In fact, the Bible teaches quite the contrary.

In Isaiah, God calls Christ “my righteous servant.”

Isaiah 53:11 (NIV)
¹¹ After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light [of life] and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

And, God’s righteous servant bears the iniquities of sinful man.  He is a substitution; righteous on behalf of those who are not, bearing the sins of those who have sinned, though he was without sin himself.  Jesus’ “becoming sin” was his bearing of the sins of others, not his becoming literally sinful himself.  Isaiah notes,

Isaiah 53:12 (NIV)
¹² Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

The WOF teaching that Jesus took the nature of Satan is egregiously erroneous, and quite deliberately misplaced, simply because it fits their model and serves their purposes of exalting man (not to mention Satan) and demoting God.

Jesus goes into Hell to “pay” for the sins of man

The WOF movement furthermore teaches that Christ suffered in Hell for the sins of man.  This theology is referenced as being derived from Psalm 16 or, in some references, the Apostles Creed.

One of the most controversial statements of the Apostles’ Creed is the line which states of Christ, “He descended into hell.”

The sentiment of the Apostles’ Creed is good and legitimate.  The failure which leads to the controversy is a misunderstanding of what the framers of the creed meant by their use of the term, “Hell.”

“Hell” is an English term.  It has no singular biblical Greek or Hebrew equivalent which describes it accurately according to its modern English usage.  The English term is used over several differing Greek and Hebrew terms in some translations.  Furthermore, translations tend to use the term within the cultural understanding of that term of the generation from which the translation comes.  Older translations use Hell in a different way than newer translations use it.

The term comes from the Saxon “helan,” which means “to cover” or “to hide.”  Hell, in its original usage, speaks of the unseen place of the dead.  It does not speak of “the lake of fire” in its original usage, but rather generally of “the place of the dead.”  The Hebrew term Sheol and the Greek term Hades are the most legitimate terms for one to understand the meaning of Hell in its original historical usage. 

Language, however, has a tendency to digress.  Terms which mean one thing in one generation come to new meanings as time passes.  The English term “gay” has certainly transformed its fundamental meaning over the years.  A gay man was once considered only happy.  Today the same phrase would describe a homosexual to most all who hear it.  Likewise a “mad” person was once considered to be mentally deranged rather than angry, as it is commonly understood today.

Hell, in its original usage meant simply “the place beyond the land of the living.”  It could equally refer to the righteous or the unrighteous, as both die and are relegated to the place of the dead.  The King James Version, written in 1611, speaks prophetically of Christ, in Psalm 16, using the original understanding of “hell” in its translation.

Psalm 16:10 (KJV)
¹⁰ For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Truly, Psalm 16 speaks of the coming Christ.  Truly, it states that he will not be left “in Hell,” in the King James Version.   However, one’s understanding of what exactly Hell is in 1611, when the KJV was published, is not the same as one’s use of the term today, as most people today understand the term to refer instead to “the lake of fire,” which is not what the Psalmist speaks of.

The underlying Hebrew word in Psalm 16:10, translated “Hell” by the King James Bible, is the term Sheol.  Sheol, in the Old Testament is a place where all of the dead of humanity will rest until their appointed time.  It is not synonymous with the lake of fire, or “Hell” as we know it today.

Sheol was a place where the righteous and the wicked went prior to the resurrection of Christ, at which point the righteous no longer went there, but directly to Heaven.

Hosea uses the same term (Sheol):

Hosea 13:14 (KJV)
¹⁴ I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.

Here, the KJV uses the term “grave” as an English translation of the very same Hebrew term, Sheol.  And, clearly from this text, the Lord will “ransom” his righteous ones from Sheol.  Indeed he did.  When Christ died, he went where dead people went- to Sheol, or Hades, which is the same term rendered in the Greek New Testament.  And, when he rose, he emptied the righteous out of Sheol/Hades and took them with him to Heaven, as noted in Ephesians:

Ephesians 4:7-9 (NIV)
⁷ But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it. ⁸ This is why it says: “When he ascended on high, he led captives in his train and gave gifts to men.” ⁹ (What does “he ascended” mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions?

The Apostles’ Creed speaks of a pure and original understanding of the term Hell, which denotes the hidden place of Hades.  Christ died, went to Hades, and rose from it, bringing with him all of those who waited for his victory over death.  Likewise, when the King James Bible speaks of Jesus not being left in Hell, it is translating the term Sheol, the general place of the dead.

David wrote in Psalm 139 the following:

Psalm 139:8 (KJV)
⁸ If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

Using the KJV, once again the term “Hell” is rendered for Sheol.  The NIV, however renders the following:

Psalm 139:8 (NIV)
⁸ If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.

The underlying term, Sheol, does not refer to Hell by today’s understanding of that term, but rather the unseen place of the dead.  Did David really consider himself prepared to make his bed in Hell at some future point?  If so, perhaps soon the WOF teachers will have David paying for the sins of man in Hell.  It’s just as ridiculous of a thought as to think that Jesus went to the lake of fire which people commonly call “Hell” by today’s language standards.

