Inspired by this post from Matthew Paul Turner, basically making fun of Pastor Joel Osteen’s (NOT OLsteen, maybe LOLsteen) new book, It’s Your Time and a one-star review on Amazon in which the “reviewer” essentially wrote that Osteen was a fraud, he hadn’t read the book, and never intended to read the book (the review’s since been taken down), I felt prompted to go where most Biblical evangelical Christians choose not to go.

“God promises your payday is on its way. If you’ll learn to be a prisoner of hope and get up every day expecting God’s favor, you’ll see God do amazing things. You’ll overcome every obstacle. You’ll defeat every enemy. And I believe and declare you’ll see every dream, every promise God has put in your heart, come to pass.” —Joel Osteen, It’s Your Time, p. 16 (emphasis mine)

“And we know that all things work together for good”

4. Too much emphasis on the temporal–the here and now–rather than the eternal. This kind of piggybacks point three. Evangelical Christians familiar with Osteen are probably shaking their heads going, “What did you expect from the author of Your Best Life NOW?” Yes, I expected this but since I’m trying to be as thorough as I can in reviewing THIS book, it needed to be said.

5. Too little Jesus. For the first 116 pages, I began to wonder whether Joel Osteen was still a Christian or whether he had become a spiritual generalist–simply referring to God as a higher power. Then Osteen speaks favor over the reader’s life and declares it “in the name of Jesus.” For another 116 pages, Osteen references Bible passages in generalizations and the context of overcoming adversity and moving toward greater success before speaking favor over the reader’s life again and declaring it “in the name of Jesus.” In Chapter 14 (“Living a Resurrected Life”) and Chapter 15 (“Your Sunday is Coming), the core Gospel message–Jesus was betrayed, crucified, died, buried, and resurrected so that mankind could be rescued from their sins and eternal damnation–is reduced to simply yet another success story–a man who encountered great difficulty but triumphed in the end. I was incredibly horrified to read those two chapters as it reduced the man who Christians revere as Lord, King, Savior, and Friend to a level of Tyler Perry or Marie Callender–just another someone who persevered through incredible adversity. If a non-Christian had done this, I wouldn’t have been as bothered. However, Pastor Osteen claims Christianity and declares favor in Jesus’ name. It should have dawned on Pastor Osteen, of all people, that the Gospel message should be included in here somewhere. But unfortunately, Jesus is a mere afterthought. Pastor Osteen doesn’t present the Gospel in an Introduction, a Foreword, a Prologue, Chapter 1, or even an Epilogue or the Conclusion. It is presented on the last page with text at the very end of the book, on a page titled, “We Care About You.” Here it is:

“I believe there is a void in every person that only a relationship with God can fill. I’m not talking about finding religion or joining a particular church. I’m talking about developing a relationship with your Heavenly Father through His Son, Jesus Christ. I believe that knowing Him is the source of true peace and fulfillment in life.”

This seems like a pretty important statement to me. So why is it at the very END of the book? Basically, it’s almost a bait-and-switch: God will give you the right opportunities and the right breaks so you have a nice house and the job promotion you’ve always wanted! Oh, and true peace and fulfillment only comes from a relationship in Jesus Christ. I feel like there’s a mixed message here.

6. Too much in the title. I am going to cut Osteen a little bit of slack here because I’ve since learned that authors have little to no say over two things in their book: the cover art and the title. It’s Your Time is the obvious choice for the title of the book (it’s the main theme Osteen reiterates throughout 300 pages) However, that’s not the full title. The full title is:

However, the full title is something I do take issue with. Why? Because it’s totally misleading. Props to the editors for picking some great action verbs that really get the mind engaged but from a Christian point of view, they are awful.

A. Activate Your Faith. This gives me the impression that my faith is a massive computer and I’ve got to input the right power sequence to activate it. I suppose this part isn’t off the mark when it comes to the book though: Part Two: It’s Time For Favor includes the following chapters:

I suppose “activate” was a pretty good verb to try and sum all that up. However, Christians aren’t called to “activate” their faith. Perhaps it’s me, but it gives the impression that a person’s faith is idling by, laying dormant until it’s “made active” (as Merriam-Webster defines “activate”). Hebrews is a great book to read on how people employed their faith: they had it and put it to meaningful use. People in the “Hall of Faith” (Hebrews 11) didn’t have to activate diddly-squat. The word “activate” also gives the impression that we’re drawing on power for our selfish purposes; employing faith indicates that we are putting our faith to good use–for the glory of God and to serve others.

B. Achieve Your Dreams. What are your dreams and goals? To live a life free of sickness? To get a job promotion? Perhaps, it’s to simply find a job in this recessed economy? Well, I can save you $25 in purchasing this hardcover book by telling you all you have to do is put Peter Pan theology into practice: “Just think happy thoughts.”

I’m not kidding. (Well, maybe about the Peter Pan theology.) But Osteen’s premise is simply that people often set themselves up for ruin because they think or buy into negative thoughts. Here’s a sample:

“Don’t speak defeat over your life.

“Your words prophesy what you become. Be bold. Dare to say, ‘I look great today. I’m made in the image of Almighty God. I am strong and talented. I’m blessed. I’m creative. I will have a productive day.’

“…Change your words. Change your life. Forget victimhood and despair. Express gratitude and hope.”

In other words, “Just think happy thoughts.” After that, the rest really is up to God who will supernaturally give you the divine breaks, the right opportunities, and he’s lining up the right people to give you favor. But that’s how you achieve your dreams, friends, just continue to think those happy thoughts.

C. Increase in God’s Favor. This is an unbiblical concept. God will never love us more or less than He already does in Christ. Unlike human love, which conditional due to our sin nature, God’s love for His children is unconditional. Parents may have a favorite child because he’s better behaved but God doesn’t work that way. Because God sees us through Christ’s righteousness, our standing in Christ does not change. (Romans 8 in its entirety can help in learning more about God’s love through Jesus Christ.) So there’s no such thing as increasing in God’s favor anymore from a Christian perspective, but rather God chooses to bless whomever He wishes to bless–believer or non-believer. (Matthew 5:45) [Blessing in this context refers to the rain that falls to water crops, providing a yield for everyone in an agricultural economy to make a living.]

To sum up, I was initially going to give this book three stars but the more I thought about it, the more I realized the message of this book does several terrible things:

1. Detracts from who Jesus is–the Son of God, the Savior of the world, sent to free humankind from their sins.
2. Gives readers a vision that God is a magical genie–if you rub Him the right way, He’ll cave to your demands.
3. “It’s Your Time” for everything–materialistically (more money) and relationally (the right spouse)–you’ve ever wanted.

Those views are flawed and extremely faulty. From a Biblical perspective, I believe It’s Your Time can be more dangerous to the non-discerning reader than it can be helpful. I don’t think the book is total trash–there are some Biblical principles that can be found in the book but they are hidden like gold. You must wade through the muck and mire to find them. To the discerning Biblical reader, the book can be more of a bane than a blessing: there is much encouragement to be found but there’s also much discouragement in the way Biblical truths are twisted, verses are quoted out of context, and much of the text is full of trite, pithy sayings and anecdotes that could be found elsewhere.

For Joel Osteen lovers (like my mother), it’s probably nothing they haven’t already heard and it would probably be something they’d appreciate. (I do believe God can use anything.) But if you know someone who is on the fence about God, I wouldn’t let them near this book lest they hear the word and have no root or get choked by the cares and riches of the world and become unfruitful. (Matthew 13:20-22)

In closing, a friend referred to much of what I quoted from this book as full of “cultural narcissism.” I couldn’t agree more. Osteen tries to capitalize off of the opportunity of a sputtering economy by infusing cultural narcissism within a Christian context. And if Christians truly follow Jesus’ example, they will quickly learn there is no place for narcissism in Christianity.

“My son, do not despise the LORD’s discipline and do not resent his rebuke, because the LORD disciplines those he loves, as a father  the son he delights in. Blessed is the man who finds wisdom, the man who gains understanding, for she is more profitable than silver and yields better returns than gold (Proverbs 3:11-14).”

Life can be hard.  Everyone has problems, some more than others.  Some people just don’t flaunt them in public because they can hide behind wealth, fame, prestige, authority or some other protective cover.

There is a school of thought out there in Christendom that promises that if people follow Jesus Christ they will be blessed with material goods and a wonderful life. It is commonly known as the “health and wealth” gospel.  There is no doubt that some Christians are blessed with an abundant life on this earth. But the fact that there are far too many faithful believers who are suffering, poor, miserable and destitute  provides evidence that those experiencing the  largesse of this world are doing so as a result of other factors than just faith in Christ. Their blessings may come from natural abilities, the gifts of others or something else.

But the mix of “blessed” and “suffering” Christians isn’t the main reason that the “health and wealth” gospel is bunk.  It is garbage because it is not biblical.  The apostle Paul, for example,  focuses not on how wonderful believers will have it as they walk by faith, but how vain, futile and empty life would be if we did not have the resurrection to look forward to. In fact, he says that “we are to be pitied more than all men” if we are living for Christ just for blessings in this life. (I Corinthians 15:19).

God does indeed bless Christians (Psalm 103:5).  But his main goal is to prepare us for the resurrection and living in eternity, not to provide us with a beach house in Malibu.  It is not exactly clear why,but their is something about suffering that actually is allowed from the hand of God which gets us ready for heaven.

The reason to keep going although life seems to always be hard is that eventually the pain will be worth it.  The refrain from an old hymn says as much:

“It will be worth it all when we see Jesus,
Life’s trials will seem so small when we see Christ;
One glimpse of His dear face all sorrow will erase,
So bravely run the race till we see Christ.”

(“When We See Christ”, words and music by Esther Kerr Rusthoi)

Truth Matters Newsletters – January 2007 – Vol. 12 Issue 1 – Kenny’s Birthday Surprise – by Robert S. Liichow

Discernment Ministries International

Kenny’s Birthday “Surprise”

On January 18, 2007 marks both forty (40) years of teaching heresy and by the mercy of our gracious God He has allowed Mr. Copeland to live to be 70 years old. Cashflow A. Dollar and John (son of Ken & Gloria Copeland) plan to surprise them on that evening with a small love offering from their devotees. Oh nothing big or elaborate, merely a token love gift of a —$2.5 million dollar check made out to the Copelands personally for their own use!

When DMI received this appeal letter, complete with DVD from Cashflow and his posse we were sickened beyond belief. The Copelands are among the wealthiest of all the televangelists and their SINistry just purchased at least 1 Citation X jet, KCM owns “Eagle Mountain” a defunct Air Force base they purchased some time back. What is more Kenny and his gang have never had to resort to the usual charismatic tactic of sending out a wide variety of gimmicks to raise funds. Why not? Because they did not and do not need the money.

DMI has no problem with giving a financial gift to ministers (gee wish we’d get more of them, guess I need a “beard” like Cashflow to beg for us), but 2.5 million dollars given to a couple of people who are filthy rich already, who have honestly done nothing but teach error and sow discord in the Body of Christ is a bit much.

Even though the letter is sent to us (and a million others on their mailing list) by their son John Copeland, the checks are to go to Cashflow’s Church until the big service!

A couple of things there to keep in mind: (1). DMI assumes Cashflow’s ministry will without a doubt keep the interest off the money given and (2) Cashflow knows that one day he will reap what he sows, I.e. his day is coming from the Copeland family to “bless” the Dollar family in Atlanta. It is kinda like the Cleveland mob, paying homage to the Chicago family, knowing that “one hand washes the other,” capice? DMI is sure (oh yeah) that Kenny will tithe to the poor from this largess, maybe make an additional payment on a condo, retreat cabin, home or two, possibly just purchase another antique car to add to his growing collection. Hey who said godliness is not gain? (Sorry to sound like a sour-puss, but nobody can spend a dime in hell which we pray is not Mr. Copeland’s ultimate destination). ♦

Copyright © Robert S. Liichow

See Related Articles:

The Jet Set http://discernmentministriesinternation.wordpress.com/2009/09/08/the-jet-set/

Benny HINN JOINS the Jet Set: http://discernmentministriesinternational.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/benny-hinn-joins-the-jet-set/

Truth Matters Newsletters – January 2007 – Vol. 12 Issue 1 – Benny Hinn JOINS the Jet Set – by Rev. Robert S. Liichow

Discernment Ministries International

Benny HINN JOINS the Jet Set

I guess it comes as no surprise, other than why did it take Benny such a long time to join the televangelist “jet set,” but that day has come. According to the Trinity Foundation Mr. Hinn’s SINistry are now the proud owners of a Gulstream private executive jet. His plane is bigger than Mr. Copeland’s new Citation X, but Copeland’s plane can fly higher and faster. Benny’s jet is not as big as Paul and Jan’s Canadaire, but it is newer.

In the minds of all these jet-setters, i.e. Mr. Copeland, Cashflow Dollar, the Crouches, Keith Butler, Benny Hinn and others… They are simply too important and their message or anointing are vital for the advancement of the Kingdom of God ergo that they cannot fly commercial. They must be able to leave at the drop of the hat as the Spirit leads them (or in case they have to blow town or a nation in a big hurry). Hinn’s plan was paid for, by the infirmed, poor and desperate people who think God will/can heal them through Hinn. What a shame.  ♦

Copyright © Robert S. Liichow

See Related Article: The Jet Set  http://discernmentministriesinternational.wordpress.com/2009/09/08/the-jet-set/ 

Other Gospels Part 2

Another reason we need to keep asking “What is the gospel?” is this: not only are there many cultural and secular gospels competing for our attention, there are many Christian ways of talking about the gospel as well.

Some versions focus on how we can have our best life now. Some focus on health and wealth. Some go in the completely opposite direction and declare that everything about the world is rotten and corrupt; the good news here is that one day God will deliver the saved and nuke everything else. (We might call this the gospel of leaving everything behind.) Let’s make no mistake: these are gospels, because someone, somewhere is receiving these messages as good news.

When we turn to the New Testament, we find Paul talking about “Christ crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23) which many of us were taught was the gospel in a nutshell (more on this in the next post). No doubt Christ’s atoning death is an essential part of what the NT means when it talk about the gospel, and if we leave it out, what we’re left with won’t be the gospel. But then we notice that Jesus himself talks about the gospel in other terms: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has come near; repent, and believe in the good news” (Mark 1:15). Jesus associates the gospel with the coming of God’s kingdom. Yes, Jesus foretold his death and resurrection, but this was certainly not received by his disciples as good news at the time (Mark 9:32).

So not only are we being pitched all kinds of gospel messages from our culture, within Christianity itself there are many ways of formulating the gospel. If we weren’t already asking “What is the gospel?” in order to distinguish it from secular “good news,” the texts and nature of Christianity force it upon us.

Question: What other gospels can you name besides “health and wealth,” “prosperity,” or “left behind”? Do you think these gospels are helpful to those who need to hear good news, or do you think they do more harm than good?

It has been a while since I last saw this little gem. While cleaning out my Google reader I found this one nestled away, posted by someone a long time ago (I think it was the Internet Monk). So take 2 minutes out of your day and laugh. Then cry as you realize that there is some truth to be found in the video. Then brainstorm ways to use it in your own ministry. Or comment and tell me I am a heretic for laughing at something so ridiculous/stupid/insipid/genius.

Love. You hear heaps about it. But, the reality is, few People actually know what it is. For most, it’s an Emotional ghost that appears then vanishes Without any warning. Illusive. Undefinable. Forever
Sought, but infrequently found.

Even believers seem to be confused about it at Times. But they don’t need to be. The Word of God Discovers obviously what love truly is. Look at two John six : And what this love consists in is this : that we live and walk as agreed by and steered by His commandments ( His orders, ordinances, Precepts, teaching. ) This is the commandment, as You’ve heard from the beginning, that you Continue to walk in love [guided by it and following It] ( The Amplified Bible ).

Quite simply, God claims love is keeping His
Commandments. That brings love out of the indefinite into something explicit. But God has done Even more than outline love for you. He’s’s given you instructions so you can know how To like as he likes. By giving you His Word, God Has given you His love manual in black and white!

All you’ve got to do is follow it, and you’ll be walking In love. If you’ve made Jesus Christ the Lord of your life, You’ve already taken step one of obedience. The love of God has been born inside you. But, Unless you’re taking action, that love will remain hidden Within you. Love works in pretty much the same way as the force of faith. Faith is born into you when you’re begotten Of God, but till you start to act on God’s Word, That powerful force lies dormant. The same is true
Concerning the love of God. You can have the love of God abiding within you and still be unable to allow it to work through you to reach other folks.

Like religion, love becomes active thru data
Of the Word. That’s why the Apostle Paul wrote to the church at Philippi exclaiming, And this I pray, that your love may
Abound yet more and more in data and in all
Judgment ( Philippians nineteen ).

The love of God is released in your life by acting on the knowledge of God’s Word. Without revelation knowledge followed by action, love lies undeveloped And selfishness continues to reign supreme in you even though you’re a new creature.

But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the Love of God perfected : hereby know we that we Are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought Himself also so to walk, even as he walked ( 1 John 2:5-6 ). As you act on God’s Word, the love of God will be Perfected in you. That’s’s when love will begin to Flow from you to others.

About Gloria Copeland

With a passion for Scripture and a determination to see the Church experience freedom and truth, Gloria Copeland has been teaching about the life-changing power of God’s Word for more than 40 years. She’s the founder of Kenneth Copeland Ministriesdeclaring Jesus Is Lord!and writer of several best-selling books, including concealed Treasures and Hearing From Heaven.