Modern versions account for the development of the cultural understanding of what Hell is, and use other terms to as not to cause modern readers, who believe “Hell” to be synonymous with the lake of fire, to misunderstand the text.

Another modern translation, the NASB, translates this text using the original Hebrew term to avoid misunderstandings:

Psalm 16:10 (NASB)
¹⁰ For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.

This lengthy explanation is essential to allow the reader to understand without question a simple fact:  Jesus did not go to the lake of fire, where the eternal punishment for sins is realized.  He went where dead people went; to Hades, because he died as a human, and followed the natural course of a dead man to that place.  [For a more expanded study on Sheol, Hell and other related terms concerning the realms of the dead, visit the "Spiritual Realms" study series at: http://www.returningking.com/?p=19.]

And, here begins the issue with the misuse of scripture in the hands of the WOF teachers.  Simply stated, they teach that Jesus literally went to Hell – in the modern understanding of the term, the lake of fire – and that he suffered in Hell to pay the penalty of sin for mankind.

“How did Jesus then on the cross say, ‘My God.’ Because God was not His Father any more. He took upon Himself the nature of Satan. And I’m telling you Jesus is in the middle of that pit. He’s suffering all that there is to suffer, there is no suffering left . . . apart from Him. His emaciated, little wormy spirit is down in the bottom of that thing and the devil thinks He’s got Him destroyed. But, all of a sudden God started talking.”
Kenneth Copeland (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN, April 21, 1991)

“In hell He [Jesus] suffered for you and for me. The Bible says hell was made for Satan and his angels. It was not made for men. Satan was holding the Son of God there illegally … The trap was set for Satan and Jesus was the bait.”
Kenneth Copeland (Walking in the Realm of the Miraculous, 1979, p. 77)

WOF teachers teach that Jesus went to Hell, using the modern definition of what Hell is.  In short, they teach that Jesus went to the lake of fire, the place of torture and punishment, on behalf of man to pay the penalty of man’s sin by being tortured in Hell.

The problem with this misquoting of scripture and misunderstanding of proper atonement theology is simple: if Jesus paid the price of man’s sin in Hell, then what was he doing on the cross?  Did his death on the cross serve any purpose, other than getting him “dead?”  Not according to these teachers.

According to the WOF false prophets, Jesus’ work on the cross accounted for nothing.  It was not Jesus’ death which provided salvation for mankind, but his suffering in Hell.

“Every prophet that walked the face of the earth under the Abrahamic covenant could have paid the price if it were a physical death only. When He 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 be gone through.”
Kenneth Copeland (What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, 1990, audiotape #02-0017, side 2)

To Copeland, then, the “plan of redemption” was incomplete upon Jesus’ death on the cross.  It was not Jesus’ death which bought atonement for man, but his suffering in Hell.  Indeed, “every prophet that walked the face of the earth” could have “paid the price if it were a physical death only.”

As Joyce Meyer puts it,

“He was pronounced guilty on the cross but He paid the price in hell.”
Joyce Meyer (What Happened from the Cross to The Throne? audio)

In this manner of thinking, Jesus’ death on the cross is utterly misunderstood by the whole of theological history.  And, according to this doctrinal error, God’s word itself misspeaks when it states that God worked  ²⁰ …through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. Colossians 1:20 (NASB)

Clearly Paul understood atonement to come “through the blood of His cross” rather than through some future suffering in Hell, of which Paul never speaks.  Does the cross have any power to these teachers?  Is it one of numerous instruments of death by which Jesus could gain passage to Hell, where the real work was done?  Is the focus on the cross this past two thousand years mere foolishness?  Perhaps it is to these who do not serve under its banner.

1 Corinthians 1:17-18 (NASB)
¹⁷ For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. ¹⁸ For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Clearly, the cross of Christ is the power of God to those who know him, but only foolishness to those who are perishing.  Note clearly Paul’s mission to preach the true gospel, “so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.”

Yet, in the teachings of the Word of Faith movement, it has indeed been proclaimed void.

“And you’ve got to really glean some things out of the Word of God to really get hold of what He [Jesus] did for you during those three days. Jesus said, ‘It is finished.’ And He meant the Old Covenant. The job He had to do was just getting started. He really did the job the three days and nights that He was in hell. That’s where the job was done.”
Joyce Meyer (What Happened from the Cross to The Throne? audio)

The cross is utterly pointless in this fabricated system where “the job was done” in Hell itself, by Jesus’ supposed punishment at Satan’s hand.

At this point, the silliness of the notion that Satan himself would punish Jesus in Hell should be observed.  This idea is utter foolishness for three reasons.

First, it is foolishness because Jesus did not go to Hell, or the lake of fire, but Hades (the Greek equivalent of Sheol) as has been noted.

Secondly, it is foolishness because Hell is not yet open for business.  The modern understanding of Hell, which these teachers use in their argument, is called either Gehenna or the lake of fire in the New Testament.  This final place of eternal destruction, according to scripture, is not yet populated, but is empty, awaiting the final judgment of the unrighteous.  The “ribbon cutting” for the lake of fire is demonstrated clearly in the book of Revelation to be a future event.

First into the lake of fire are the Beast and the False Prophet.

Revelation 19:20 (NASB)
²⁰ And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.

They will be followed by the unrighteous survivors of the Tribulation at the time of Christ’s return.

Matthew 25:31-34 (NIV)
³¹ “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. ³² All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. ³³ He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. ³⁴ “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world.

Matthew 25:41 (NIV)
⁴¹ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

This group will be followed by Satan himself, one thousand years later.  (read Revelation 20:1-9 for full context)

Revelation 20:10 (NASB)
¹⁰ And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Lastly, the dead of history who remain in Hades (the righteous were removed from Hades at Jesus’ resurrection) will enter after their judgment from the great white throne.

Revelation 20:11-15 (NASB)
¹¹ Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them. ¹² And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. ¹³ And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. ¹⁴ Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. ¹⁵ And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

One will clearly note that “death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire” at this future time.  Though Satan is present at this time, he was not present at the time of Christ, and is not present currently in Hell.  His advent into Hell is still a future event.  Thus, he could not possibly have been waiting in Hell for Jesus around 30 AD.

Thirdly, the idea of Satan punishing Christ in Hell is foolish because it presumes that Satan has some sort of authority to punish beings who are cast into Hell.  This postulate comes from superstition, bad “Hell” jokes and wives tales.  Satan is not the “proprietor” of Hell, but is an “inmate” of Hell himself.  Even Copeland seems to understand this, though his theological postulating skips over his own realization of this truth.

The Bible says hell was made for Satan and his angels. It was not made for men. Satan was holding the Son of God there illegally … The trap was set for Satan and Jesus was the bait.”
Kenneth Copeland (Walking in the Realm of the Miraculous, 1979, p. 77)

Indeed, Hell was made for Satan and his angels.  It is a place of punishment whereby Satan and his angels are to be destroyed for all eternity.  How can one’s intended place of eternal punishment somehow become his personal place of mastery over another?  Did Satan go to Hell and take over his own prison?

Matthew 25:41 (NIV)
⁴¹ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

It makes no logical sense whatsoever to presume that Hell is an abode where Satan would have authority to punish Christ.  It is Christ who created Hell to punish Satan!  And, God has authority over Hell, not Satan.  If Christ were to go to Hell, and if Satan were to have been there to meet him, even then there is absolutely no scriptural hint that Satan would have the authority to punish Christ there.  Hell belongs to Christ, and is a place where God punishes the wicked- including Satan himself.  It is not Satan’s personal play pen, but his own eternal destiny of punishment.

These teachers are a mockery to legitimate theological study.  I am convinced, however, that they are not stupid, but rather very intelligent.  Their failure is not that they are incapable of studying scripture properly, but that they choose not to.  Instead, they twist scripture to meet their own needs, all the while leading millions into the pit with them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

“Atonement” is the theological term for rendering one’s sins forgiven.  Atonement is the process whereby sins actually become forgiven and one is made right with God.

Most Word of Faith teachers have historically been accurate on atonement issues at some point, but have since jumped onto a bandwagon heading toward the continued demotion of God, in the person of Jesus Christ.

This section deals with the false atonement principles of the WOF, which render Christ imminently discredited in light of historical theology and biblical testimony.  Please note that each heading in this section contains a flawed premise, as taught from the WOF perspective. 

Jesus was not born God

 WOF teachers hold to a wild form of kenoticism, which is a doctrine teaching that Jesus emptied himself of his deity when he came to the earth.  While kenoticism varies in its forms, the teaching in generality implies that Jesus “gave up” some of his God-nature in order to serve as a man during his earthly growth and ministry.

While kenoticism is a false theory in itself, the WOF version of it is excessive even to the already flawed theology.  WOF teachers proclaim that Jesus in fact gave up his deity entirely!  He was not God while on the earth, but a man who was God prior, and who would be God again.

“‘Don’t be disturbed when people accuse you of thinking you are God … They crucified Me for claiming I was God. I didn’t claim that I was God; I just claimed that I walked with Him and that He was in Me. Hallelujah! That’s what you’re doing …’”
Ken Copeland – ‘Take Time to Pray,’ Believer’s Voice of Victory, February 1987, p. 9

Copeland quotes this kenotic theology from (you guessed it) “revelation knowledge,” in the form of one of his many conversations with God, where God tells Ken things he failed to tell Paul, Peter, John or even Jesus himself, apparently.  Copeland maintains that Jesus never claimed to be God, but only that he “walked with Him” and that “He was in Me,” such as what you and I might claim.

As usual, the problem with his position is found in scripture itself.

John 10:24-30 (NIV)
²⁴ The Jews gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” ²⁵ Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, ²⁶ but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. ²⁷ My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. ²⁸ I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. ²⁹ My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. ³⁰ I and the Father are one.”