Truth Matters Newsletter – June 2005 – Vol. 10 Issue 6 – Sacred Cow Number Five – It is God’s Will to Always Heal – by Rev. Robert S. Liichow

Discernment Ministries International

Sacred Cow Number Five – It Is God’s Will to Always Heal

Throughout this series I have been focusing on the major beliefs of the Word of Faith (WOF) cult. It is appropriate to delve into this topic due to the fact that the cult is also known as the “Health and Wealth” movement. This month I will consider their views on divine healing as oppose to what the Bible teaches and next month I will close this series out by exposing their twisting of biblical texts concerning God’s will and financial prosperity. But what good is money if you don’t have your health, eh?

It is vitally important for you to understand Discernment Ministries International (DMI) position regarding divine healing. DMI does not doubt that our Lord Jesus Christ still heals His people. Where orthodox Christians diverge from the WOF cult is that we believe that God heals people according to His sovereign good pleasure which is based upon His will for us as individuals. The Lord is the Healer and frankly, it may or may not be within His plan to heal an individual physically. I have often taught that God answers 100% of my prayers (yours too), however, the answers are not always what I want.

There is absolutely nothing wrong or sinful for Christians to pray for physical healing for themselves, family members, friends or others. It is doctrinally correct for the elders of a congregation to anoint the sick with oil and pray for their physical restoration (read James 5:14,15). Our Lord can and does heal through the proper reception of His grace when we come to the altar and celebrate the Lord’s Supper:

Those guilty of unworthy communion through non-discernment of the body and/or failure to examine themselves commit sacrilege against the most holy things, for which reason they are weak or sick or have even died (1 Cor. 11:27-31)…In the Large Catechism Luther confesses the other side of the coin presented by the Apostle in these verses. ‘We must never regard the sacrament as a harmful thing from which we should flee, but as a pure, wholesome, soothing medicine that aids you and gives life in both soul and body. For where the soul is healed, the body is healed as well’ (LCV.68). Positive bodily benefit may accrue, even in this life, to those who worthily (I.e.., contritely and with faith) partake of the Holy Supper. For it may please Almighty God to hold back the progress or even to drive back the depredations of bodily and mental disease through the life-giving body and blood of Him “by [whose] wounds we are healed (Is 53:5c; 1 Pt 2:24) (1)

It is with these texts in mind that we know that our Lord can and does heal His people. DMI is not anti-healing, we are against any teaching which takes something God may graciously do for one of His children and turn that grace into a work wrought by man and thus available to anyone who knows how to work the work, which is essentially what the WOF cult has done.

The WOF Teaching on Divine Healing

The problem with the WOF view of divine healing is that it is based on false premises, shoddy exegesis and is being propagated in many cases by wolves masquerading as genuine Christians. Their belief promises healing to all yet provides healing to none. The only ones who truly benefit from this deadly error are the so-called healing evangelists, all of whom have gotten extremely wealthy from presenting false hopes to the hopeless and desperate. Let’s drive a stake into this particular darkness.

 F.F. Bosworth, an early “healing” evangelist, made the following statement and as you can read Gloria Copeland’s comment echoes Bosworth’s and is now parroted by every WOF SINister on television and in pulpits today:

We see, from almost every conceivable angle throughout the Scripture, that there is no doctrine more clearly taught than it is God’s will to all who have need of healing, and that they may fulfill the number of their days, according to His promise. (2)

The Word of God will establish, without a doubt, that it is God’s will to heal everyone all of the time who will agree with Him. Agreeing with God puts you in a position to receive from God. (3)

There you have it folks, it is God’s will to heal everyone all of the time, end of story. Obviously people who are not healed are (1) out of the will of God for their lives and (2) not in agreement with God. Bosworth moved to Zion, IL a city founded by faith healer John Alexander Dowie (who later claimed he was Elijah returned and died of a stroke). His initial education and training came from his association with Dowie, Parham and E.W. Kenyon. In her healing school tape series Gloria goes on pontificating regarding the condition of the early Church:

In the early Church, they had this revelation. Sickness was no problem to them. They knew how to resist Satan and command disease to leave. They depended on the power of God to put them over in everything. Satan did not control the early Church, the believers kept him under control. (4)

The early Church she is referring to is the Church from its inception to the Dark Ages. The revelation they had was that it was God’s will to always heal people of everything every time. “Sickness was no problem to them.” Oh, really? What does she base that statement on? Paul in 1 Cor. 11 warned the Corinthians about abuses concerning the Lord’s Supper. That due to those abuses many were (1) weak; (2) sickly and (3) some had died. This seems like a bit of a problem to me. If people were not sick then James would not have written about the sick people calling for the church elders. Nothing is written in Acts about the rank and file believer “commanding disease to leave.” Both of Copeland’s statements are unwarranted and in fact, potentially quite dangerous a fact I will address later in this article. This much is certain, at least according to the WOF doctrine— healing is the will of God for all His people.

The fallacy behind their belief is that they teach that physical healing was also obtained for all of God’s children in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. “God heals today because healing is in the atonement.” Tilton is merely quoting Dr. T.J. McCrossan who attempted to write a scholarly apologetic for physical healing in the atonement in his book (read and cited by almost every WOF SINister) Bodily Healing and the Atonement:

Again, all Christians should expect God to heal their bodies today, because Christ died to atone for our sicknesses as well as for our diseases. (6)

Gloria Copeland in her “healing school” echoes this sentiment as well:

When He paid the price for sin, He paid the price for sickness and the chastisement of our peace (mental torment) for us…Forgiveness of sin belongs to you now. Healing of your body belongs to you now. Freedom from mental torment belongs to you now…When Jesus came out of hell, He brought us with Him. We are not bound by sin, sickness or disease anymore. (7)

Some WOF extremists teach that the 39 “stripes” which Jesus was lashed with by the Roman soldiers actually represent categories of disease. Each lash was a disease which is why Peter says that “by His stripes we are healed” (see 1 Peter 2:24).

I continued and said, ‘How many of you believe that Jesus took all our diseases on himself at Calvary? Every one of those 39 stripes he had on his back was a different disease…Can you imagine all the brain damage in the world on him? Can you see all the crippling disease on him? Millions of all kinds of diseases, all on Jesus at one time? (8)

He suffered in our stead because He did not want us to suffer disease. He took our specific diseases and infirmities upon His own sinless, perfect body in complete payment of the penalty of our sin. (9)

The Bible says in Isaiah, that on Calvary He was so disfigured, His body was so bent out of shape, His Spirit was so twisted, that He didn’t even look like a man any more. Sin had crushed Him in His Spirit; sickness and disease had taken hold of His body. He had cancer, tuberculosis, syphilis, gonorrhea, and everything else all at one time. All of this from the whole world, came on Him, and He took everybody’s sickness, everybody’s disease upon His own body. (10)

The obvious error here stems from their belief that Jesus literally became a sinner. He did not bear the penalty for our sin, but He actually became sin. Even so regarding our sicknesses; He was not punished for sickness (which is a result of sin) but actually bore/became literally plagued with all the illnesses of humanity past, present and future during His scourging.

Jesus our Lamb suffered in two ways. He shed His blood on the cross for our salvation from sin, and He bore the stripes on His BODY for our healing from sickness. In the intense spiritual and physical agony of Calvary, which Jesus suffered principally in His spirit…But in the excruciating physical agony of the Praetorium, where Jesus suffered in His BODY from the terrible Roman lash, He bare our sicknesses; for it was there by His stripes that He was made sick for us (Isaiah 53:10), and by His stripes we are healed. (11)

When Jesus bore away our sins, He also bore away our diseases. The cross pronounced a double cure for the ills of mankind. The church of Jesus Christ has been made as free from sickness as it has been made free from sin. A Christian may continue to sin after he has been born again, but he does not have to…A Christian may continue to be sick after he has been born again but he does not have to. He has been redeemed from sickness. The price has been paid for his healing. Sickness can no longer exert dominion over him unless he allows it. (12)

When the Bible talks about suffering, that doesn’t mean ‘sickness.’ We have no business suffering sickness and disease, because Jesus redeemed us from that…Yes, there is suffering, but not sickness and disease. Thank God you don’t have to suffer with that, because Jesus bore our infirmities. (13)

The reason I cited all of the above individuals is to show you (and anyone you may share this with) how widely this error is taught. No one can claim that DMI is setting up a straw man argument. On the contrary, I have in fact only referenced a few examples and could have easily added an additional twenty quotes from our library concerning divine healing.

It is the WOF cult’s contention that divine healing is part-n-parcel of our redemption. I have heard Kenneth Copeland on numerous occasions say that it is as easy to get healed as it is to get saved. It simply requires an individual to use the same force of faith for both. This only shows their ignorance concerning salvation, but since they are at best semi-Pelagian and at worst full blown Pelagians (as was Charles Finney) it is understandable. Let me remind you of what Dr. Martin Luther said regarding salvation in the Third Article on Becoming Holy in his Small Catechism:

A. I believe that I cannot come to my Lord Jesus Christ by my own intelligence or power. But the Holy Spirit call me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, made me holy and kept me in the true faith, just as He calls, gathers together, enlightens and makes holy the whole Church on earth and keeps it with Jesus in the one, true faith. In this Church, He generously forgives each day every sin committed by me and by every believer. On the last day, He will raise me and all the dead from the grave. He will give eternal life to me and to all who believe in Christ. Yes, this is true!

Salvation is not by our own efforts it is by grace alone through faith and the faith to believe in Christ Jesus is a gift from God (read Eph. 2:8). This is in direct opposition to their view where they have the lost man making a decision to receive Christ and in the same manner to make a decision to be healed as well. Yet if salvation is the gift of God and physical healing is indeed included in the atoning death of Christ, then divine healing would have to equally be a gift. Naturally, they do not see it this way. In answering their claim of divine healing being in the atonement I will cite Dr. Crenshaw:

Is there healing in the atonement? Certainly, and in exactly the way Matthew used the Isaiah passage. From Isaiah we learn that Jesus definitively and once for all removed the cause of sickness by atonement in bearing sin. From Matthew we learn that He occasionally removed the effects of sin during His earthly ministry by miracles. We have already seen that He did miracles to demonstrate Who He was, and once this was done, there was no reason to expect them to continue. The purpose had been completed. Since the healing aspect of the Isaiah passage was “fulfilled” in the life of the Lord, why should we look for it to be fulfilled again today? (14)

Christ died because we were sinners in need of redemption, not because we were sick in need of healing. The focus of the atonement is our being made righteous before the Father by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. Crenshaw goes on to say:

The Word of Faith leaders, however, make one of the fruits of His death, healing disease, the essence of the atonement. They miss the whole point of sin, judgment, and Jesus’ death, for God has not charged us with diseases but with sin, with disobedience to His moral laws. Diseases are the result of sin, not the sin itself, and Jesus bore our sin, not the result…While in this life though, we shall always have some sin and thus some sickness. It is only when we are glorified that we shall no longer sin (1 John 3:2). Just as we do not expect sinlessness in this life, neither should we expect perfect health.

One day we shall be sinless and free of sickness, and one day the curse from the earth shall be removed, all as a result of the atonement, but not now. (15)

In the April, 2005 edition of Truth Matters the article dealt with the WOF heresy concerning the atonement of Jesus and it is obvious to any genuine Christian that the leaders of this cult are totally ignorant of the biblical Jesus and the biblical account of His death for us on the cross. So it is no wonder they are equally confused regarding healing and the atonement. They all teach that sickness comes from Satan, they do not teach that we live in a fallen world, thusly much of our woes stem from this fact. They give far too much credit to Satan while ignoring texts such as—

For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day. For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; 2 Cor. 4:16,17

If one reads the prior verses and the following ones the meaning becomes clear. Our body is dying, yet spiritually we are growing daily by the grace of God. The WOF leaders and their followers are dying physically daily, as are we all. Those who propagate faith healing ministries are no less prone to disease than anyone else in the Body of Christ.

The danger of this specific error is that those who hear these leaders actually believe what they proclaim and follow their so-called spiritual laws and principles often at the cost of their own lives. Meanwhile, the faith healers keep their own physical ailments out of the spotlight as long as possible and when they are sick they make use of the best medical facilities money can buy.

How Do We Tap Into God’s Healing Power?

(All you Need is Faith, Everybody Now, All You Need is Faith)   (16)

 This is really the $64,000 question the WOF pundits claim to have the answer to. But first allow me to give you a short history lesson. Prior to the formation of this cult (17) belief in faith healing was around for many years. Individuals traveled under the aegis of “healing evangelists.” Some of the more notable characters include: John Alexander Dowie, John G. Lake, and Aimee Semple McPherson. These and other people laid the foundation for the so-called “healing revival” of Post World War II. The healers of the late 40’s and 50’s took their cues from the healers which proceeded them. In the Post War days healing evangelists roved the nation. Names like William Branham, Oral Roberts, A.A. Allen, Jack Coe, T.L. Osborn, O.L. Jaggers and Franklin Hall were (and are) commonplace in Pentecostalism and the early Charismatic renewal movement. There was extreme competition (18) among these healers and each one claimed a stronger “anointing” or more dramatic miracles in their meetings. From Dowie up to the present day those seeking divine healing were led to believe that they needed to be in the presence of the man or women especially anointed by God to heal the sick. These charlatans (as history has proven) usually laid hands upon the sick and commanded evil spirits (the cause of sickness they claimed) to leave the infirmed. All of these former faith healers obtained both fame and great fortunes from those in need.

Due to the tremendous wealth which these fake-healers accumulated it caused many others to take their place when death or exposure ended their time in the spotlight. Today we have a host of individuals who teach that Christians need to come to them specifically for healing, that they (the healers) are the mediators of God’s power for those who will but “believe.” People such as Oral Roberts, Kathryn Kuhlman (deceased), Benny Hinn, R.W. Schambach, Leroy Jenkins, Peter Popoff, Robert Tilton, W.V. Grant Jr., Jim Whittington, Don Stewart and other healing evangelists can be seen regularly on television. Hagin and his clones took a different and less risky route then the healing evangelists. It was the WOF cult that began to write and teach about divine healing apart from needing to go to the big tent, traveling healing revivalists which have dotted the spiritual landscape. Divine healing began to become codified into a guarantee from God if people simply applied the correct spiritual laws or principles.

During the great healing revival, evangelists would hold short meetings, and I’d come along behind them with longer meetings. By the time I got there, I often found people who had been healed in those meetings already had lost their healing. This happened in my meetings, too, but I learned how to get them healed and keep them healed. (19)

Even though Hagin attempted to lump himself in with the “big” healing revivalist he never was seen as one of them. In fact, Hagin is not known for even having a divine healing ministry per se. Hagin would show up after the “big-boys” had left town and hold smaller meetings in which he would pray for those who had lost their healing and teach the attendees how to receive divine healing. The important point to remember is that Hagin states he ’learned how to get them healed and keep them healed.” In essence he is saying that he is really more powerful than the huge tent revivalists in that he had the needed revelation of how one can remain healed. Before considering how to keep divine healing, let’s get down to brass tacks and see what is taught on how to receive it in the first place!

Faith healing is exactly what it says it is: you are healed by faith, and you keep your healing by faith…Miracles and healing happen through faith: so if it happens through faith, then we need to find out about faith. (20)

Everything within the WOF cult is predicated by their concept of faith, (21) which as we studied last month does not mean a believer’s simple reliance and trust in God, the object of our faith as revealed in the Holy Scriptures. To these people faith is a mystical force which when properly use according to set spiritual laws will create and change spiritual and physical reality, including physical health and healing. So the initial piece to the healing puzzle is that people receive healing by releasing the force of faith within them for healing.

Your faith will cause the power of God to be manifested in your life. His power is always present. It will do what you need it to do. (22)

Notice how depersonalized Copeland’s statement is; “your faith will cause….it will do what you need it to do.” God’s power is separated from Himself (something the Bible does not teach). The power of our faith, i.e. our ability to conceive in our spirits what we desire will cause this power to be activated. God’s power is at our command and is only limited by the strength of our faith. If a person believes this way about God and faith, then when they fail to receive their healing by “faith” it can have some very dire implications for that individual, or their families.

“If Christ is our Passover lamb, His blood was most assuredly shed to save us from the wrath of God through the forgiveness of our sins, and His flesh was bruised and broken for our physical benefits.’ The logical conclusion to such reasoning is that if one gets sick, he really has not had his sins forgiven. To evade this logic, they make a distinction between forgiveness and healing, which is the Gnostic dualism… (23)

The Copelands assert that the faith that saves is the same faith that heals. It is only logical to believe if one is not healed, then one must not be saved either. Admittedly, the WOF cult does not make this distinction, but then logic is not their strong suit.

Let’s consider just a few of the biblical examples of people who received divine healing from God apart from exercising faith on their part. How do they explain the FACT that ten lepers were healed by Jesus, yet only ONE had faith (read Luke 17:12-19). How much faith did Lazarus exercise when Jesus raised him from the dead, death after all is a permanent result of sin & sickness (read the crippled beggar in Acts 3:3-8 ? The cripple asked for money, Peter and John had none, instead the man got physically healed, something he obviously did not believe for! I could mention the case where Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law in Mark 1:31. Nothing is mentioned of her faith in Christ, yet Jesus healed her. Most of you are familiar with the case of the man who was born blind. Jesus healed him and in this case the man had faith in Jesus AFTER he was healed, not before (read John 4:16).

Failure to Receive Divine Healing

All failure to receive the promised blessings falls squarely on the shoulders of the individual believer. It is never the fault of the healer. In closing I will cite seven of the most common excuses used to attempt to explain away the lack of success in the healing business. Space does not permit me to give direct citations, but I will list works which detail what I am sharing in the end notes. (24)

#1. The individual only had head knowledge of God’s will for healing and not a revelation from the Spirit to their spirit. The individual only had mental assent, which will not heal anyone. Remember the only way you can know if you have a spirit versus soul revelation is by the manifestation of what you have believed for.

#2. Hidden sin in a person’s life can block the flow of divine healing. Naturally this excuse does not explain why God allegedly heals unbelievers and admitted sinners in healing revivals. This mystery is attested to by Kuhlman and Hinn.