In John 10, Jesus answers a clear question, “If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.”  Jesus not only told them plainly that he was the Christ, but concluded with, “I and the Father are one,” a foundational basis of Trinitarian theology.

Additionally, it is clear that those present understood his claim to be clearly indicating such, as in the very next verse they tried to stone him for claiming to be God!

John 10:31-33 (NIV)
³¹ Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, ³² but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” ³³ “We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

Clearly the Bible, nor the Jews had any issue with Jesus’ claims to be God – only Copeland.  Or, perhaps it should be stated, “only Copeland’s club,” as he certainly does not stand alone in his claims.

If Jesus came as God, then why did God have to anoint Him? If Jesus – see God’s already been anointed. If Jesus came as God, then why did God have to anoint Him? Jesus came as a man, that’s why it was legal to anoint him. God doesn’t need anointing, He is anointing. Jesus came as a man, and at age 30 God is now getting ready to demonstrate to us, and give us an example of what a man, with the anointing, can do. 
– Creflo Dollar, Jesus’ Growth into Sonship, dated December 8, 15, 2002

Dollar, (aptly named, don’t you think?) spells out the idea even more thoroughly.  Jesus was “a man with the anointing,” as each of the WOF themselves claim to be.  The idea of Jesus being no different from other “anointed” men precisely is what would draw Copeland to make this outlandish claim:

“The Spirit of God spoke to me and He said, “Son, realize this. Now follow me in this and don’t let your tradition trip you up.” He said, “Think this way — a twice-born man whipped Satan in his own domain.” And I threw my Bible down… like that. I said, “What?” He said, “A born-again man defeated Satan, the firstborn of many brethren defeated him.” He said, “You are the very image, the very copy of that one.” I said, “Goodness, gracious sakes alive!” And I began to see what had gone on in there, and I said, “Well now you don’t mean, you couldn’t dare mean, that I could have done the same thing?” He said, “Oh yeah, if you’d had the knowledge of the Word of God that He did, you could have done the same thing, ’cause you’re a reborn man too.”
Kenneth Copeland (Substitution and Identification, tape #00-0202, side 2)

The very heart of WOF theology requires the affirmation of man being capable completely of God’s wonders.  After all, as noted earlier, God used the same “force of faith” to create the world that you and I are supposed to use to fill our wallets, heal our bodies of every affliction (we’ll observe later) and “speak” our world into existence. 

It should be noted that traditional kenoticism (though flawed itself) does at least draw its framework from a flawed attempt at exegesis; chiefly, from Philippians 2.

Philippians 2:5-8 (NIV)
⁵ Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: ⁶ Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, ⁷ but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. ⁸ And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death– even death on a cross!

Kenoticism derives its name from the Greek term kenoo (ken-ah’-o), which is translated “made himself nothing” in the NIV above.  Kenoo literally means “to make void” or figuratively “to make of no reputation (as the KJV does translate it),” such as a king dressing in civilian clothes and walking the streets at night.  In the context, the text states essentially “Jesus was God” but himself kenoo, taking the nature of a servant.”  Clearly kenoo, in the context, is the place between “God” and “a servant.”  Jesus’ emptying of himself was figurative, as is clearly noted in verse 8, “And, being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself….”

Jesus did kenoo himself – he chose to live life as a man, though God incarnate.  His making “himself nothing” is not literal, but figurative in his chosen earthly social position as a servant rather than the King which he is.

The same author, Paul, also notes in Colossians,

Colossians 2:9 (NIV)
⁹ For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

The false ideas of kenosis indicating a Christ who had released himself from deity has failed muster in nearly all venues of traditional theology as a legitimate concept.  It apparently lives on in the WOF movement, not because of Philippians 2, however, but due to Copeland’s fireside chat with God about “things I never told the apostle Paul.”

At the end of the day, the Jesus of the WOF doctrine is pre-existent God, who “dumped” Godhood aside to come to earth as a completely normal human man such as you and I, but without a sin nature.  To be more precise, Christ came to earth as the second Adam.

The Second Adam

The concept of a “second Adam” is a genuinely biblical concept – at least when one allows the Bible to the metaphor in its own light.  1 Corinthians 15 notes,

1 Corinthians 15:42-49 (NIV)
⁴² So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; ⁴³ it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; ⁴⁴ it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. ⁴⁵ So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. ⁴⁶ The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. ⁴⁷ The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. ⁴⁸ As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. ⁴⁹ And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.

The biblical metaphor of a second Adam is clear from its context.  The first Adam was “a living being” and the second “a life-giving spirit.”  Note, this follows the introductory concept of the nature of the resurrection of the dead: our bodies are “sown a natural body” and “raised a spiritual body.”  The metaphor, then, speaks to the first Adam as “natural body” and the second Adam, Christ, who will raise us in his likeness with a “spiritual body.” 

This text specifically is dealing with the differences between a natural body and the coming spiritual body of all in Christ who will be resurrected from the dead.  More on this biblical principle can be read at http://www.returningking.com/?p=16.  But, suffice it to say, biblical teachings concerning a second Adam are nothing like what it has been made into by WOF teachers.

WOF teachers have a God-complex concerning Adam.  Their belief is that he was created an equal with God (as noted earlier in this study) and had the same fullness of God in the bodily form as Christ himself has.  He (Adam) was a duplicate of God himself.

When God made Adam all He did was make an exact imprint of Himself. He duplicated Himself
Creflo Dollar (Our equality with God Through Righteousness January 21,2001)

Adam was God manifested in the flesh.
Ken Copeland – (Following the Faith of Abraham, Tape #01-3001)

Their teachings concerning Adam as God-incarnate lend themselves to the understanding that we, too, being “in Christ” who was the second Adam, are re-created to a God-status.

“Adam was made in the image of God. He was as much female as he was male. He was exactly like God. Then God separated him and removed the female part. Woman means ‘man with the womb.’ Eve had as much authority as Adam did as long as they stayed together.”
Kenneth Copeland (Sensitivity of Heart, KCP Publications, 1984, p. 23)

Aside from the weirdness of Copeland’s seeming mother complex, the gist of the WOF atonement process is the reinvention of the Adamic being in Christ himself; a new man made without a sin nature who would redeem the nature of man.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CHECK OUT  THE 24/7 LINE UP OF 60+ HRs OF THE VERY BEST **Word of Faith**  EXPOSURE VIDEO AT

THE WORD on the Word of Faith TV 

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Along with the elevation of man to godhood, it makes perfect sense (in this skewed use of it) that God would somehow also be demoted to man.  That is precisely what happens in the twisted systematic theology of the WOF.

God’s lost place in creation

The essence of God’s demotion is taught by the WOF teachers to be the results of Adam’s sin.  The postulate is that God, making Adam in his likeness (another God) also gave Adam the ability to give away the earth.  God gave it to Adam, then Adam gave it to Satan, in effect, through his sin.  In this strange theology, God, then, “lost” the earth literally.  He has no power in the earth because he gave it away to man.  God became an outsider to his own creation.

“The Bible says that God gave this earth to the sons of men … and when [Adam] turned and gave that dominion to Satan, look where it left God. If left Him on the outside looking in … He had no legal right to do anything about it, did He? … He had injected Himself illegally into the earth — what Satan had intended for Him to do was to fall for it — pull off an illegal act and turn the light off in God, and subordinate God to himself … He intended to get God into such a trap that He couldn’t get out.”
Kenneth Copeland (What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, 1990, audiotape #02-0017)

First of all, the Bible never says that God gave the earth to the sons of men.  The phrase “sons of men” does not appear in the creation account at all, but rather in the account of the evil which prevailed upon the earth prior to the flood.  Once again, we have an example of a WOF teacher simply “making up” scripture on the fly.  Can we have a chapter and verse, Ken?

The Bible is rather clear that God has not given away the earth. 

1 Corinthians 10:26 (NIV)
²⁶ for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.”

Deuteronomy 10:14 (NIV)
¹⁴ To the Lord your God belong the heavens, even the highest heavens, the earth and everything in it.

While this teaching indicates that God “lost” his creation in the sense of being ousted from it, scripture teaches that after Adam’s sin it was God – not Satan or Adam – who redefined the condition of earth as a result of man’s sin.

Genesis 3:17 (NIV)
¹⁷ To Adam he said, “Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.

According to Copeland, “[God was] left on the outside looking in.”  How, then, did God curse the Earth?  If God “had no legal right to do anything about it” then who exactly fulfilled God’s curse?  Did Satan curse the earth at God’s request?  This postulate not only lacks scriptural confirmation, but also common sense.

Furthermore, the idea that there is some legal system which relegates God to a subordinate is utterly non-scriptural and denigrates God to a pawn in someone else’s game.  Perhaps it is the “force of faith” that is this superpower which makes rules over God’s head?  Perhaps it is Copeland himself.

Scripture teaches utterly contrarily to this concept.  Job says of God,

Job 23:13 (NIV)
¹³ “But he stands alone, and who can oppose him? He does whatever he pleases.

The author of Psalm 33 notes,

Psalm 33:11 (NIV)
¹¹ But the plans of the Lord stand firm forever, the purposes of his heart through all generations.

Solomon notes,

Proverbs 19:21 (NIV)
²¹ Many are the plans in a man’s heart, but it is the Lord’s purpose that prevails.

Where is the biblical text which indicates that God is at the mercy of some unwritten legal system?  And, unwritten it remains, for at no point does the Bible even hint that God is subject to Copeland’s “spiritual laws.”

In fact, every single statement of Copeland’s previous quote is utterly lacking in any biblical evidence.  The entire notion is another made up doctrine.

Jeremiah 14:14 (NIV)
¹⁴ Then the Lord said to me, “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds.