#3. A lack of tithing (off the gross vs. the net) will open the door for demonic attack. God will rebuke the devourer (I.e. Satan & demons in the WOF cult) on the behalf of the faithful tither (read Mal. 3:11). This is a frequently twisted text used by SINisters to bilk money from God’s gullible and often desperate sheep.

#4. A lack of knowledge concerning divine healing is a major cause of sickness in the Church. After all, doesn’t the Bible teach us that “My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge” in Hosea 4:6? How can one exercise faith for healing when one does not know it is God’s will to heal them?

#5. Sicknesses that come form unknown causes. This is a major source of confusion and depression among WOF cultists. Marilyn Hickey is well known for teaching that “the curse causeless shall not come” from Proverbs 26:2. So when sickness attacks the WOF devotee they immediately begin to search their lives and see if thee is any hidden sin, lack of giving or strife with others. There is always a cause for sickness and its root is to be found in Satan and the believer who has left the door open for him to attack them.

#6. An attack from Satan to hold back God’s plan. This excuse is usually reserved for the leaders in the movement itself. If the sheep get a disease, then it is obviously their fault in some way. If a leader gets a disease it is an attack from the Enemy to hinder the expansion of the Kingdom of God. For example, when Jan Crouch gets cancer it is because Satan wanted to stop her from giving donated toys to poor children in Haiti.

#7. The individual was healed, but lost their healing. This is a common excuse favored by the healing evangelists. They claim people were healed in their meetings and when they die later on, it is because they “lost” their healing. This is why so many books have been written on how to Keep your healing.

When you read the books published by individuals cited in this article do not be deceived by the testimonies they share. No information is ever given that will enable the reader to verify the claims being made. Anyone can write “ten people, born blind were healed in my Calcutta crusade’ or “Mrs. M. wrote us and said that after she sent in her last $100 God delivered her completely from the demon of stomach cancer.” Also, realize that the level of sickness and disease is as high, if not actually higher among the WOF leaders. The rate of cancer among their international leadership and their families is off the scale. One would expect to see a large (and growing larger) group of extremely healthy individuals and yet they are no better off than anyone else in the Church.

They promise much but they deliver nothing but false hopes and empty promises. I believe Jude must have know people like this in his day:

Woe unto them! For they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. Jude 1:11-13 ¨ ♦

Copyright © 2005  Robert S. Liichow

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Kenneth Copeland (*But were Afraid to Ask)  By Rev. Robert S. Liichow

This Booklet is Only  Available from DMI – $15.00

End Notes

1. Stephenson, John R. The Lord’s Supper (Northville, SD: The Luther Academy), 2003 p. 200. Bold type added for emphasis.

2. God’s Word for Your Healing (Tulsa, Ok: Harrison House) 1993, p. 9 This comment is attributed to F.F. Bosworth by the unknown author of this book. F.F. Bosworth is best known today for his book Christ the Healer. The following comments were obtained from http://www.christianheroes.com/ev/ev014.asp: “Little is known of the early life of F.F. Bosworth. His family moved to Zion city whilst he was young and both he and his brother BB were to become preachers. FF Bosworth strongly influenced many of the early healing evangelists. This list includes Oral Roberts, T.L. Osborn, J.G. Lake and many others. His book ‘Christ the Healer is a tremendous book on the principles of healing through the finished work of Christ on the cross at Calvary. Bosworth worked with John Alexander Dowie for a number of years before starting his own healing ministry. Bosworth embraced Pentecostalism as a result of being influenced by Charles Parham in 1906. Bosworth was also influenced by E.W. Kenyon and his teachings on divine healing…In 1948Bosworth met William Branham. Bosworth supported Branham until his death. (Bosworth’s) in 1958” The underlining and bold type has been added.

3. Copeland, Gloria, Healing School (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries), 1988, p. 5.

4. Ibid. p. 10

5. Tilton, Robert How to Receive & Keep Your Healing (Dallas, TX: Robert Tilton Ministries) 1987, p. 22 bold type added.

6. McCrossan, T.J. Bodily Healing and the Atonement (Tulsa, OK. Rhema Bible Church). 1982 p. 10.

7. Copeland, Gloria, Healing School (Fort Worth, TX; Kenneth Copeland Ministries 1988 pp. 28,29,30

8. Hunter, Charles and Francis, How to Heal the Sick, Kingwood, TX: Hunter Books), 1981, 9.85.

8. Roberts, Oral How I know God Wants to Heal You, (Tulsa, OK ; Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association) 1970 p. 3 Underlining added.

9. Price, Frederick K. Is Healing For All, (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House) 1976, p. 119. Underlining added.

10. Osborn, T.L. Healing the Sick and Casting Out Devils, (Tulsa, OK; The voice of Faith Ministry), 1950, pp. 179, 180.

11. Copeland, Gloria, God’s Will For Your Healing, (Fort Worth, TX; Kenneth Copeland Ministries) 1972, p. 30

12. Hagin Kenneth E. Must Christians Suffer?, (Tulsa, OK Kenneth Hagin Ministries). 1990 pp. 2, 41.

13. Crenshaw, Curtis, Man As God The Word of Faith Movement (Memphis, TN; Footstool Publications), 1994 p. 139

14. Ibid p. 133

15. Hum this to yourself using the Beatles tune ‘All you need is Love”

In saying ‘formation’ I am referring to the establishment of actual Word of Faith congregations. This did not really begin to occur until Kenneth Hagin had graduated his first class from Rhema Bible Training Center outside of Tulsa, OK. In the late 1940’s up to this day there have been many formerly Pentecostal congregations which separated themselves from their denominations and became independent charismatic churches, many of which began to teach WOF concepts as they became popular. One of the largest and most enduring WOF “denominations” was started by Buddy Harrison, Hagin’s son-in-law called Faith Christian Fellowship which has 100’s of congregations throughout America and overseas.

16. For many years there was an ongoing “battle” between A.A. Allen and Jack Coe over who had the largest healing revival tent. Branham claimed to see an angel feel demons in his right hand, Roberts said God had anointed his right hand with healing power. Jack Coe would inflate the results of his meetings and make outlandish claims. Each healer tried to find a “nitch” market among the sick seekers.

17. Hagin, Kenneth, How to Keep Your Healing (Tulsa, OK. Kenneth Hagin Ministries). 1989, p. 19

18. Tilton, Robert, How To Receive & Keep Your Healing, (Dallas, TX: Robert Tilton Ministries ) 1987, p. 18 Underlining added.

In Last month’s Truth Matters (May 2005) I delved into the WOF concept regarding faith and it would be redundant to devote much space re-explaining it in this issue.

19. Copeland, Gloria, Healing School (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries) 1988 p. 4 underlining added.

20 Crenshaw, Curtis, Man As God The Word of Faith Movement (Memphis, TN. Footstool Publication) 1994 p. 143. In the beginning of this citation Crenshaw is quoting from McCrossan’s book on healing and the atonement. Bold type added.

21. Here are some titles which cover these excuses and many others: T.L. Osborn. One Hundred Divine Healing Facts; Gordon Lindsey Twenty-Five Objections to divine healing and Bible answers; K. Neill Foster Twenty-three Reasons Why Some Are Not Healed.

22. I have mentioned in many previous articles and on our website the fact that the rate of cancer among WOF leaders and their families far exceeds that of other international Christian leaders and their families.

Truth Matters Newsletter – February 2005 – Vol. 10 Issue 2 – Sacred Cow Number One – Jesus Was Very Wealthy – by Rev. Robert S. Liichow

Discernment Ministries International

Sacred Cow Number OneJesus Was Very Wealthy

Over the next several months the Lord willing, DMI will be writing a series of articles designed to kick over several sacred cows within Charismania. (1) The term “sacred cow” has its origin from Hinduism where the cow is viewed as a sacred animal. (2)   Today it is an idiomatic term for a cherished idea that cannot be questioned or negated. One such major “sacred cow” is the doctrine that our Lord Jesus Christ was extremely wealthy. This false doctrine is accepted and taught by every major Word of Faith (WOF) teacher and televangelist.

The conviction that Jesus was very rich is not an ancillary teaching it is a central core dogma for literally hundreds of thousands of professing Christians. It is so central a concept that when it is demolished many other teachings can no longer be supported, which is why it qualifies as a sacred cow for many sign-gift extremists. After all, if Jesus was not wealthy then the rest of the various teachings on prosperity fall down like a house of card.

Through my research I cannot unequivocally say who originally came up with the wealthy Jesus idea, but it does seem to have taken root during the so-called “Healing Revival” of Post World War II. Earlier divine healers were well known for their personal wealth and riches. Aimee Semple McPherson was know for her opulent lifestyle. (3)   I personally remember Lester Sumrall commenting on how John Alexander Dowie used to have tubs of money and lived very well in his city, Zion, Illinois.

When the new batch of healers came around after WWII it seems they took their financial cues from those “giants” upon whose shoulders they humbly stood. Healers such as A.A. Alan, Jack Coe, Oral Roberts, T.L. Osborn, William Branham were wealthy people. Those who followed them in the early 1960’s to this day such as Kathryn Kuhlman, R.. Schambach, Benny Hinn, W.V. Grant, Peter Popoff and Robert Tilton  are (or were in the case of Kuhlman who is dead) extremely wealthy individuals. Not to mention a host of WOF teachers, as opposed to those claiming healing ministries. These people too are extremely wealthy and openly display their wealth. This list would include people such as: Paul and Jan Crouch, T.D. Jakes, Leroy Tomkins, Ken & Gloria Copeland, Jesse Duplantis, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyer, Fred Price, Jerry Savelle, Norvel Hayes, John Avanzini, etc.

Where Did the Doctrine of Wealthy Jesus Come From?

I believe this false teaching came about by necessity. Somehow, these phenomenally wealthy individuals who claim to be serving Christ and His sheep had to create some form of “biblical” support for their lavish lifestyle. Ergo, the teaching that Jesus and His disciples were wealthy developed.

Once the fake-healers and false teachers could show their followers, who by-in-large were and are biblical fundamentalists, a Wealthy Jesus by twisting biblical texts, then they could explain away their wealth as a natural by-product of following the Savior! As a result of creating a wealthy Jesus an entirely new, formerly untapped vein of revenue could now be mined by these unscrupulous preachers and what is commonly called the “Prosperity Gospel” was invented. (4)

The concept that Jesus was rich and that God wants you to be rich too,  proved to be so popular every sign-gift healer/preacher/teacher/pastor has written books on the topic. Here are a few  examples from the DMI archives: Attach You Lack by Oral Roberts; Financial Prosperity by Elbert Willis; The Blessing of Obedience by Norvel Hayes; Dare to Be A Success by Robert Tilton; The Power to Create Wealth by Robert Tilton; Sowing In Famine by Jerry Savelle; God’s Answer to Insufficient Funds by Rod Parsley; The Laws of Prosperity by Kenneth Copeland; God’s Debt Free Guarantee by John Avanzini; It’s Not Working Brother John by John Avanzizi; The Miracle of Seed Faith by Oral Roberts; Lifestyles of the Rich and Faithful by Fred Price.

How They Biblically “Prove” Jesus Was Rich

As the old saying goes “the best defense is a good offense” which is just what Mr. Avanzizi attempts to do in his attempt to counter the genuine version of the biblical Jesus when he stated:

“I don’t now where these goofy traditions creep in at, but one of the goofiest ones is that Jesus and His disciples were poor. Now there’s no Bible to substantiate that. (5) Let me explain from memory and my background as a former Word of Faith Pastor/Teacher how I was taught that Jesus and His followers were rich.

His Birth

We have to start with the birth of Jesus. Remember the wise men that came to worship Him and they brought Him gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh (see Matt. 2:11) ? Forget the Christmas card images, there were not just three wise men, but a whole caravan and they brought a tremendous amount of riches with them that they gave to Jesus. Joseph was a carpenter. What we’d called a “skilled tradesman” today. He had enough money to buy a house and establish a carpentry business for two years before Herod sought to kill Jesus. Vs. 11 clearly says they were in a “house” not in the manger by the time the wise men got there. Obviously Jesus came from a fairly well off family. The only reason He was born in a manger was because Joseph could not rent a room, not because he could not afford one! When the angel appeared and warned Joseph to take his family and flee to Egypt until Jesus returned after Herod’s death many years later. After that point Jesus took up the profitable trade of being a carpenter like Joseph. Jesus was rich from His very birth, given heaps of gold and extremely valuable incense. What is more, Jesus learned a valuable trade, carpentry (ever see how much a carpenter makes per hour these days?) and He worked at this trade for several years. What do you think Jesus did with the money He made from selling His works? He tithed, gave and God blessed Him for it! “

www@simpletruths.net

Keep in mind that 99.9% of what I am writing above is a pure reading into the text The facts are 1) we do not know how many wise men came to worship Jesus, any number given is pure speculation which has no place in biblical doctrine. 2) Nor do we know the amount of treasure they gave the Christ child. 3) We have little background on Joseph apart from his genealogy (see Matt.1:1) and we know Joseph was a carpenter. 4) There is nothing that says they lived off the treasure given to them while in Egypt. 5). Yet Jesus was viewed by others as the carpenter’s son (see Matt 13:55).  In that time it was traditional for sons to follow their father’s trade, so I will accept that Jesus did probably work as a carpenter for some period of time. However, to equate what carpenter’s were paid in Jesus’ day with what a “union” carpenter makes per hour today is the height of folly. 6) Jesus fulfilled every aspect of God’s law which would have included tithing, but that does not equate with being materially wealthy. (6)

His Ministry

Jesus began His official ministry after being baptized by John, coming out of the wilderness in the power of the Holy Spirit and choosing 12 disciples. In order for Him to do all this He had to have money, and a great deal of it. Elbert Willis (7) states the WOF view very specifically in the following citation:

Many people say, ‘Well, Jesus didn’t have prosperity. He didn’t have any money. He had twelve disciples and seventy others with Him. They were not working, but they were serving Him. That equate eighty-three men. And their families? Have you ever heard a pauper having a treasure? Do you have so much money that you need a treasurer to keep up with it? (8)

To begin with the Bible does not say that Jesus was a “pauper” nor does it say He had so much money that He covered all the living expenses of eighty-three men and their families. The Bible mentions nothing about Jesus financially providing for these men’s families. The families of these chosen disciples continued to work as they had before one of their sons was called to follow the Master. Then Elbert makes mention, as do all prosperity preachers, about the fact that Jesus had a “treasurer.” Here is a statement by the grandfather of greed, Oral Roberts:

Second, we know Jesus was not poor because He needed to have a treasurer. According to John 13:29, a disciple by the name of Judas Iscariot was Jesus’ treasurer. Now a treasurer is needed by a person who must deal with large sums of money that have to be accounted for, write checks, make purchases and pay bills, taxes and debts. You ask, “Did Jesus have that kind of money? Yes, or He wouldn’t have needed a treasurer. He had so much that later Judas stole from the treasury.   (9)

The problem with their concept stems around their reading more into the word “treasurer” than should be, it is an exegetical error on their part. They carry today’s concept and read it back into the text. They had no paper currency in those days, they had coins. It is hard to imagine that Jesus was so wealthy that Judas alone could have lugged around a very heavy bag of gold, silver and copper coins all day long (gold is rather heavy, or so I am told). All that is meant by the passage is that Jesus had appointed Judas to be in charge of whatever money they had. The Greek word for “bag” , which according to strong’s Concordance is defined as “a small box for other uses, a purse to keep money in”. (10) Hardly the impression today’s prosperity preachers give their followers. They like to make such a big deal out of the fact that Judas carried the money bag that Mr. Copeland gives the following “revelation” concerning Judas and the purse:

Jesus knew the spiritual law of giving and He operated it proficiently. He gave to the poor at such an astonishing rate that when Judas left the room during the Last Supper, some people thought that he must be going to give to the poor. Do you want a hundredfold return on your money? Give and let God multiply it back to you. No bank in the world offers this kind of return! Praise the Lord!”

It is beyond the scope of this article to deal with the WOF doctrine of spiritual laws, (prosperity is just one of them) but there is nothing stated in the Gospels that our Lord manipulated spiritual laws of any sort. I am sure that our Lord gave to the poor, but there is nothing that says that “He gave to the poor as such as astonishing rate” because if this were the case, then according to Copeland Jesus would have received 100 times back on every denarii’ He gave away. As an aside: if this spiritual law is biblical then why aren’t more televangelists giving money away at an astonishing rate. The only thing that is astonishing is that people are so biblically dull that they give millions to these shysters who keep far far more than they ever give away!

His Clothing

Jesus wore designer clothing. Naturally one must realize that Jesus as a man who fulfilled the Law walked in the blessings of Abraham (see Deut. 28:1-14) would only wear the best clothing available.

John 19:23 says “He had a seamless robe’ Roman soldiers gambled for it at the foot of the cross. It was a designer original. It was valuabe enough for them to want it…And then there are Christians that have a poverty complex that says “Well, I feel guilty about having nice things.’ Jesus didn’t. (12)

I’m telling you, Jesus wasn’t poor, and He didn’t wear no rags, either. Like we march in on these Easter little plays that we do at our church, with those raggedly sheets on. Jesus didn’t have no rags on.  He wore designer clothes, honey! (13) uniquely made and different from the ordinary. But Jesus clothes were even better than that. (14)

That is all Jesus said to them is, ’Come follow me and I’ll make you fishers of men’ They went ’Wooo right!’ And they followed him! Why? The boy was dressed in  an Armani Suit! He was wearing Berlini shoes!  Come on now! Why do we know that? Because He hung on the cross at Calvary they gambled for His clothes. They tossed dice for His underwear! You think anybody here would gamble for your underwear [Laughs]? You could have some pretty fine DNKY underwear, but you ain’t got anything that I’m gambling for [Laughs]! He was dressed fine! The rich will always follow the rich. The poor will follow the rich. But the rich will never follow the poor! So, how do we get these strange notions and these strange attitudes? Where does that come from except religious attitudes that kept the body of Christ poor! Amen? (15)

The above statements would be humorous (and such teachings are usually delivered in such a fashion to the devotees) if it were not so blatantly false and misleading. This concept is mouthed by every WOF preacher and televangelist.