Fredrick Price mirrors the same doctrines, stating,

“Adam, as I said, gave it [the earth] away to the serpent, to the Devil. As a result of it, he got his behind kicked out of the garden. He went out of Eden, out of the garden. He began to wander around, and he has troubles from day one. Now God was out of the business. God was out of the earth realm. God had no more stock in this earth realm. No more. None at all. Nothing He could do. Not a thing in the world He could do. . . .The only way God could get back into this earth realm, He had to have an invitation.
Fredrick K.C. Price (Ever Increasing Faith, TBN May 1, 1992, audiotape #PR11)

Indeed, it does appear that God is “out of the business” as far as these men are concerned.  He is certainly not in theirs.

Interestingly, Adam “got his behind kicked out of the garden.”  By whom, one wonders?  If God has lost control, should one suppose Price is indicating that Satan kicked Adam out of the Garden of Eden?  Why then does scripture say,

Genesis 3:23-24 (NIV)
²³ So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. ²⁴ After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

Clearly, God is still in control.  It is He who banished man from Eden.  It is He who placed a cherubim to guard it.  It is HE who is still in control, as He has always been and always will be.

God’s dependence on man

In accordance with God’s loss of control on earth comes his utter dependence on man to give him his authority again.  According to these teachers, God cannot act in the earth realm outside of man’s invitation and enabling.

The only way God could get back into this earth realm, He had to have an invitation. Ha-hah! He had to have an invitation. And so, God looked around–saw different men, saw Noah, saw different ones. He gave them a few instructions. They did what He said. So and so and so and so. But, finally, He got to a point where He had His plan ready for operation. And He saw a man named Abraham.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (Ever Increasing Faith, TBN May 1, 1992, audiotape #PR11)

While this teaching vacillates back and forth between Satan being in control

“The Bible says that God gave this earth to the sons of men … and when [Adam] turned and gave that dominion to Satan
Kenneth Copeland (What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, 1990, audiotape #02-0017)

and man being in control,

” . . . the anointing is dependent upon my words. God will not move unless I say it. Why? because He has made us coworkers with Him. He set things up that way.”?
Benny Hinn (The Anointing. 1992. p.82)

one thing is clear; God is not in control, and must be granted the privilege of influencing his creation by none other than man who is merely a part of that creation.

“God had no avenue of lasting faith or moving in the earth. He had to have covenant with somebody. He had to be invited in, in other words, or He couldn’t come. God is on the outside looking in. In order to have any say so in the earth, He’s going to have to be in agreement with a man here.”
Kenneth Copeland (God’s Covenants With Man II, 1985, audiotape #01-4404, side 1)

Ultimately, the pendulum lands to man being in control in this convoluted doctrine.  It is man’s control, of course, which best fits the purposes of these teachers.

Thus, through God’s covenant with Abraham he was given an agreement by which he could once again have a say in the earth realm.

Skipping to modernity, Abraham’s blessings are now passed on to every believer in Christ, so that God now is only able to move when Christians enable him. 

” . . . the anointing is dependent upon my words. God will not move unless I say it. Why? because He has made us coworkers with Him. He set things up that way.”
Benny Hinn (The Anointing. 1992. p.82)

“You create the presence of Jesus with your mouth … He is bound by your lips and by your words … Remember that Christ is depending upon you and your spoken word to release His presence.”
Paul Yonggi (David) Cho (The Fourth Dimension, Vol.1 1979, p. 83)

The end result of this ridiculous doctrine is not only that man is a little god, but that God is a little man, being literally forced into action by the utterances of man.  According to Cho, God “is bound by your lips and your words.” 

This false revelation itself creates a contradiction in the WOF theology.  Is it the force of faith which responds to man’s utterance, or is it God himself?

Copeland seems to believe it whichever way is most productive for his cause.  He states that

“Words are spiritual containers,”
Kenneth Copeland (Forces of the Recreated Human Spirit, 15; cf. 14)

 and that

The “force of faith is released by words.”
Kenneth Copeland (Authority of the Believer II, 1987, audiotape #01-0302, side 1)

So, it is the “force of faith” which acts, rather than God. 

“Words create pictures, and pictures in your mind create words. And then the words come back out your mouth….And when that spiritual force comes out it is going to give substance to the image that’s on the inside of you. Aw, that’s that visualization stuff! Aw, that’s that New Age! No, New Age is trying to do this; and they’d get somewhat results out of it because this is spiritual law, brother.”
Kenneth Copeland (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN, March 28, 1991)

However, if the idea that some force other than God is in control makes you uncomfortable, Copeland also teaches that God will respond personally to your commands, rather than the force of faith, which he used (as observed earlier) when he created the earth.

“As a believer, you have a right to make commands in the name of Jesus. Each time you stand on the Word, you are commanding God to a certain extent because it is His Word.”
Kenneth Copeland (Our Covenant with God, 1987, p. 32)

Thus, you have the power to “command God” or the “word containers” of the force of faith.  As such, you can have whatever you wish.

The God of the Bible is neither at a loss for his own power, nor is he commanded of man.  It is he, alone, who rules, and he, alone, who is the source of all power.

Deuteronomy 32:39 (NIV)
³⁹ “See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.

1 Chronicles 29:11 (NIV)
¹¹ Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours. Yours, O Lord, is the kingdom; you are exalted as head over all.

Job 9:12 (NIV)
¹² If he snatches away, who can stop him? Who can say to him, ‘What are you doing?’

Job 25:2 (NIV)
² “Dominion and awe belong to God; he establishes order in the heights of heaven.

Job 41:11 (NIV)
¹¹ Who has a claim against me that I must pay? Everything under heaven belongs to me.

Psalm 83:18 (NIV)
¹⁸ Let them know that you, whose name is the Lord– that you alone are the Most High over all the earth.

In conclusion, the concepts of God “losing” his creation to man (or to Satan, depending on which theory the WOF teachers are using at the moment) and being dependent upon man, are both utterly unsound theologically and rationally:  Theologically, because scripture never teaches nor even hints at God having lost his foothold on earth nor in all of creation, and rationally because one who loses his control over his creation cannot be rightfully called God, as he will have been usurped by one more powerful than himself.  To follow this flat-out postulate to its logical conclusion, God is no longer God at all, but is in fact at the mercy of others.  And, this logical conclusion is precisely the conclusion of the Word of Faith movement’s theology:  God is not in control on earth.

“God’s on the outside looking in. He doesn’t have any legal entree into the earth. The thing don’t belong to Him. You see how sassy the Devil was in the presence of God in the book of Job? God said, “Where have you been?” Wasn’t any of God’s business. He [Satan] didn’t even have to answer if he didn’t want to … God didn’t argue with him a bit! You see, this is the position that God’s been in … Might say, “Well, if God’s running things He’s doing a lousy job of it.” He hadn’t been running ‘em…..”
Kenneth Copeland (Image of God in You III, 1989, audiotape #01-1403, side 1)

And, God no longer being in control leaves control given instead to another; the man whom God created.

“Yes! You are in control! So, if man has control, who no longer has it? God.”
Fredrick K.C. Price (“Prayer: Do You Know What Prayer Is … and How to Pray?” The Word Study Bible, 1990 p. 1178)

Indeed, the “little god” doctrine comes full circle in the WOF world view.  Man has not only become “like” God, but has trumped God’s power entirely, making man fully in control of his own destiny and even the very actions of God.

Truly Satan’s original sin has come to fruition within the supposed walls of the church. 

Isaiah 14:12-14 (NIV)
¹² How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! ¹³ You said in your heart, “I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. ¹⁴ I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.”

The WOF teaching has found its niche in the hearts of a corrupt world, as through this illogical set of doctrines, sinful man has received what he has always wanted.  He is indeed in control, even over the very God which owns him.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

According to WOF doctrine, in the beginning, God made the heavens and the earth, and he placed another “god,” a reproduction of himself on the earth to guard it, named Adam.

“I’m going to have to reproduce Myself. Like I’m God up here in heaven. I’m going to make Me a god and put Myself in the physical body so that he can guard the earth and keep out all intruders in the earth … Now that gives us a little insight on why God wanted a god on the earth like He was God in heaven … When God made Adam all He did was make an exact imprint of Himself. He duplicated Himself … If you eat of this fruit, you will be like God. What’s the problem? He’s already like God. He was already like God.”
Creflo Dollar (Our equality with God Through Righteousness January 21,2001)

“God came to earth and touched a piece of dust and turned it into a God.”
Benny Hinn (TBN, Dec 1, 1990)

And man was God’s equal in every way.

“[Man] was created on terms of equality with God, and he could stand in God’s presence without any consciousness of inferiority…God 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”?
Kenneth Hagin, Sr. (Zoe: The God-Kind of Life, 1989. pp. 35-36, 41)

This man-god, Adam, had the fullness of the godhead within him.  He had super-human powers and could do amazing things (which the Bible failed to mention).

“Adam was a super-being when God created him. I don’t know whether people know this, but he was the first superman that really ever lived. First of all, the Scriptures declare clearly that he had dominion over the fowls of the air, the fish of the sea–which means he used to fly. Of course, how can he have dominion over the birds and not be able to do what they do? The word ‘dominion’ in the Hebrew clearly declares that if you have dominion over a subject, that you do everything that subject does. In other words, that subject, if it does something you cannot do, you don’t have dominion over it. 1’11 prove it further. Adam not only flew, he flew to space. He was–with one thought he would be on the moon.”
Benny Hinn (Praise the Lord, TBN December 26, 1991)

The root stock of this mythology stems from a gross misrepresentation of the creation of humanity in Genesis 1.

Genesis 1:26 (NIV)
²⁶ Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

The first error of this doctrine is that the statement “Let us make man in our image” does not relegate man to God’s status.  In fact, the statement itself relegates man to something essentially lower that God, not equal.  Man is a creation¸ while God is pre-existent and eternal.  He has no beginning- no creation. 