Because Jesus wore the best, than that gives them license to wear Armani suits and spend over $1,000+ on a pair of shoes. In fact, Bishop T.D. Jakes buys his shoes in Detroit from another Bishop who owns a very upscale haberdashery. My wife and I personally witnessed Robert Tilton raise over $1,000 for a pastor so he could go and buy some “decent shoes to preach in.”

His Message

“Not only did Jesus come from a wealthy family and He no doubt was a member of the Galilean Amalgamated Carpenters Union, but He wore only the best clothes and much of what he taught centered around financial prosperity. I realize this may be new insights to many of you but hear the revelation knowledge from today’s anointed:

“The very first thing on Jesus’ agenda was to get rid of poverty! Would you like to know why some people, including ministries, never get out of poverty? Its not because they aren’t smart. Its because they don’t have windows of opportunity. It because they’re not anointed. If you’re not anointed, poverty will follow you all the days of your life. His first objective was to get rid of poverty. (16)

What Duplantis is referring to is the first message Jesus preached in Luke 4:18: “The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor… Jesse goes on to say that the Gospel message to the poor is that they do not have to be financially poor any longer. He and others teach that Jesus was not addressing spiritual poverty, but financial lack. What is good news to a poor person? That they can become rich! Jesse goes as far as to say that Jesus was more interested in preaching financial prosperity than opening the eyes of the blind because He mentions it first in His message!

Markus Bishop in his book, Our Covenant of Prosperity in the section entitled “Jesus Came To Reverse the Curse” writes this about the same text:

“Not only has God anointed Jesus, but He has appointed Him. He had commissioned and commanded Him to preach the Gospel, the Good News, to the poor. And Jesus wasn’t talking here about the ‘poor in spirit.” He was talking about preaching the Good News to those who were experiencing financial difficulty, poverty and lack. He was saying, ‘God has sent Me to preach the Good News to the poor.’ What is ‘good news’ to the poor? That they would be redeemed from financial poverty. (17)

All of the prosperity pimps twist this verse and make the central theme of the Gospel message of Christ redemption from the “curse” of poverty. There is not one reputable theologian, commentary writer or scholar who agrees with their aberrant abuse of the text. John Gill’s and Mathew Henry’s commentary say the following regarding Luke 4:18:

because he hath anointed me; or “that he might anoint me”; the Ethiopic version renders it, “by whom he hath anointed me”, for it was with the Holy Ghost he was anointed, as to be king and priest, so likewise to be a prophet: hence he has the name Messiah, which signifies anointed: and this unction he had, in order to preach the Gospel to the poor: in Isaiah it is, “to the meek”, which design the same persons, and mean such as are poor in spirit, and are sensible of their spiritual poverty; have low and humble thoughts of themselves, and of their own righteousness; and seek to Christ for durable riches and true righteousness, and frankly acknowledge that all they have and are, is owing to the grace of God: and generally speaking, these are the poor of this world, and poor in their intellectuals, who have but a small degree of natural wisdom and knowledge: to these the Gospel, or glad tidings of the love, grace, and mercy of God in Christ, of peace, pardon, righteousness, life and salvation by Christ, wre preached by him, and that in so clear a manner. (18)

Thirdly,  What his work was. He was qualified and commissioned, 1. To be a geat prophet. He was now entering upon Observe, (1) To whom he was to preach; to the poor; to those that were poor in the world, whom the Jewish doctors disdained to undertake the teaching of and spoke of with contempt; to those that were poor in spirit, to the need and humble, and to those that were truly sorrowful for sin; to them the gospel and the grace of it will be welcome, and they shall have it, Mt. 11:15   (19)

No commentary I researched agrees with the interpretation given by WOF movements’ sinisters. (20)  If Jesus’ message was really one of how to become financially wealthy why did He proclaim that “blessed are the poor in spirit because theirs is the kingdom of God” in Matthew 26:11? How could there be any poverty when Jesus fully preached the Gospel and equipped His ministry term to go out and do likewise?

I can imagine my conversation with Mr. Copeland regarding prosperity. It might go something like this: “Well, Mr. Heresy-hunter” how do you explain the encounter Jesus had with the rich, not poor, but RICH young ruler?” I’ll first allow Mr. Copeland to give us his insights:

“Whenever I read something that seem contradictory to this, I immediately stop and straighten my thinking. The truth is hidden in some way and I rely on the Holy Spirit to reveal it to me…Here is how the Lord revealed the truth to me: As I read Mark 10:20, And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed FROM MY YOUTH, the Lord spoke to me and said, “See this is why he was rich”….When the rich young ruler walked away, Jesus said; ‘How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!’ Then an interesting thing happened. The next verse says, ‘And the disciples were astonished at his words.’ We have taken it for granted that Jesus and His disciples didn’t have anything. But the Bible describes Peter, James, and John as professional fisherman. They owned more than one boat and they had household servants! When Jesus spoke those words, it shook them. (21)

According to Copeland “this was the biggest financial deal that young man had ever been offered, but he walked away from it because he didn’t know God’s system of finances.  (22)   In Copeland’s warped mind Jesus was really offering this man 100 times what he currently was worth. Copeland even says that Jesus was offering this man apostleship, but the man missed it because he had many possessions. Please do not lose sight of the fact that Copland claims to have obtained his insight into this text by divine personal revelation from the Holy Spirit.

If one takes time to read the entire discourse the true meaning becomes very plain. Jesus exposed where this man’s heart was. He loved his possessions more than Jesus. Hew was unwilling to part with them and he certainly was not willing to take up his cross and follow Jesus to be crucified.

This is why Jesus goes on to make the following comment: Mark 10:23 “And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the Kingdom of God!”  He repeats Himself in the next verse by saying”…how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the Kingdom of God!”   To make His point even stronger in vs. 25 over Master says “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God.”

His disciples were astonished because in those days being wealthy was a sign of God’s approval and blessing and if the rich could not make it in, even one, like the rich young ruler who seemed to keep the Law, then what hope did they have?

In and of themselves they had no hope of salvation. Their wealth (or lack thereof), and their attempts at keeping all of God’s law perfectly would not grant them entrance into the kingdom of God. Jesus knowing their anxiety and concern tells them simply in vs. 27 “And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men [it is] impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.” Man cannot save himself, but with God all things are possible even the salvation of the rich! The rest of the chapter leads into the 100-fold nonsense commonly twisted by Copeland and others to mean if you give $10 then God will give you back $1,000 (talk about voodoo economics!).

The 12 Were Rich

You don’t think that Jesus would choose 12 poor men to be His representatives do you? What kind of kingdom ambassadors would penniless beggars be? Also, why would 12 rich men follow some poor guy? No, Jesus chose 12 highly successful businessmen, sort of the prototypical “Full Gospel Businessmen’s Association.” Think about it for a moment, Matthew was a tax collector, sort of like being a CPA today, a man use to handling large sums of money. Copeland just informed us that Peter, James and John were professional fishermen with several boats. Although nothing is ever actually stated about the personal wealth of any of the original 12 in the biblical text, that does not matter to these men because it bolsters their false teachings on personal financial wealth.

In summary we now understand according to the prosperity preachers that Jesus was born into a well to do family, was given a huge amount of treasure by a large caravan of wise men, that He was a professional carpenter and that he wore only the finest clothing. We see that His main message was how to break the curse of poverty off of poor people. Lastly, we also have learned that His original followers, hand-picked by Jesus, were also wealthy businessmen of various types.

This is the Rich Jesus which is presented on a regular basis on Christian television and radio. This is the version of Jesus taught about in national and international crusades, in hundreds of books, audio and video tapes series by men and women who hold sway over the spiritual lives of literally millions of professing Christians. Now, let’s consider what the Bible actually shows us concerning the biblical Jesus.

We must always have “sola Scriptura” as the overriding principle of our spiritual understanding. Everything we know for certain is found within the Bible. Any other non-biblical source is not to be considered authoritative and where the Bible is silent we too had best keep silent or at least be honest enough to admit that we have wandered into the realm of speculation, which at times may even seem to be logical, but it is still speculation, and non-authoritative. The vast majority of what the so-called prosperity preachers proclaim is either speculative in nature, outright invention or a twisting of the biblical texts they cite.

His Birth

We know little of Joseph and his family other than he came from Nazareth up to Jerusalem for the census and to pay his taxes. The fact he paid taxes does not mean he was wealthy, poor people to this day (including yours truly) pay taxes. What it does mean is that Joseph was an honest man and obeyed both God and the civil authorities.

We are not told of how much wealth/treasure the wise men gave to Jesus and his family. Nor do we know how many of them came to worship the Christ child. They were a small enough group to effectively slip away from King Herod’s grasp (see Mat.2:12). In the next verse we are told that the angel of the Lord told Joseph to take his family to Egypt. They stayed there until Herod died, which many commentators say was approximately two years after he slaughtered the children. We have no idea where in Egypt Jesus and His family went.

From historical records we do know something of the carpentry business of that day and even a bit about the area Jesus grew up in from archeology. Carpenters were not the highly paid “skilled craftsmen” in the same vein as our union member carpenters are today. To make such comparisons is sheer folly.

Archeological excavations of Nazareth from the 1950’s show the village of Jesus’ day were occupied by poor agricultural people. As Jesus grew up he worked in the trade of a carpenter not a trade know for its wealth. How did Jesus become rich with a step-dad who was only a carpenter? There is absolutely no indication anywhere that he was wealthy from his family or from traveling with His disciples. By the way, He took no tithes. (23)

Nothing in the biblical record states that Joseph was wealthy, or that they became wealthy from the gifts given to them by the wise men. Nothing is stated about Joseph having a thriving carpentry business which was profitable or that Jesus became wealthy as a carpenter.

His Ministry

Above I cited a quote from Elbert Willis who would have us believe that Jesus was so wealthy that He supported eighty-three (83) men and their family for the duration of His ministry! Nothing in the bible even remotely suggests this. It is pure fabrication on Elbert’s part to bolster his other teachings on why it is God’s will for the rest of His children to be wealthy like Jesus was. Read what Jesus had to say concerning His cousin John:

And when the messengers of John were departed, he began to speak unto the people concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A reed shaken with the wind? But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously appareled, and live delicately, are in kings’ courts. But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more than a prophet. Luke 7:24-25

Doesn’t it strike you as more than a bit strange, in light of prosperity teachings, that John the cousin of Jesus would be poor? Yet by all accounts he was at best an ascetic. Didn’t Jesus give to the poor “at an astonishing rate” as Mr. Copeland teaches? The Bible says in Mark 1:6   And John was clothed with camel’s hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loins; and he did eat locusts and wild honey…”  This is hardly a prophetic picture of someone “wearing the best, eating the best and driving the best.”  Let’s very briefly consider the picture of the servants of God by the author of the book of Hebrews:

And what shall I more say? For the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and [of] Barak, and [of] Samson, and [of] Jephthae [of] David also, and Samuel, and [of] the prophets: Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to fight the armies of the aliens. Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: And others had trial of [cruel] mockings and scourging, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; (Of whom the world was not worthy: ) they wandered in desserts, and [in] mountains, and [in] dens and caves of the earth. And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: Hebrews 11:32-39   (24)

Here is the famous “hall of faith” and in reading it what do we see? That the true servants of God were mocked; scourged, imprisoned; stoned (with real rocks); cut in half; killed by the sword; and they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins {a far cry from Armani and Gucchi}. We read what God’s opinion was — “of such the world was not worthy.” These prophets were destitute, afflicted and tormented. How is this possible with the scenario that the Gospel “pimps” have put forward? If anyone walked in covenant with God it had to be these O.T. believers. Yet, what was their reward? Far from blessing, it seemed that all the weight and curse of sinful mankind fell upon them. Any in-depth study of the Hebrew and Greek will demonstrate that these faithful servants of God were anything but operating in the “blessings” of Abraham!

Regarding His ministry if Jesus taught the “100-fold” return on one’s giving as is alleged by the opines of opulence then why do they restrict the flow to 100 times ones financial giving?  Our Lord mentioned families, houses, and lands (see Mark 10:30) in the same text, PLUS persecutions. These aspects of Jesus’ teaching they blithely skip over.

In Mark 15:41 we read that women followed Jesus and “ministered” to Him, in the Greek the word is from which we get our term deacon of deaconess. Robertson gives more grammatical insights regarding their ministry to our Lord:

Followed him and ministered unto him. Two imperfects describing the long Galilean ministry of these three women and many other women in Galilee (Lu 8:1-3) who came up with him to Jerusalem. (25)

Jesus had material support from these women and others who followed Him, He was not “supporting” His disciples and their families. What about His teaching concerning wealth and poverty? Let the Master answer for Himself:

Blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:3  Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest; go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me Mark 10:21. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind: And thou shalt be blessed: for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just. Luke 14:13,14

Jesus did teach about giving and living sacrificially for the sake of others. He never taught that those who give will necessarily receive a return on their giving in this life. He did (and does) teach us to give to those who ask, (see Matt. 5:24) expecting nothing in return. He wars His followers concerning the various dangers which can creep into a life and choke the Word of God:

And these are they which are sown, among thorns; such as hear the word, And the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful,. {lusts: or, inordinate desires}. Mark 4:18,19.

In Mark 10:24 again He reminds His disciples “how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!” Jesus was not against the rich as some “liberation theologians” would have us believe, nor was He “pro” poverty either. He taught a balanced message that was predicated on the principle of seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness (see Matt. 6:33) and the things you have need of your heavenly Father will supply. If Jesus was rich then why didn’t He have enough funds in His treasury to feed the five thousand a simple meal?

When Jesus then lifted up his eyes, and saw a great company come unto him, he saith unto Phillip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? And his he said to prove him: for he himself knew what he would do. Phillip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little. One of his disciples, Andrew, Jesus said, Make the men sit down. No there was much grass I Simon Peter’s brother, saith unto him. There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes; but what are they among so many? And in the place so the men sat down, in number about five thousand. John 6:5-10.

Apparently they did not even have 200 pennies in their treasury to feed these hungry folks. Jesus did not rely upon money, He looked to His Father in heaven, the real “Source” of all humanities needs and gave thanks and worked a miracle.

How do the gurus of greed deal with the account of Jesus and His disciples picking the kernels of wheat from the field to eat on the Sabbath?

And it came to pass on the second Sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plunked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands. And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day? Luke 6:1-2

Why weren’t Jesus and His “boyz” sitting down at the Four Seasons or The Stork Club, feasting on roasted lamb with mint jelly while knocking off a few bottles Judean Roederer Cristal Rose-Limited champagne? Instead we find Him wandering through a corn field eating the gleanings which were left for the poor (see Lev. 19:9). How do these masters of money parse the following teaching of Christ?

Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; “but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. Matt 6:19-21

This image of Jesus is never taught by those who make merchandise of God’s greedy and gullible saints:

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that brought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction  And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of {pernicious ways: or, lascivious ways, as some copies read} And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you; whose judgment now of a long time lingered not, and their damnation slumbered not. 2 Peter 2:1-3

These false teachers exist to make the people of God nothing more than a means to provide for their very lavish lifestyles. The huge conventions, radio and television broadcasts are little more than means to sell their books, tapes, videos and of course ask for “seed-faith” gifts…all the while promising the people 100 times back on what they give or in some cases the promise divine healing, restored marriages, salvation of lost family and friends. They vary their “pitch” depending upon the audience and all of these people are MASTERS at zeroing in on precisely what hot button to push to open folks wallets.

His Clothing

I have never heard so much made out of so little. Matthew 27:35 “And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.” There are several explanations why the Roman soldiers threw dice for His garments. The Bible itself gives us the main reason—to fulfill the prophecy in Psalms 22:18.

The Roman soldiers gambled for His garments because they were poor themselves, this is a historical fact and possibly they thought that since Jesus had the reputation of being a miracle worker possibly his clothes may have contained some form of magic power. They may have heard about the woman with the issue of blood who (in their minds) merely touched the hem of His garment and was healed instantly (see Mark 9:20-21).   Soldiers being poor are a well documented fact the other comments are my own mere suppositions.

This much is certain there is nothing stated about His clothing that set Him apart from others due to His fine duds, in fact, those who did not know Him could not pick Him out of a crowd (see John 18:4-5).

His 12 Disciples

Prosperity Pontificators teach that Jesus hand picked only wealthy men. What does the biblical record show us? If Peter owned a successful fishing business then why after the resurrection of our Lord did he say:

Then Peter said, “Silver and gold I do not have, but what I do have I give you; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up and walk.” This does not mean they had none on them at the time; they had NO money. These are words out of their own mouths recorded by the Holy Spirit through their hands as Scripture. Acts 3:6

Or prior to Jesus’ death when it came time to pay the temple tax, did Jesus call Judas over and reach into the very deep and heavy bag of gold, silver and copper coins?

Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money, that take, and give unto them for me and thee. {a piece….or a stater; it is half an ounce of silver, in value two shillings and six pence, sterling about fifty five cents}. Matthew 17:27

Not only didn’t Peter have the tax money neither did Jesus. Now if Jesus was so very wealthy, then why did this type of a miraculous provision have to be made? How do these pilfering profiteers answer James the brother of Jesus when he says:

“Listen, my beloved brethren: Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?”   James 2:5

What about the Apostle Paul, true, he was not one of the original 12, but he was a genuine apostle and he was not wealthy. He says: as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and behold we live; as chastened, and yet not killed; as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as poor yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.” 2 Cor. 6:9-10

To the present hour we both hunger and thirst, and we are poorly clothed, and beaten, and homeless. And we labor working with our own hands.” 1 Cor 4:11-12 But what things were gain to me these I have counted loss for Christ. Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death. If, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.” Paul a Pharisee was quite rich yet he gave it up for a life to follow Christ. Phil 3:7, 1:1

Paul wrote approximately two-thirds of the New Testament and yet he describes his life as a faithful servant of Christ as living with (1) hunger; (2) thirst; (3) poorly clothed; (4) beaten; (5) homeless; as (6) poor; and (7) having lost everything for the sake of gaining Christ Jesus. NONE of this matches up with the false teaching of a Rich Jesus and Wealthy Disciples.

These men and women are teaching lies either out of ignorance or out of sheer greed. In either case God’s people who buy into these lies in the end hurt themselves spiritually because they have been led further from the true Christ of the Bible. Many people end up shipwrecked in their walk, with Christ because of being taken by these religious con-men. DMI deals with people in both of these categories on a regular basis.

Like all pyramid schemes the only people the “law of prosperity” work for are those who are propagating them to an eager (and often greedy) audience who want to believe it is God’s will for them to be wealthy. How are they to arrive at that status? Simple—GIVE and GIVE and GIVE to these false teachers. Attend all their seminars, buy all their books and tapes, and “sow your biggest financial seed” into every appeal letter they have mechanically sent out to you via a huge computerized mass-mailing company. Oh yes, make sure and NEVER DOUBT the man/woman of God, if you do then you have “dug up your seed” and will have to start the whole process over again.

Now, being set free from such foolishness and darkness it amazes me that more people are not waking up to the FACT that this stuff just is not working in the lives of the rank-and-file. After 30+ years of teaching this, if it were true then the Church should be filled with thousands of multi-millionaires. Yet the only ones becoming millionaires are Benny Hinn; Kenneth Copland; Paul & Jan Crouch; Joyce Meyer; Bob Tilton; Peter Popoff; John Avanzini; Oral & Richard Roberts; Juanita Bynum; Paula White; T.D. Jakes; and Don Stewart to name just a few who teach these lies. ♦

Copyright © Rev. Robert S. Liichow

End Notes

1. “Charismania” refers to people who have given themselves over totally to the more extreme beliefs and practices on the fringe of the sign-gift/Pentecostal movement. Not all Pentecostal or Sign-gift Christians believe the sacred cows which will be dealt with over the next few months.

2. Some trace the cow’s sacred status back to Lord Krishna, one of the faith’s most important figures. He is said to have appeared 5,000 years ago as a cowhead, and is often described as bala-gopala, “the child who protects the cows” Another of Krishna’s holy names, Govinda, means “one who brings satisfaction to the cows.” Other scriptures identify the cow as the “mother” of all civilization its milk nurturing the population Obtained from http://www.uwec.edu/geography/Ivogeler/w111/articles/Hinduism’s%20Sacred%20Cow.htm  on 01-27-2005.

3. Bahr, Robert. The Least of All Saints, The Story of Aimee Semple McPherson. This is an insightful and fascinating book about one of Pentecostalism’s most prominent female evangelists and pastors.

4. I am well schooled in this particular sacred cow being a graduate from Robert Tilton’s Bible School in the mid-1980’s. Mr. Tilton, is still on television, bilking God’s ignorant and desperate sheep out of millions of dollars. Tilton has mastered this false doctrine and raised it to a literal art form of sorts.

5. Hanegraff, Hank, Christianity in Crisis, Harvest House, 1993, p. 187

6. Tithing was a law or a principle we had to follow if we wanted God to financially prosper us. 10% off the gross (not the net) was expected, along with offerings. If this law was carried out faithfully on every dime that came into our hands then and only then would the windows of heaven be opened and God would pour out so much money we would not have room enough to hold it all (see Mal. Ch. 3). Any biblical scholar will point out that there were several types of tithing required under the law and much of it had little to do with giving money.

7. A good book on this topic is entitled The Lie of the Tithe available at http://www.gotosimpletruth.com/Tithing/tithe4.html. ( added: See you tube video below)

8. Many people are not familiar with Ebert Willis. I have met him on a few occasions and have literally 100% of his tapes and books. He was one of the “purest” of the WOF teachers. He actually believes what he teaches and lives by it. Elbert was so hardcore that once he spoke at Rhema and delivered a famous sermon entitled “Wet Water Walkers or Dry Boat Sitters.” It was so tough on the Hagin crowd, he was never invited back to speak again.

9. Willis, Elbert Financial Prosperity Fill the Gap Ministries, Lafayette, La 1975, pp. 19-20

10. Oral Roberts. “How I Learned Jesus Was Not Poor, page 16 Underlinging added for emphasis.

11. Obtained from http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Greek/grk.cgi?number=1101&version=kjv on 01-27-05

12. Copeland, Kenneth The Laws of Prosperity Kenneth Copeland Publication, 1974, pp. 66-67

13. John Hagee, Praise-A-Thon, Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) November 5, 2004. Bold type added for emphasis.

14. Creflo Dollar Crusade, Feb 9, 1999. Information obtained from http://www.geocities.com/Bob_Hunter/dollar.html.

15. Oral Roberts. How I Learned Jesus Was Not Poor, page 24

16. Dr. Thomas C. Anderson, Praise The Lord, “TBN, August 21, 2004 Bold type and underlining added for emphasis.

17. Jesse Duplantis, Voice of the Covenant Magazine, Pg. 5 Nov. 1997

18. Bishop, Marcus Our Covenant of Prosperity Harrison House Publishers 1997, pp. 47-48.

19. Obtained from http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/luke/gill/luke4.htm Underlining added for emphasis.

20. Obtained from http://www.gospelcom.net/eword/comments/luke/mh/luke4.htm Underlining added for emphasis.

21. My research included the Geneva Commentary, Jamison Fausett Brown, Darby, Johnson, McGarvey Pendleton, Wesley and Lightfoot.

22. Copeland, Kenneth The Laws of Prosperity Kenneth Copeland Publications, 1974 pp. 63-65.

23. Ibid. p. 64

24. Obtained from http://www.letusreason.org/Wf15.htm on 02–2-05 Underlining and Bold type added for emphasis.

25. Robertson’s Word Pictures BibleWorks CD, ver. 4.0.0035p. 1998 Underlining added for emphasis.

I just wanna preface this video by saying that I rarely agree with Mark Driscoll and am often not a big fan of either his theology or his tone, but this clip does a good job pointing out some of the flaws with health and wealth theology. Before I saw this I thought that all Driscoll and I had in common was our love for Christ and our tendency to cuss a little too much.

Consider what Driscoll is saying about our Lord and Savior and what implications that should have for our theology and our lives. Any comments?

Truth Matters Newsletter – July 2004 Vol. 8 No. 7 – The Leaven of Lakewood – by Robert Liichow

I want to begin this article by giving credit where credit is due. When it comes to the Lakewood charismatic mega-church there are aspects of this ministry which must be cited as worthy. To begin with the church was originally started by John Osteen, who was a Southern Baptist pastor but after receiving the “baptism” in/with the Holy Spirit he became enamored with the charismatic renewal movement in its early stage and eventually became associated with the Word of Faith (WOF) cult. The following commentary was taken from the official web site of Lakeland Church.

The late John Osteen served the Lord Jesus Christ as pastor, evangelist, author, and teacher for sixty years. Ordained as a Southern Baptist he received the baptism in the Holy Ghost in 1958, an experience which revolutionized his ministry into a worldwide outreach…John Osteen began Lakewood Church in a dusty, abandoned feed store on Mother’s Day 1959…John Osteen was driven by an amazing love for people of all ages, races, nationalities and walks of life. (1)

One thing is certain in a time of racial division John Osteen opened wide the doors of his church to all people, and all shades and classes of people came. John, even though he had rejected his Baptist theology (he did actually earn a Masters degree from Northern Baptist Seminary) he never lost sight of the need for foreign missions and his congregation supported and still supports a great deal of foreign mission work. At the time of his death Lakewood Church has risen to 8,000 members.

However, I am under no illusion regarding the WOF “leaven” which John propagated and is unfortunately being further magnified through his son Joel Osteen who took over as Pastor when his father died in 1999. John was a big crusader for the error of positive confession.  This is a metaphysical belief that we can either create or change our reality by the power of our words, for example he stated the following:

When they say like they did to Smith Wigglesworth, “How are you feeling today?” He said “Listen, I don’t ask my body how it’s feeling; I tell it how to feel” And your words should not be to describe the situation; your words should be given to change the situation. And so, read it mediate upon it, and speak it (2)

I am the sum total of what I have been confessing through the years. My children are the best children that ever lived on the face of the earth. They are blessed of God. They are the sum total of what Dodie and I have confessed and loved them into being  (3)

Osteen is on record as fully endorsing the WOF errant concepts surrounding financial prosperity:  It’s God’s will for you to live in prosperity instead of poverty. It’s God’s will for you to pay your bills and not be in debt. It’s God’s will for you to live in health and not in sickness all the days of your life. (4)

In the above sermon we can see the Health & Wealth “gospel” summed up three sentences. So despite the good things that John Osteen did as a Pastor he got ensnared by the subtlety of false teaching and ended up misleading millions  before his death. Jesus in speaking to His disciples warned them about the leaven of the Pharisees in the following discussion:

Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees…How is it that ye do not understand that I spake [it] not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade [them] not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.  Mt. 16:6,11-12

Even though it seems to us that His disciples were a little slow on the “uptake” at times Jesus makes His point crystal clear to them — He was warning them to beware (6) to be on guard against the danger of their doctrinal errors, which Jesus likens to leaven in bread. Jesus knew that if left unchecked , like leaven in bread, their doctrinal error would spread.  The leaven of false doctrines which he instilled in his son are now expanding and misleading more people than John Osteen could have ever imagined.

The Concerns: John Osteen Master of Marketeering

Joel Osteen has absolutely no biblical training or experience to be a pastor. Charismatic pulpits are filled with people who feel “called” to the pastorate and that is enough for them and those who follow them. They attempt to build congregations on the “strength of their calling. Some charismatic leaders may go on to an unaccredited “Bible School” for a year or two, such as Rhema Bible Training Center started by the late Kenny Hagin. None of the large group of ministers  that we were ever acquainted over the years attended any legitimate seminary.

Would you allow a surgeon to operate on you because he felt “called” to be a surgeon as a child, but never went on to medical school? Or would you allow someone to build your house who firmly believed God had called him to be an architect yet had never gone on to college to study architectural design? Of course not, it would be the height of foolishness!

Yet millions of professing Christians are more then willing to follow a man (or woman) who says “God” has called them and has supernaturally equipped them to be ministers. These especially anointed men and woman have no need to study Church History, hermeneutics, systematic theology and struggle through Greek and Hebrew as other ministers do. They hear directly from God (this is especially true for the sign-gift  (7)  pastors, most seeker-sensitive churches are lead by seminary educated individuals).

So my first main concern is that we have a man in the pulpit of the largest congregation in America, being beamed around the world that has no biblical education or training for the vocation he says he has! To me we have a clear case of the blind leading the blind (read Luke 6:39) with the end result being mases of people falling into the ditch of spiritual ignorance, abuse and/or extremism.

Joel Osteen made the following statement which ought to be enough to drive 1,000’s of people away from his church:

“Osteen’s upbeat style is deliberate and authentic. ’Make church relevant,” he says, ’Give them something to be able to take away. I find today people are not looking for theology. There’s a place for it, [But] in your every day life you need to know how to live.” (8)

That statement is loaded with seeker-sensitive “code”. My wife and I left a North American Baptist church of over 1,000 members which had as its acronym “GPARS” which stood for (1) Grace; (2) People; (3) Authenticity; (4) Relevance and (5) small groups.

Of course Osteen’s “style” is upbeat, would you expect negativity from a positive confession devotee? No! Deliberate, absolutely, he really believes much of the WOF nonsense his father taught him all his life, not to mention whatever offbeat spirituality he may have gleaned from his two years at Oral Roberts University. Authentic?  Without a doubt!  What you see is what you get. Joel Osteen is a man without any biblical education but an admitted talent for marketing.

To be a success in marketing you have to know where people itch and scratch it. Or, you have to create a desire in them by creating a hunger for something they currently do not have nor formerly knew they needed. All commercials can be condensed down to one of these two truths.

So to become a mega-church a pastor has to make church relevant. He has to give the people what they want, something that soothes that spiritual itch. In order to be a “success” ( i.e. large masses of people and money) pastors must preach unchallenging messages that uplift rather than convict. He must pander to the lowest common denominator and make sure that whatever is taught does not offend anyone at anytime. What we are seeing is really nothing new, it is simply a  fulfillment of Paul’s warning to Timothy in 1 Tim 4:3-4,

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 2 Tim 4:3-4

This is exactly where multitudes of people are spiritually today. The above text also helps explain the phenomena of people like Robert Schuller, Rick Warren, Bill Hybels and now, Joel Osteen.

Osteen goes on to say that “I find today that people are not looking for theology.” Well that is obvious because if they were they would not find any sound theology at Lakewood! Although he does not reveal to the readers where he found this astonishing fact out, it appears the folks he has talked to have no interest in theology.

Lest you think me a bit harsh let me remind you that theology simply means: “the knowledge of God.” In essence Osteen has said that people are really not interested in learning about God. Somehow (undoubtedly due to his lack of biblical education) he has made a distinction between knowing the God of the bible via sound biblical theology and “knowing how to live.”

Brothers and sisters, my wife and I can testify to you that the more accurately you understand God within the biblical context the better life you will live before Him. Tracy and I have a daughter, she does not like to eat certain vegetables, but we MAKE her eat them from time to time. Why? As her parents, even though somewhat distasteful to her we know that eating them will be beneficial.

The same is true for every man who mounts a pulpit! God does not tell us to feed the sheep what they want to eat. Jesus told Peter “feed My sheep,” (see John 21:16). Jesus said “feed” the sheep not “entertain” them! We are to give them the Word of God in its totality. Any pastor can fall into the trap of becoming a people pleaser. This is why Paul, through the Holy Ghost warned young Timothy in the verse just above the one I cited:

“I charge [thee] therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his Kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 2 Tim. 4:2

Timothy is WARNED to be steadfast in his proclamation of the Gospel to be ready and in his preaching to (1) REPROVE; (2) REBUKE; (3) EXHORT the people according to the Scriptures. How? We are to preach with all longsuffering (because such preaching is unpleasant to people’s carnal nature) and with doctrine. GASP! Doctrine? I can hear the seeker-sensitive pundits saying “oh come now, Rev. Liichow, surely you know preaching doctrinal messages is passé ?”  Osteen would do well to heed the word of the Lord from a genuine prophet who stated:

Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto the shepherds; Woe [be] to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: [but] ye feed not the flock. Ezek. 34:2-3

There are many biblical themes which are very “unpopular” and even politically “incorrect” yet the faithful pastor/teacher will expound on these topics as well so that the flock undr his care is receiving a balanced spiritual diet and is able to walk in the full light of God’s Word and not in the shadows.

What is Joel’s educational background and experience? Since we know his training is not theological what is it? He did attend Oral Roberts University for two years, but his area of study had to do with television production and marketing.

“Meanwhile, son Joel, one of six children, was learning the business of television…’Growing up, I knew what I wanted to do. I wanted to be involved in TV production, ‘ he says. “That was just my passion,’ In 1981 he came home from Oral Roberts University (ORU) to start the Lakeword TV ministry. (9)

For seventeen (17) years Joel was behind the scenes handling all the television and marketing of his father’s ministry. The next statement from the Charisma article is very revealing:

‘The younger Osteen’s television-marketing talents and his dad’s preaching skills resulted eventually in the church churches being aired on stations nationwide and in more then 100 countries. (10)

Joel Osteen had the ability to get his father’s heavily WOF influenced message out all over America and into 100 foreign markets. Due to this dynamic-duo of folksy preaching/teaching and highly visible presence on television Lakewood Church grew to close to 8,000 members at the time of John Osteen’s death in 1999.

With his father sick in the hospital, John asks his son, Joel, to preach for him that Sunday. Initially Joel balked at the idea and said “no,” He then relented and here are Joel’s own words concerning his preaching that day:

“I just got up there and told stories. I was so glad when it was over, I said, ‘I’ll never do this again in my life.’  (11)

That was the beginning of his public ministry; he just got up and told “stories,” Joel has been telling stories that have been tickling the ears of the multitudes ever since. Here is how the article describes Joel’s style of preaching:

“The appealing style of Osteen’s personality in the pulpit is unmistakable. It is part of the reason for the Lakewood’s current level of success. (12) Everyone agrees Osteen’s preaching is a key ingredient. Descriptions of his style include ‘simple,’ ‘down-to-earth,’ ‘practical’ ‘relatable,’ ‘easy,’ ‘folksy,’ ‘humble,’. (13)

It’s 10 a.m. when he began his sermon. The theme is practical as he gives example after example of the importance of following God’s timing rather then one’s own. He keeps the tone cheerful, optimistic, ‘God doesn’t want anybody walking out of here today heavy-hearted and downcast,” Osteen says. (14)

Joel Osteen is charismatic in his personality. He is not a bad looking man, his delivery is as non-threatening as the positive messages he delivers. Perhaps, I am reading in to much yet when I read “practical” it makes me think that he believes teaching theology is somehow “impractical.” The example after example simply means he tells a lot of stories and anecdotes that somehow relate to the message in which he may cite one or two proof texts to make his point.

It also concerns me what a pastor can make the statement that God does not want anybody walking out of here “heavy-hearted”. My Bible says “godly sorrow worketh repentance…” (see 2 Cor. 7:10).  At times God does want us to walk out of a service “heavy-hearted” if we have been sinning against His will. We should allow the Word (when properly expounded) and the Spirit (when genuinely present) to break us, to convict us of sinful attitudes and practices.

However, if all you hear is “upbeat,” “cheerful,” and “optimistic” messages there is little opportunity for the Holy Spirit to work conviction in the hearts of the hearers. This folksy down home non-confrontational type of message also goes a long way in explaining the huge crowds that gather to be entertained.

Entertained? Oh, yes, it is not only Joel’s preaching style but the music of Lakewood is an important ingredient in drawing large hoards of people. Once Joel took command of Lakewood’s already large congregation (between 6,000 to 8,000 members) he began to expand the musical talent as well.

Four years ago, when Cindy Cruse-Ratcliff—became Lakewood’s minister of music, the church had only one Sunday morning service….Soon after Cruse-Ratcliff arrived Lakwood expanded when two Sunday morning services were added…’The growth was extremely rapid,’ says Cruse-Ratcliff, who still serves on the 200-member Lakewood Staff. (15)

“Star power” brings people to churches as well, especially musical stars and Joel is not ignorant of this fact. As minister of music Ms. Ratcliff knows people in the contemporary music scene and she no doubt help add to the musical strength of this mega-church by helping bring in some more musical talent:

Helping to spice up the mix are two of the most prominent names in worship music. Maros Witt, who fills stadiums in Latin America for worship concerts was tapped in 2002 to pastor Lakewood’s 3,000 member Hispanic congregation. Also adding diversity to the Lakewood staff is Israel Houghton, whose soulful worship anthems are sung around the world. ( 16)

The music at Lakewood is contemporary. They have musical stars that appeal to Hispanic (Witt), African-American (Houghton) and Caucasian members (Ratcliff). The musical team writes many of their own songs and nothing in the article is ever mentioned about hymns.

This is not surprising when you consider that (to our knowledge) no seeker-sensitive or WOF congregation use hymnals at all, apart from the occasional singing of Amazing Grace. The charismatic movement’s brand of music has infiltrated almost all evangelical congregations that have forsaken the use of the historic hymns. At our former seeker-sensitive Baptist church we sang songs that originated from the Toronto “revival” and from the Vineyard movement, two examples of some of the wildest expressions within the renewal movement.

Musically speaking there is a method “to their madness” at Lakewood and other mega-churches. They have a strong emphasis to cut all ties with traditional Christianity. The classic, highly theological hymns and hymnals virtually scream out the dreaded word “TRADITIONAL.”

                    Out With the Old, In With the New

Lakewood an all seeker congregations do not want to be associated with any denominational trappings or any forms of liturgical worship. Many of these churches have even removed crosses from behind their pulpits lest they appear to be too churchy  to the seeker.

In all our time spent among both Pentecostal believers and seeker-sensitive groups we never recited the Lord’s prayer as part of our worship. We never recited any of the historic creeds of the orthodox Church. I doubt there are three people who attend Lakewood who could recite the Apostles or Nicene Creeds, probably few know the Lord’s Prayer. Catechism classes? You’ve got to be kidding! In it’s place some groups may offer a new member’s class, but these classes are usually just general introductions to what the church has to offer the “seeker.” Osteen being a sign-gift believer offers classes which promote the concept of a second baptism in/with/by the Holy Spirit, but this aspect seems to be soft-peddled as well. 

                  What Is the Key to Osteen’s Success?

Osteen I believe is probably the first of many WOF devotee’s who has melded the successful marketing techniques of the seeker-sensitive mega-churches with their positive confession health & wealth message. The blend becomes a potent hybrid that appeals to both sign-gift believers (sort of “charismatic lite”) and baby-boomer seekers.

The message that God wants to bless His children with complete physical health, to give them great financial wealth and to demand little of them regarding their spiritual life is a highly appealing message. When you combine this with well know Gospel singers, highly orchestrated praise and worship teams in a decidedly non-church atmosphere it will appeal to even a wider audience.

We cannot forget to mix in the vast television footprint that Lakewood Church promotes, along with its web site, daddy John Osteen’s books are still in almost all Christian bookstores so it is not difficult to understand how it can gather 30,000 people in Lakewood’s rented 16,000 seat arena, formerly the home of the Houston Rockets.

What Saddens me the most is that one hears little, if any, Law & Gospel proclaimed by Joel at Lakewood Church. To quote something I remember hearing “dad” Hagin say: “how do you poison a dog? You put the poison in with the good meat,” I do not want to press the analogy too far but the reality is that 30,000 people are not being biblically fed a balanced spiritual diet that will promote true growth in their lives. What you do hear is a synthesis of WOF concepts wrapped up in a seeker-friendly environment by a young man with a winsome smile.

Lastly, we cannot lose sight of the fact that a certain synergy builds with any church when it beings to reach such a size. People, who have no solid doctrinal foundation, will want to attend the place here “something” is happening (throw in a coffee bar, ice rink and gym does not hurt either). In America, bigger is better. After all, many posit, if Joel was not being used of the Lord then why would God allow all these people to come to Lakewood church?

Could it be a sign of God’s judgment on His people who have forsaken His ways? Often we think of God’s judgment as some divine catastrophe, yet often, and just as catastrophic, is when He simply allows people to have their own way. I believe the words of Jeremiah are applicable to many in the Church today;

Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this and be horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith the LORD. For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters [and] hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water. Jer. 2:12-13

As much as Joel no doubt believes the growth they’ve experienced is due to the blessing of God it really boils down to three simple things, which have nothing to do with God at all:

1. His father’s legacy and an already existing mega-church;

2. Joel’s slick marketing abilities

3. A biblically errant, but hugely popular message which appeals to the masses seeking to have their ears tickled and experience a “good time” in church.

Please pray for Joel Osteen, like it or not, he currently has a tremendous impact on many people. Pray the Lord opens his eyes to biblical truth and may he take as bold a stand to expose error.  ♦

coperight © 2004 by Robert Liichow

End Notes

1. http://www.lakewood.cc/john_tribute.htm

2. Osteen, John Sermon entitled Developing Miracle Working Faith, FA-006. Bold type and underlining added for emphasis.

3. Obtained from http://www.myfortress.org/JohnOsteen.html on 06-10-04

4. Osteen, John. Sermon, The Holy Spirit Part 1 HS-001

5. :to be in a continuous state of readiness to learn of any future danger, need, or error, and to respond appropriately -’to pay attention to, to keep on the lookout for, to be alert for, to be on one’s guard against.’ Taken from the Louw-Nida Greek-English Lexicon, Silver Mountain Software, ver 5.0

6. I purposefully use the term sign-gift in place of charismatic because all Christians are charismatic believers in that each one of us have been gifted with some gifts from the Holy Spirit (read 1 Cor. 12:7).

 7. Charisma, June 2004, pp. 44-45. Bold type added for emphasis.

8. Ibid., June 2004, p. 44

9. Ibid, p. 44.

10. Ibid p. 44. Underlining added for emphasis

11. Ibid p. 46.

12. Ibid. p. 45

13. Ibid, p. 49 Italics and underlining added for emphasis.

14. Ibid p. 44

15. Ibid. p. 46

16. It is interesting as hard as they have tried to distance themselves from established “traditional” forms of Christian worship they have created their own liturgies of a sort. They have banners which are marched around, they have praise dancers (we called them “Glory Dancers”). They have alter calls, and other aspects which have become standard practices and thus traditions.

Does God want us to be rich and have a “BIG HOUSE?”

THIS WORLD IS NOT OUR HOME!!!

From time to time we get comments that need to be responded to in depth. This is one case.

Demonknight2 SAID,,,,

“Hello, Damon. Since you clearly don’t want comments that say anything nice about the guys you’re against, I won’t say anything. But I have to ask you SERIOUSLY your personal opinion or what you think the Bible says about the issue… Perhaps God doesn’t necassarily want ALL believers to be BILLIONARES. But… Do you really think that as Christians, the only things we’re worthy of having (in God’s eyes) are the SAME things non-believers have or LESS than what non-believers have??? In other words, why would God ask believers to engage in things completely outside the realm of what the rest of the world is doing, then expect those SAME people to eat mud pies for dinner, AND LIKE IT?????? Again, are you saying that the God we serve is a “turn the other cheek & eat hambergers for dinner & thank me for it” type of God, while the person that slapped you is laughing with his friends about it & eating steak & has NOTHING to do with God??? Honestly, if God is going to contrast the size of our wallet to whether we love & trust in him, then perhaps it’s not us who are putting stock in money, maybe it’s really God! OK, but that sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it??? But equally ridiculous? The notion that God wants, condones, or commands that all believers be LESS than “the world” even if the subject IS MONEY!!! Be HONEST… Do you want to serve a God that “sees” you as not being worthy to have a house BIGGER than a person who OUTWORDLY MOCKS GOD???? – Thanks”

I will do my best to show how Demonknight2 needs a total paradigm shift in his understanding. Because his case is levied against mere strawmen arguments (not the real beliefs of those he opposes) that he has created in his own mind against those that do not believe in the Prosperity Gospel and the Word of Faith Movement.

The Lord has blessed some to be rich and some not. Mainline Christianity does not say that “God does not want us rich” NOR does it posit that “God wants us to live in poverty”. But the Word of God is clear that we cannot serve both God and Money (mammon), and Gods declares “chose this day whom you will serve.” We are not to store up for ourselves treasures on this earth but in heaven. It is harder for a rich man to get to heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of needle. This is not because being rich is a sin. But because earthly riches have earthly strings (the deceitfulness of riches) attached, instead of the pursuit of sanctification (the race set before us), is wrought with many inherent problems. But the Lord does sometimes bless is followers with great material possessions in this world, if it be his will for that believer. Given that they are mature in the faith and have their eyes fixed on Jesus and are serving Him and not “serving money.”

THE BIBLE HAS MANY WARNINGS ABOUT EARTHLY RICHES: 

Ecc 5:10 He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is an evil disease.

Ecc 6:2 A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor, so that he Wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity, and it is also vanity.

Ecc 12:7-8 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall returned to God who gave it. Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher; all is vanity

1Ti 6:17-19 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded; nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

Jas 1:10-11 But the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away. For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.

THE BIBLE HAS WARNINGS ABOUT THE FLEETINGNESS OF LIFE

Psa 102:11 My days are like a shadow that declineth; and I am withered like grass.

Jas 4:13-15 Go to now, ye that say, Today or tomorrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away. For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

Psa 144:3-4 LORD, what is man, that thou takest knowledge of him! or the son of man, that thou makest account of him! Man is like to vanity: his days are as a shadow that passeth away.

1Ch 29:15 For we are strangers before thee, and sojourners, as were all our fathers: our days on the earth are as a shadow, and there is none abiding.

TIME IS JUST A PUZZLE PIECE IN ETERNITY!!!

AND Our days are short and do quickly fade Job_14:2; Psa_90:9, Psa_102:11, Psa_144:4; Ecc_6:12; Isa_40:6-8; Jam_4:14

For we are aliens and strangers to this world. This world IS NOT our home!!!

We are merely pilgrims on a pilgrimage and sojourners in a foreign land. Gen_47:9; Psa_39:12, Psa_119:19; Heb_11:13-16; 1Pe_2:11 ; 1Pe_1:17

The Lord tells us in the sermon on the Mount that we are the salt and light of the world. This means He was telling us that this world is not our home. Matthew 5:13-16. 1Corinthians 15 gloriously proclaims the resurrection life that is to come for those who believe (trust, faith is not a force) on Jesus.

BUT UNBELIVERS ARE RESSURECTED TO DIE THE SECOND DEATH Rev. 20:6,14

1Pe 1:23-24 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

Therefore, “Mat 6:19-21 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

The Lord is not concerned about big houses in this life. He is concerned that our pursuit of earthly riches in this life will cause us to miss out on the home He has prepared for us in Heaven. If I where to suffer for in abject poverty for a hundred thousand years in this life. It would not compare to the riches of His Eternal Kingdom

I THINK THE QUESTION IS,,,,, WILL YOU HAVE YOUR BEST LIFE NOW,,, OR LATER?

http://thewordonthewordoffaithinfoblog.com/2009/05/13/this-world-is-not-our-home/

All About Wofers (Word Of Faith Folks)

The Flawed Foundation Of Word Of Faith Theology Part 2

While waiting in a lab for my blood to be drawn, I spotted a magazine with a cover that said “The 10 Ideas That Are Changing The World”. There was no resisting that title, having a bent for the philosophical (or am I just bent?). I was flipping through thinking how entirely saturated each idea was with what’s called “humanism”.

Shortly put, humanism is the glorification of humans; our ability to create technology, to reshape our world, to remake our lives, to change our habits, etc. Take the global warming debate for example. Proponents of changing our habits are actually convinced that puny and dunderheaded humans are fully capable of controlling the entire planet.

Honestly… we don’t even understand the climate, let alone know how to ”save” it from it’s natural processes.

One of the 10 humanistic ideas was strikingly foolish, and strikingly prevelant. It’s called “amortality”, or the denial and resistance to certain aging and death. Botox, cryogenics, disease research all have at least some of the “amortality” concept within them.

Research to cure cancer or manage chronic pain is a great idea, and more power to ‘em. But truly believing that we can cure every illness on the planet, that no one should ever be sick and never have to grow old is unrealistic at best. We don’t want to look old, feel old, or be old because we worship youth these days. Maybe we always have, at least some. Peter Pan was written awhile back! 

Cryogenics, or deep freezing the body to be revived later, is a really out there level of amortal thinking, but consider the weekend warrior: they try to play sports at 50 as hard and well as they did at 20, and complain that they’ve wrecked their knees or need back surgery. How predictable was that?

Now before this turns into a “dump on the culture” post, there was one section that stood in powerfully sharp contrast: the resurgence of Calvinistic theology in American Christianity. Calvinism shifts all power to God and entirely away from us without exception.

There’s parts to Calvinism I don’t agree with. The idea of predistination, which states that God chooses who will be saved and who won’t, free will not able to alter our destiny. That I disagree with because God has clearly offered salvation to all the world. My belief is that since He is omniscient, He knows who will and won’t, but I cannot accept that He would deny anyone salvation.

Yet the God of Calvin is truly massive and unfathomable. A died in the wool Calvinist would never complain that the Lord allowed this suffering or that hardship, and certainly not bug Him about a post they wanted to write, because their God is not to be questioned about His decisions.

A Calvinistic response to suffering is much along the lines of this scripture “Though He slay me, yet will I follow Him”. He and He alone is all-powerful, and all-knowing. Only the Lord controls the strings of our lives and in fact all life, as is His divine right.

As Ps 95 says “For the LORD is the great God, and the great King above all gods. In His hand are the deep places of the earth, the heights of the hills are His also, and the sea is His for He made it, and His hands formed the dry land.” He is to be approached with awe and submission.

If any one theology has absorbed God as absolute Master of heaven, earth, and all things it is Calvinism. It’s making a bit of a comeback because of the economy and social disorder of late. A person who believed that the Lord never intends a true Christian to see their 401K implode is now quite confused.

People who might have gone too far into the theory of the Lord not allowing them hardship have been forced to go searching for a different understanding of God and their relationship with Him. A Calvinistic understanding is far different than the informal, friendly Jesus most of us have.

I’ve long wondered if many, like me, have lost our visceral grasp of the fact that God is not like us. I know that I’ve over-humanized God. Yes, Jesus was fully human, but He was also fully God.  Making God too human, too casually approachable may well be a culprit for my horrific habit of getting angry at him when He’s allowed something I didn’t like.

Jesus being too like me in my beliefs puts me on equal footing with Him, which I most definitely am NOT. I’ve had that repugnant habit most of my life, and only recently have been trying to tear it down. A Calvinist would ask me who the heck did I think I was! 

The hidden danger to a kinder/gentler God is we can lose the sense of who has the right to decide things. We can naturally try to use Him as a “feel good” in a world that doesn’t. Or expect Him to do our bidding and make things more comfortable for us. We must be ever careful not to make God human, in our image.

I never want to lose the truth that the goal of God’s heart is intimacy; if anything I’d like to fall deeper into it. But until my (our) native self-serving is destroyed by the Holy Spirit, the notion of a gift-giving human God is a dangerous trap. I got scars on my ankles, how ’bout you?

One of my interests is astronomy (no not astrology and horoscopes). The Hubble space telescope being repaired right now showed us the most unimaginably beautiful and violent universe. Filled with breathtaking star nurseries, galaxies being born and dying with astonishing power, black holes eating up light itself…

Who would ever have had the mind to conceive of such magnificence! God dreams pretty don’t He?

The Hubble also blew the minds of astronomers, physicists, and scientists who thought they knew what was what. Because of the Hubble, “dark matter” was discovered, an invisible and unmeasurable matter making up some 90% of the universe, that no one understands. It also was responsible for discovering that the universe is held together by a “dark energy”.

Dark energy is not subject to the rules of gravity, light, or anything else we understand. It keeps some galaxies from crashing into each other when they should, and causes others to when they shouldn’t. It is expanding the universe well beyond what physics would allow for. It is an impenetrable mystery to the brightest minds on earth.

I say all this because it blows my mind, and what’s left of my mind melts down when I consider that God not only understands these things perfectly, He came up with them. From His imagination the rules of astrophysics came into being, which can melt almost anyone’s grey matter. He also is exempt from them.

Astronomy programs on TV returns some wonder to my oft dim mind, pulling me out of the sticky tar pit of the daily grind. It makes God much, much bigger to my little thoughts. Dark energy reinforces to me that God alone is capable of being all powerful, and all things are squarely seated in His hands. Then it reinstates that fact that such is His right, not mine.

A Calvinistic world view is marked by an extraordinary reverence for God and positioning of man well below Him in every way, about all things. Our lives are not our own. We haven’t a right to them anymore, once situating ourselves as the handmaidens and bond-servants of the Almighty.