1 Chronicles 16:36 (NIV)
³⁶ Praise be to the Lord, the God of Israel, from everlasting to everlasting.

Revelation 22:13 (NIV)
¹³ I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

Can that which is created be equal to that which created it?

This fallacy of equality with God comes directly from Satan’s repertoire, as it was Satan who began the propagation of that particular false theology:

Genesis 3:5 (NIV)
⁵ “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

And it was Satan who first saw the fruition of the desire to be elevated to Godhood:

Ezekiel 28:17 (NIV)
¹⁷ Your heart became proud on account of your beauty, and you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor. So I threw you to the earth; I made a spectacle of you before kings.

WOF teachers proclaim that the fall of man hindered Adam’s god-status, but that Christ returned man to being a “little god” in his act of redemption.

“You don’t have a god in you, you are one”
Kenneth Copeland (The Force of Love, 1987, audiotape #02-0028, side 1)

“I say this with all respect so that it don’t upset you too bad, but I say it anyway. When I read in the Bible where he [Jesus] says, ‘I Am,’ I just smile and say, ‘Yes, I Am, too!’”
Kenneth Copeland (Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN July 9, 1987)

“Jesus is no longer the only begotten Son of God.”
Kenneth Copeland (Now We Are In Christ Jesus, 1980, p. 24)

“When you were born again the Word was made flesh in you. You are everything He was and everything He is and ever He shall be. Don’t say,’ I have.’ Say, ‘ I am, I am, I am, I am, I am.”
Benny Hinn (“Our Position in Christ #2 — The Word Made Flesh” 1991, audiotape #A031190-2, side 2)

“He [God] doesn’t even draw a distinction between Himself and us. . . . You know what else that’s settled, then, tonight? This hue and cry and controversy that has been spawned by the Devil to try and bring dissension within the body of Christ that we are gods. I am a little god! . . . I have His name. I’m one with Him. I’m in covenant relation. I am a little god! Critics, be gone!”
Paul Crouch (Praise the Lord, TBN? July 7, 1986)

“You are as much the incarnation of God as Jesus Christ was…the believer is as much an incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth”.
Kenneth Hagin, Sr. (Word Of Faith December 1980, p. 14)

 

The little gods doctrine is nothing more than a repackaging of Satan’s original sin:

Isaiah 14:12-14 (NIV)
¹² How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! ¹³ You said in your heart, “I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. ¹⁴ I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.”

 

The teachings of man’s elevation to god-status is an essential element of WOF systematic theology.  It is from this premise that the supporters of these wicked teachers then can be shaped into an understanding of the rest of the theological story.  From a god-status, man is in control and can do as God did, using the force of faith to create one’s own reality and shape one’s own future.  The end result is, according to these teachers, man is utterly in control of his own circumstances, being an incarnation of Christ, with authority to rule one’s own life.

“You have the same creative faith and ability on the inside of you that God used when he created the heavens and the earth.”
Kenneth Copeland (Inner Image of the Covenant, side 2)

 

What scripture teaches about man

o   Man is subordinate to God, and is not deified in any fashion.

Isaiah 43:10 (NIV)
¹⁰ “You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.

·        

Clearly, God does not consider man a “little god” – for he states adamantly through Isaiah that there was no god formed before him or after him.

 

 

 

o   Man belongs to God

Psalm 100:3 (NIV)
³ Know that the Lord is God. It is he who made us, and we are his; we are his people, the sheep of his pasture.

·        

Not only is God creator, and man subservient, but man belongs to God: “we are his people, the sheep of his pasture.”

 

 

 

o   God rules man

Psalm 139:15-16 (NIV)
¹⁵ My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, ¹⁶ your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be.

·        

Man is in no position to bargain with God, or to share God’s stature.  Man’s life was written by God before one day of it began.

 

 

 

o   God does not share his glory – with man, beast, spirit or anything else

Isaiah 42:8 (NIV)
⁸ “I am the Lord; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols.

 

Scripture clearly teaches that man is utterly subordinate to God in creation.  In fact, man is even subordinate to the angels, who themselves are subordinate to God.

Psalm 8:5 (NIV)
⁵ You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.

 

In the end, the “little god” teachings of WOF leaders does find strong biblical support in several places, such as these:

2 Timothy 4:3 (NIV)
³ For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.

1 Timothy 4:1 (NIV)
¹ The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.

Their motives are well understood in scripture:

Titus 1:11 (NIV)
¹¹ They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach–and that for the sake of dishonest gain.

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CHECK OUT  THE 24/7 LINE UP OF 60+ HRs OF THE VERY BEST **Word of Faith**  EXPOSURE VIDEO AT

THE WORD on the Word of Faith TV 

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Part three:

(Notes below are scrollable)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Introduction

In the old days, the truth was proclaimed with broad brushstrokes and the heresy arose in small pockets of uprising.  Today the tables have turned.  The truth is spoken in small pockets of a remnant church which still adheres to constancy in biblical principles, while the heresy is screamed from hundreds of television networks and millions of websites, as God spoke through Paul:

(Notes below are scrollable)