We haven’t the right to complain, avoid, or expend our energies on what we want for ourselves. An almighty view of the Almighty is paired with and usually causes a much humbled opinion of ourselves. Awe produces submission.

Smith Wigglesworth would approve, though I don’t think he was a Calvinist per se. He called our human desires a hinderance and a curse to us, as they insist upon vaulting themselves above our rank. Oswald Chambers would assent to our pay grade being several tax brackets down from God’s too. Isaiah couldn’t even stay on his feet when he saw the LORD.

It seems the “greatest” men and women of faith had a brain melting grasp of the magnificence and glory of God paired with tremendous humility about the nature of humanity. The contribution of Calvinism these days is to blast to bits the secret arrogances we have that would consider God a vending machine for health, wealth, or ease.

I was strangely refreshed by that section of the article, directly stripping all trappings of  power from the clutches of mankind. The “big God” people are still around, because as one quote worded it “People have friends, what they need is a God”. I was also taken to task, layers of a “vending machine” God made plain in my own thoughts.

Then the same night I watched a program about the Hubble telescope. Right after I was taken down a few notches, God took Himself up a few notches in my thoughts. The grandest scale we humans can view, the universe, is barely a stretch for the thoughts of God. What else could He be thinking of?

What will His new heavens and new earth look like? Will I be able to swim through a star nebula or fly through a spiral galaxy in my new body? Will I understand God the way He understands me someday? Will the sky be pink and the grass lilac? Will space be black as it is now, or brighter than a thousand suns yet not injure the eyes?

What is God dreaming up for us, you and I? Won’t it be lovely to find out…

Does God want us to be rich and have a “BIG HOUSE?”

THIS WORLD IS NOT OUR HOME!!!

From time to time we get comments that need to be responded to in depth. This is one case.

Demonknight2 SAID,,,,

“Hello, Damon. Since you clearly don’t want comments that say anything nice about the guys you’re against, I won’t say anything. But I have to ask you SERIOUSLY your personal opinion or what you think the Bible says about the issue… Perhaps God doesn’t necassarily want ALL believers to be BILLIONARES. But… Do you really think that as Christians, the only things we’re worthy of having (in God’s eyes) are the SAME things non-believers have or LESS than what non-believers have??? In other words, why would God ask believers to engage in things completely outside the realm of what the rest of the world is doing, then expect those SAME people to eat mud pies for dinner, AND LIKE IT?????? Again, are you saying that the God we serve is a “turn the other cheek & eat hambergers for dinner & thank me for it” type of God, while the person that slapped you is laughing with his friends about it & eating steak & has NOTHING to do with God??? Honestly, if God is going to contrast the size of our wallet to whether we love & trust in him, then perhaps it’s not us who are putting stock in money, maybe it’s really God! OK, but that sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it??? But equally ridiculous? The notion that God wants, condones, or commands that all believers be LESS than “the world” even if the subject IS MONEY!!! Be HONEST… Do you want to serve a God that “sees” you as not being worthy to have a house BIGGER than a person who OUTWORDLY MOCKS GOD???? – Thanks”

I will do my best to show how Demonknight2 needs a total paradigm shift in his understanding. Because his case is levied against mere strawmen arguments (not the real beliefs of those he opposes) that he has created in his own mind against those that do not believe in the Prosperity Gospel and the Word of Faith Movement.

The Lord has blessed some to be rich and some not. Mainline Christianity does not say that “God does not want us rich” NOR does it posit that “God wants us to live in poverty”. But the Word of God is clear that we cannot serve both God and Money (mammon), and Gods declares “chose this day whom you will serve.” We are not to store up for ourselves treasures on this earth but in heaven. It is harder for a rich man to get to heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of needle. This is not because being rich is a sin. But because earthly riches have earthly strings (the deceitfulness of riches) attached, instead of the pursuit of sanctification (the race set before us), is wrought with many inherent problems. But the Lord does sometimes bless is followers with great material possessions in this world, if it be his will for that believer. Given that they are mature in the faith and have their eyes fixed on Jesus and are serving Him and not “serving money.”

THE BIBLE HAS MANY WARNINGS ABOUT EARTHLY RICHES: 

Ecc 5:10 He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is an evil disease.

Ecc 6:2 A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor, so that he Wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity, and it is also vanity.

Ecc 12:7-8 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall returned to God who gave it. Vanity of vanities, saith the preacher; all is vanity

1Ti 6:17-19 Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded; nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy; That they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate; Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.

Jas 1:10-11 But the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away. For the sun is no sooner risen with a burning heat, but it withereth the grass, and the flower thereof falleth, and the grace of the fashion of it perisheth: so also shall the rich man fade away in his ways.

THE BIBLE HAS WARNINGS ABOUT THE FLEETINGNESS OF LIFE

Psa 102:11 My days are like a shadow that declineth; and I am withered like grass.

Jas 4:13-15 Go to now, ye that say, Today or tomorrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away. For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

Psa 144:3-4 LORD, what is man, that thou takest knowledge of him! or the son of man, that thou makest account of him! Man is like to vanity: his days are as a shadow that passeth away.

1Ch 29:15 For we are strangers before thee, and sojourners, as were all our fathers: our days on the earth are as a shadow, and there is none abiding.

TIME IS JUST A PUZZLE PIECE IN ETERNITY!!!

AND Our days are short and do quickly fade Job_14:2; Psa_90:9, Psa_102:11, Psa_144:4; Ecc_6:12; Isa_40:6-8; Jam_4:14

For we are aliens and strangers to this world. This world IS NOT our home!!!

We are merely pilgrims on a pilgrimage and sojourners in a foreign land. Gen_47:9; Psa_39:12, Psa_119:19; Heb_11:13-16; 1Pe_2:11 ; 1Pe_1:17

The Lord tells us in the sermon on the Mount that we are the salt and light of the world. This means He was telling us that this world is not our home. Matthew 5:13-16. 1Corinthians 15 gloriously proclaims the resurrection life that is to come for those who believe (trust, faith is not a force) on Jesus.

BUT UNBELIVERS ARE RESSURECTED TO DIE THE SECOND DEATH Rev. 20:6,14

1Pe 1:23-24 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

Therefore, “Mat 6:19-21 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

The Lord is not concerned about big houses in this life. He is concerned that our pursuit of earthly riches in this life will cause us to miss out on the home He has prepared for us in Heaven. If I where to suffer for in abject poverty for a hundred thousand years in this life. It would not compare to the riches of His Eternal Kingdom

I THINK THE QUESTION IS,,,,, WILL YOU HAVE YOUR BEST LIFE NOW,,, OR LATER?

One of the greatest threats to the American church is not from an attack without, but rather from an attack by those who are viewed by many to be within. The “word of faith” movement, or “prosperity gospel” movement, perverts the Word of God and distorts the nature of what it means for God to bless His people. Folks at McCarthy certainly know how I feel about this false gospel and the false teachers who peddle it. I never want it to become a “pet” subject of mine, but I’ve seen too many people hurt and disillusioned by the false expectations the “word of faith” preachers present to folks when they are at their most vulnerable to not speak out. I think an understanding of this movement is a necessity for every Bible-believing Christian in order to have the discernment and tools he or she needs to help others avoid the same pitfalls.

I strongly recommend Hank Hanegraaff’s Christianity In Crisis: 21st Century Edition–which you can get at any Christian bookstore, on Amazon.com, or on his website, www.equip.org. This is one of the best explanations and refutations of the “word of faith” movement I’ve ever read.

Here are two great audio clips about the dangers of the “word of faith” movement. The first is from Hanegraaff’s March 26th broadcast of The Bible Answer Man. Listen through the first 5 or so minutes to hear a great explanation of the danger of this movement. The second is a well-listened to clip from John Piper, one of my favorite preachers. His clip really needs no explanation.

Bible Answer Man Broadcast March 26, 2009

Pastor Jackson Boyett of Dayspring Fellowship interviews Dr. Michael Horton about heretical TV preachers such as Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Paul Crouch, Kenneth Hagin, Robert Tilton, Peter Popoff, Jimmy Swaggart, John Avanzini, and a host of others. Horton is the editor of the book, the Agony of Deceit which is co-authored by Dr. Walter Martin, Dr. R.C. Sproul, Joel Nederhood, C. Everett Coop, Art Lindsley, and others. Dr. Walter Martin has been a frequent guest on the John Ankerberg show and is the founder of the Christian Research Institute. Part 5. Director – Larry Wessels of Christian Answers.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2003246070293752911

THIS VIDEO IS A PART OF A 5 PART SERIES. All parts are 1 hour in length but well worth the time, as I have seen most every Word of Faith exposure videos. And in my opinion it is the very best,, this series is even better than Justin Peters series called “A Call for Discernment” The rest of the series is available on THIS BLOG! Click the “VIDEO” picture in the top right hand column for the TWotWoF VIDEO ROW blog.

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

Understanding Mark 11:23

Mark 11:23 “Truly I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says is going to happen, it will be granted him.”

The faith movement is alive and well on planet earth. As Christian television continues to expand around the world, much of its content comes from these so called faith preachers. With Bibles in hand they preach a message of hope.. no, much better than that… certainty. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that; for the promises of the Bible are certain of fulfillment. Unbelief is a sin and we should pursue true faith in God with all our hearts. In fact, without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). But these preachers often go way too far… perhaps not because of a lack of sincerity (though I can’t read their hearts as God does), but because of the lack of sound exegesis. Here’s the problem in a nutshell: DECEIVED PEOPLE DECEIVE PEOPLE.

We would be horrified to hear of a surgeon who had just 2 weeks of training operating on someone’s brain. As vital as brain surgery is (in terms of salary, society pays brain surgeons many times what the average preacher receives), I believe the job of the preacher is far more important. Paul told Timothy, “Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.” (1 Tim. 4:16). Eternal souls hang in the balance, and great care and attention is needed to ensure that a teaching is sound, healthy and accurate. Unbiblical tradition and poor theology have severe consequences.

One of the key texts used by the faith preachers is Mark 11:23. For those caught up in this movement, and for those who simply want to understand what the verse really teaches, I commend to you the following short section from a longer series of articles by Vincent Cheung called “Faith to move mountains.” I trust it will be a blessing. – Pastor John Samson

FAITH TO MOVE MOUNTAINS
by Vincent Cheung

In our time, there is a teaching that is popular in some charismatic sects. In fact, it is so prevalent that we can even call it a movement. Supposedly derived from Mark 11:23 and similar verses, it says that if a person believes, then whatever he says will happen, and the diligent application of this teaching could bring anyone health and wealth. Commentators are afraid to say anything that would encourage such a teaching. However, to illegitimately soften or spiritualize a biblical verse is a misguided way of solving the problem of abuse. Moreover, the verse does say that if a person believes, then whatever he says will happen. It is futile to counter abuse by denying what the verse clearly and literally means.

The proper way to counter abuse is not to change the meaning of the verse, but to criticize the false teaching where it truly deviates from Scripture. To illustrate, I will raise two points about the teaching in question. The first has to do with the nature of faith, and the second has to do with the source of faith, or how faith is generated. These two points do not cover all the erroneous ideas espoused by the teaching, but our present purpose is to arrive at a correct positive understanding of Mark 11, verse 23, nothing more.

First, this false teaching conceives of faith as a force that is powerful in itself. Sometimes it is less esoteric and amounts to a christianized version of the self-centered doctrine of “positive thinking.” Its proponents are not always consistent in this, but when they do speak from such a perspective, they do not refer to faith as a person’s belief and reliance on a proper object – as in God, his promises, and so on – but that belief itself is the power that produces the desired effects. Attacking this misconception of faith will at the same time check the abuse of verse 23.

Second, the false teaching appeals to Romans 10:17 (“faith comes by hearing”) and asserts that faith is produced by hearing the words of Scripture over and over again. One way to do this is for a person to repeatedly speak some selected biblical verses to himself. For example, a sick person can say, “By his stripes, I am healed” (see 1 Peter 2:24) several hundred times a day. He might doubt the statement at first, but he will eventually become convinced that it is true, and then by the principle taught in Mark 11:23, physical healing will follow.

When they attempt to oppose this teaching, many people end up attacking Scripture itself. They would criticize the principle that a Christian can command things to happen by faith. But this principle is exactly what Jesus teaches. Adherents of the false teaching are right to complain that it is sheer unbelief to suggest that Jesus does not literally mean what he says in verse 23. All Christians should affirm that if we have faith, then we can command a mountain to move, and it will happen. Jesus demonstrated it on the fig tree, and then he said that we can do the same and even more, if we have faith. So unless we are willing to sacrifice the inspiration of Scripture due to unbelief, this principle is not subject to debate.

What is wrong with the false teaching is not their understanding of the principle, but in their understanding of faith. First, they erroneously conceive of faith as a force – that the power resides in belief as such – instead of understanding faith as the belief in divinely revealed propositions that require God’s conscious exercise of his power to make good. Second, they falsely conceive of faith as something that they can produce within themselves by repeatedly listening to biblical propositions.

The first misunderstanding makes their definition of faith altogether non-Christian. This point alone is sufficient to refute their doctrine concerning Mark 11:23. But the second point is even more relevant to our main purpose, which is to attain a correct positive understanding of the verse. To review, Jesus teaches the principle, “if we have faith, then we can move mountains.” Commentators have focused on qualifying the “we can move mountains” portion of the principle. But I suggest that we should focus on the “if we have faith” portion instead.

Here is the answer, then. The Bible says that faith comes by hearing the word of God. From this, the false teaching in question has inferred that faith always comes when a person hears the word of God. But the verse does not say any such thing.

In context, the verse is talking about the preaching of the gospel. As Paul writes, “How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?” (Romans 10:14). But nowhere is it suggested that everyone who hears the gospel will believe and thus be saved.

Salvation comes when a person believes the gospel, and a person can only believe the gospel when he finds out what the gospel is and what it says. Thus someone must go preach the gospel so that people might hear it. But the point is not that everyone who hears the gospel will become a Christian. Still less is Paul suggesting that the more a person hears, the more faith he is guaranteed to receive. The false teaching in question confuses how faith is usually facilitated or “delivered” (hearing) with what actually causes a person to believe what he hears.

So what causes a person to believe the word of God when he hears it? The Bible teaches that both faith and unbelief are controlled by God. It teaches in numerous places that a person refuses to believe because God actively works in his mind to harden his heart (John 12:39-40). So a person can hear the word of God everyday for half a century, but unless God sovereignly grants him faith to believe what he hears, he will remain in unbelief.

The kind of conviction that comes from nothing more than prolonged repetition could very well be the effect of brainwashing, for a lack of a better term. It is true that there can be a relationship between continuous exposure to the Bible and an increase of faith, but right now I am referring to mere repetition without the work of the Spirit. If the kind of faith that the Bible talks about can come this way, then the most effective form of evangelism would be to kidnap the unbelievers and lock them into a room where the Bible is played on loud speakers all day and all night. There would be no need for prayer, for persuasion, or for the Holy Spirit.

But again, the resulting conviction would be the result of mere brainwashing, and the profession of faith a mere parroting of what has been heard, similar to how an insane person might mindlessly mutter some of the phrases that he overhears or that are fed to him by others. There would be no genuine belief in the promises of God, but the conviction would serve only as the lifeless and thoughtless replacement to the person’s previous beliefs that have now been forcibly short-circuited by the process. The person might feel convinced, but there can be no power and no salvation in this kind of “faith.”

True faith is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8). In 1 Corinthians 12:9, Paul refers to the kind of faith that is a special manifestation of the Spirit. From its mention in 1 Corinthians 13:2 – that is, in the context of spiritual manifestations – we understand that it is this kind of faith that moves mountains. Just as faith to believe the gospel for salvation is sovereignly granted by God to whomever he chooses, this special manifestation of faith is also granted “just as he determines” (1 Corinthians 12:11).

This biblical understanding of faith returns the fulfillment of Mark 11:23 to the sovereign hand of God. In the process, it destroys the false teaching in question without compromising the principle taught by Jesus – that if we have faith, we will have whatever we say. The difference is that whether we have faith, or whether we have this kind of faith, is entirely up to God. He might deliver it to us by means of his word, but hearing his word does not guarantee this kind or level of faith.

Our faith depends on the work of the Spirit, who applies the word of God to our hearts and convinces us of its truth, giving us confidence of its effect, power, and relevance. The above commentators would be relieved that I have provided a legitimate way to explain how what Jesus says would not happen. But I have also explained how it could happen – it will happen when God grants the faith. So it remains for the commentators, or those who think like them, to assert that God will never grant this kind of faith. However, there is no biblical evidence for this, and if God would never grant this kind of faith even in principle, then this would render Jesus’ statement pointless. Thus it appears that the suggestion, that God would never grant this kind of faith even in principle, once again comes from nothing other than unbelief.

To recapitulate, verse 23 teaches that if we have faith, we can even command a mountain to move, and it will happen. Whether we will have this kind of faith is up to God, and at any time, it is possible that he will grant this kind of faith. It is from this same perspective that we can derive a correct understanding of verse 24. In that verse, Jesus refers to “whatever you ask for in prayer.”

Commentators again pile qualifications upon qualifications upon this, until they drown the verse deep into uncertainty and unbelief, making it practically useless for the readers. Of course any scriptural promise must be understood within the larger context of the Bible. However, this verse is clearly positive in intent, and should be expounded from a positive angle.

Larry Hurtado notes that Mark places great emphasis in calling Christians to follow Jesus’ ministry, and we should understand this teaching about faith in such a context. He adds, “Here Mark presents Jesus as an example of faith, and his readers are not only to admire Jesus’ faith but also to imitate it.”

We should support this perspective, since it is true that the Bible stresses faith as something that glorifies God and furthers his purpose. However, it is possible to press too far even this legitimate point, since the Bible also describes faith’s crucial role in drawing on God’s resources for our own success and preservation. We must not hesitate to exercise faith in God to meet our personal needs, as if to say that God’s resources are required for ministry but optional for our everyday living. A Christian should look to God for everything, even his daily bread (Matthew 6:11).

Perhaps it is best to acknowledge that faith in God can work for both our own benefit and for the advancement of his kingdom, and these two are seldom in conflict when we place the former within a broader concern for the latter. In other words, our faith for self-preservation and various benefits must be shaped by and subordinate to our concern for God’s kingdom.

Another aspect of faith has to do with persistence. Throughout the Bible, faith is sometimes portrayed as a quality that performs single and instantaneous acts of greatness, but at other times it is portrayed as a persistent and stubborn conviction that produces consistent speech and action over long durations. One only needs to read through Hebrews 11 for examples of both facets of faith. It is through “faith and patience” that we inherit God’s promises (Hebrews 6:12). This is an important reminder for all those who venture out in faith for the work of the kingdom. Our trust is in God’s word, which never fails, and not in immediate or short-term results.

Then, verse 25 cautions us against an extreme individualism in our faith. We cannot love God and at the same time hate our brothers and sisters in Christ. We cannot have faith toward God and at the same time harbor resentment toward others. Strong faith thrives in an environment where God’s people live in love and harmony, but strife will suffocate it. As 1 Peter 3:7 says, “Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers.”

Jesus tells us that faith can move mountains. This is not a teaching for us to explain away or for us to drown under a thousand qualifications. Instead, it serves to confront our unbelief and encourage stronger faith in us. It enables us to attempt new things, attain greater heights, and stretch our imagination. We must not shun or deny this faith. We must covet it!

Lord, we believe, help our unbelief! Increase our faith, so that we may “encourage the exhausted, and strengthen the feeble” (Isaiah 35:3, NASB). And if it pleases you, grant us a faith that can even uproot a mountain by a mere word of command. Lord, grant us this faith – now in the form of an explosive power, now in the form of a persistent trust – so that we may cast aside all obstacles and perform exploits in your name, for your glory and for the good of your people. Amen.

LINK HERE

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

AND DON”T MISS OUR TWotWoF GROUP RADIO SHOW

LIVE Thursdays at 10pm central

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

Promise Keepers, Kenneth Hagan and Freemasonry

Promise Keepers has taken pagan worship one step further. The first exposure of P.K. that I read documented that fact that the Promise Keepers distributed a book filled with sexual imagery of a very perverted sort. This article revolves around the pagan worship of the phallus (male reproductive organ). The story starts in July 1997 when the Supreme Council of the 33rd Degree of Freemasonry in it’s official publication called ‘The Scottish Rite Journal’ made a call to raise funds to restore the Masonic obelisk in Washington D.C. and also placed it on the cover of the magazine. This vile structure has been worshipped by pagans for centuries and it represents the phallus which is also associated with sun and serpent worship. It was designed by Freemasons, named after a Freemason and the cornerstone laid in Masonic ritual. Therefore it is a sexual, pagan, satanic, Masonic idol that Christians should identify and avoid. But these facts have been ignored and Christians are being deceived about the nature of this idol. Kenneth Hagan followed the Masonic lodge by placing the obelisk on his magazine cover the very next month! I do not believe that this is a coincidence and that a man such as Hagan who is well over 50 years older then me (he just turned 80) and was in Ministry well before I was even born and who has established International Bible colleges would be ignorant of the true nature of the obelisk.

The very next month in July 1997, Kenneth Hagan followed after the Mason’s example by placing the Masonic obelisk on the cover of his magazine. The article about the obelisk in the Masonic magazine mentioned that at the Grand Masters Conference held in Tulsa, Oklahoma (the headquarters for both 33rd degree Freemasons Oral Roberts and Kenneth Hagan) a call was made to Grand Lodges to raise money to restore the world’s tallest masonry structure. Were Hagan and Roberts present at this meeting? Anyone willing to come forward? Another significant clue is the key word ‘illuminate’ used by the Word of Faith magazine to describe the cover. The Illuminati has been associated with the obelisk a long time before. See the image below, published in 1982, for the obelisk-illuminati connection.

Copyright 1994 by the Christian Research Institute. Editor-in-chief, Elliot Miller. Used by permission. For more information on the Christian Research Institute, go to http://web.archive.org/web/20030212144905/http://www.equip.org/.

“Ye Are Gods?”
Orthodox and Heretical Views on the Deification of Man
Robert M. Bowman, Jr.

from the Christian Research Journal, Winter/Spring 1987, page 18. The Editor-in-Chief of the Christian Research Journal is Elliot Miller.

Is the belief that men were created to be “gods,” either in this life or in some future exaltation, a Christian teaching? Is it in any sense Christian to speak of the “deification” of man – to say that God created or redeemed man in order to become deity? What do various religious groups who use such language today mean? Are they all saying the same thing? Are all who use such terminology heretics? If not, how do we tell the difference? All of these questions will be addressed in this article.

DIFFERENT IDEAS OF DEIFICATION
The first step in answering these interrelated questions is to recognize that talk about men being gods cannot be isolated from basic world views, or conceptions of the world and its relation to God. Norman Geisler and William Watkins have pointed out that there are seven basic world views: atheism (no God), polytheism (many gods), pantheism (God is all), panentheism (God is in all), finite godism (a finite god made the world), deism (a God who does not do miracles created the world), and theism, or monotheism (a God who does miracles created the world), which is the biblical view (and is held by orthodox Jews and Muslims as well as Christians).[1] Not all doctrines can be neatly categorized into one of these seven world views, since some people do hold to combinations of two views; but such positions are inherently inconsistent, and usually one world view is dominant.
            In this article our concern will be with doctrines of deification which claim to be strictly Christian. (This means that we will not discuss, for example, New Age concepts of deification.) Varieties of such “Christian” views on deification can be found among adherents of monotheism, polytheism, and panentheism.

Monotheistic Deification
It may surprise some to learn that a monotheistic doctrine of deification was taught by many of the church fathers, and is believed by many Christians today, including the entire Eastern Orthodox church. In keeping with monotheism, the Eastern orthodox do not teach that men will literally become “gods” (which would be polytheism). Rather, as did many of the church fathers,[2] they teach that men are “deified” in the sense that the Holy Spirit dwells within Christian believers and transforms them into the image of God in Christ, eventually endowing them in the resurrection with immortality and God’s perfect moral character.
            It may be objected that to classify as monotheistic any doctrine which refers to men in some positive sense as “gods” is self-contradictory; and strictly speaking such an objection is valid. Indeed, later in this study it shall be argued that such terminology is not biblical. However, the point here is that however inconsistent and confusing the language that is used (and it is inconsistent), the substance of what the Eastern Orthodox are seeking to express when they speak of deification is actually faithful to the monotheistic world view. The language used is polytheistic, and in the light of Scripture should be rejected; but the doctrine intended by this language in the context of the teachings of the fathers and of Eastern Orthodoxy is quite biblical, and is thus not actually polytheistic.
            Thus, it should not be argued that anyone who speaks of “deification” necessarily holds to a heretical view of man. Such a sweeping judgment would condemn many of the early church’s greatest theologians (e.g., Athanasius, Augustine), as well as one of the three main branches of historic orthodox Christianity in existence today. On the other hand, some doctrines of deification are most certainly heretical, because they are unbiblical in substance as well as in terminology.

Polytheistic Deification
Two examples of polytheistic doctrines of deification are the teachings of Mormonism and Armstrongism, although adherents of these religions generally do not admit to being polytheists.
            The Mormons are very explicit in their “scriptures” that there are many Gods; for example, the three persons of the Trinity are regarded as three “Gods.”[3] Since they believe that many Gods exist but at present worship only one – God the Father – at least one Mormon scholar has admitted with qualifications that their doctrine could be termed “henotheistic.”[4] Henotheism is a variety of polytheism in which there are many gods, but only one which should be worshipped. Thus, the meaning of deification in Mormonism is radically different than that of the church fathers who used similar terms, despite Mormon arguments to the contrary.[5]
            The Worldwide Church of God of Herbert W. Armstrong (who died early in 1986) claims to believe in only one God. However, Armstrongism defines “God” as a collective term (like “church” or “family”) referring to a family of distinct beings all having the same essential nature. Presently this “God family” consists of two members, God the Father and Christ, but it is their plan to reproduce themselves in human beings and so add millions or even billions to the God family.[6] Therefore, by the normal use of words on which our categorizations are based, Armstrong’s world view is also polytheistic.

Panentheistic Deification
An important example of a panentheistic doctrine of deification within professing Christianity is Union Life, founded by Norman Grubb, who at one time was a respected evangelical leader. In 1980 Cornerstone, an evangelical magazine, ran an article arguing that Union Life was teaching pantheism or panentheism.[7] Union Life has attempted to argue[8] that panentheism, unlike pantheism, is not heretical (despite Grubb’s admission that he does not know the definition of pantheism![9]). However, neither pantheism nor panentheism separates the creation from the essential nature of the Creator, though panentheism does posit a differentiation in which the creation is the expression of the Creator. The heretical nature of Union Life is made evident by such statements as, “there is only One Person in the universe,” “everything is God on a certain level of manifestation,” and “Nothing but God exists!”[10] Therefore, Union Life’s claim to following the tradition of the church fathers[11] is no more valid than that of the Mormons.

Positive Confession: Monotheistic or Polytheistic?
Not all views of the deification of man are easily classifiable. Perhaps the most difficult doctrine of deification to categorize into one of the seven basic world views is that of the “positive confession” or “faith” teachers, including Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Frederick K.C. Price, Charles Capps, Casey Treat, and many others.
            In brief, the “faith” teaching maintains that God created man in “God’s class,” as “little gods,” with the potential to exercise the “God kind of faith” in calling things into existence and living in prosperity and success as sovereign beings. We lost this opportunity by rebelling against God and receiving Satan’s nature. To correct this situation, Christ became a man, died spiritually (receiving Satan’s nature), went to Hell, was “born again,” rose from the dead with God’s nature, and then sent the Holy Spirit so that the Incarnation could be duplicated in believers, thus fulfilling their calling to be little gods. Since we are called to experience this kind of life now, we should experience success in everything we do, including health and financial prosperity.
            Some aspects of this teaching have been documented and compared with Scripture in articles published in previous issues of this journal.[12] Regarding the claim that men are “little gods,” there is no question (as shall be demonstrated shortly) that the language used is unbiblical, but are the ideas being conveyed contrary to Scripture as well? Specifically, is the world view of the “faith” teaching monotheistic or polytheistic?
            A simple answer to this question is somewhat elusive. The positive confession teachers have made statements that seem polytheistic, and yet often in the same paragraph contradict themselves by asserting the truth of monotheism.[13] At least two positive confession teachers, Frederick K.C. Price and Casey Treat, have admitted that men are not literally gods and have promised not to use this terminology again.[14] In many cases, the dominant world view appears to be monotheism, with their teachings tending at times toward a polytheistic world view. It seems best, then, to regard the “faith” teaching as neither soundly monotheistic nor fully polytheistic, but instead as a confused mixture of both world views.
            This means that the “faith” teaching of deification cannot be regarded as orthodox. Their concept of deification teaches that man has a “sovereign will” comparable to God’s, and that man can therefore exercise the “God kind of faith” and command things to be whatever he chooses.[15] At least one “faith” teacher, Kenneth Copeland, seems to regard God as finite, since he says, speaking of Adam, “His body and God were exactly the same size.”[16] Again, it is the context in which the doctrine appears that determines whether the teaching is orthodox or heretical. In this case, there seems to be significant evidence to show that some, at least, of the “faith” teachers have a heretical view of God, as well as a heretical view of the nature of the believer. Nevertheless, there also appears to be evidence that not all of the “faith” teachers are heretical in the same sense as, say, Mormonism or Armstrongism.
            At this point we will turn to the biblical teaching relating to this subject to see whether the Bible teaches deification at all.

THE BIBLICAL TEACHING
All of the various doctrines of deification discussed above appeal to the same passages of Scripture and the same biblical themes to validate their teaching. Besides the passages where men are called “gods” or “sons of God,” there are the biblical themes concerning men in the image of God; the close relationship between Christ and Christians; and the statement in 2 Peter 1:4 that Christians are “partakers of the divine nature.” In this article we shall discuss briefly each of these texts and themes.

Are Men Called “Gods” in Scripture?
The Bible in both Old and New Testaments explicitly and repeatedly affirms that there is only one God (e.g.,Deut. 4:35-39; Isa. 43:10; 44:6-8; 1 Cor. 8:4-6; 1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19). Therefore, the Bible most definitely rejects any sort of polytheism, including henotheism.
            The Scriptures also very clearly teach that God is an absolutely unique being who is distinct from the world as its Creator (e.g.,Gen. 1:1; John 1:3; Rom. 1:25; Heb. 11:3). This teaching rules out pantheism and panentheism, according to which the world is either identical to God or an essential aspect of God. Since He is eternal, omnipresent, omnipotent, and omniscient, God is totally unique, so that there is none even like God (e.g.,Ps. 102:25-27; Isa. 40-46; Acts 17:24-28).[17] The Bible, then, unmistakably teaches a monotheistic world view.
            In the face of so many explicit statements that there is only one God, and in light of His uniqueness, it may seem surprising that anyone would claim that the Bible teaches that men are gods. However, there are a few passages in Scripture which seem to call men “god” or “gods.” Most or all of these, however, are irrelevant to any doctrine of deification. In practice, the question of whether the Bible ever calls men “gods” in a positive sense focuses exclusively on Psalm 82:6 (“I said, ‘you are gods’”) and its citation by Jesus in John 10:34-35.
            The usual view among biblical expositors for centuries is that Psalm 82 refers to Israelite judges by virtue of their position as judges representing God; it is, therefore, a figurative usage which applies only to those judges and does not apply to men or even believers in general. If this interpretation is correct, Psalm 82:6 is also irrelevant to any doctrine of Christian deification.
            An alternative interpretation agrees that the “gods” are Israelite judges, but sees the use of the term “gods” as an ironic figure of speech. Irony is a rhetorical device in which something is said to be the case in such a way as to make the assertion seem ridiculous (compare Paul’s ironic “you have become kings” in 1 Corinthians 4:8, where Paul’s point is that they had not become kings). According to this interpretation, the parallel description of the “gods” as “sons of the Most High” (which, it is argued, is not in keeping with the Old Testament use of the term “sons” of God), the condemnation of the judges for their wicked judgment, and especially the statement, “Nevertheless, you will die as men,” all point to the conclusion that the judges are called “gods” in irony.
            If the former interpretation is correct, then in John 10:34-35 Jesus would be understood to mean that if God called wicked judges “gods” how much more appropriate is it for Him, Jesus, to be called God, or even the Son of God. If the ironic interpretation of Psalm 82:6 is correct, then in John 10:34-35 Jesus’ point would still be basically the same. It is also possible that Jesus was implying that the Old Testament application of the term “gods” to wicked judges was fulfilled (taking “not to be broken” to mean “not to be unfulfilled,” cf. John 7:23) in Himself as the true Judge (cf. John 5:22,27-30; 9:39).[18] Those wicked men were, then, at best called “gods” and “sons of the Most High” in a special and figurative sense; and at worst they were pseudo-gods and pseudo-sons of God. Jesus, on the other hand, is truly God (cf. John 1:1,18; 20:28; 1 John 5:20) and the unique Son of God (John 10:36; 20:31; etc.)
            Neither the representative nor the ironic interpretation of Psalm 82 allows it (or John 10:34-35) to be understood to teach that men were created or redeemed to be gods. Nor is there any other legitimate interpretation which would allow for such a conclusion. The Israelite judges were wicked men condemned to death by the true God, and therefore were not by any definition of deification candidates for godhood.
            If, then, the deification of man is to be found in Scripture, it will have to be on the basis of other biblical texts or themes, as Scripture gives men the title of “gods” only in a figurative or condemnatory sense.

The Image of God: An Exact Duplicate?
One biblical teaching upon which great emphasis is usually laid by those who teach some form of the deification of man is the doctrine of man as created and redeemed in the image of God. Of the many examples that could be given, two will have to suffice. Casey Treat’s claim that man is an “exact duplicate” of God is based on his understanding of the meaning of “image” in Genesis 1:26-27.[19] The Mormon apologetic for their doctrine that God is an exalted Man and that men can also become Gods typically appeals to the image of God in man, and to the parallel passage in Genesis 5:1-3 where Adam is said to have begotten Seth “in his own likeness, after his own image” (Genesis 5:1-3).[20]
            These claims raise two questions. Does the creation of man in the image of God imply that God Himself is an exalted man (as in Mormonism), or perhaps a spirit with the physical form or shape of a man (as in Armstrongism)? And does the image of God in man imply that men may become “gods”? There are several reasons why such conclusions are incorrect.
            First, there are the biblical statements which say that God is not a man (Num. 23:19; 1 Sam. 15:29; Hos.11:9). Second, there is the biblical teaching on the attributes of God already mentioned, according to which God obviously cannot now or ever have been a man (except in the sense that the second person of the triune God became a man by taking upon Himself a second nature different from the nature of deity). Third, in the context of Genesis 1:26-27 and 5:1-3 there is one very important difference between the relationship between God and Adam on the one hand and Adam and Seth on the other hand: Adam was created or made by God, while Seth was begotten by Adam. To create or make something in the image or likeness of someone means to make something of a different kind that nevertheless somehow “pictures” or represents that someone (cf. Luke 20:24-25). It is therefore a mistake to reason backwards from the creation of man in God’s image to deduce the nature of God. Genesis 1:26-27 is telling us something about man, not about God.
            Besides the passages in Genesis (see also 9:6), the Old Testament says nothing else about the image of God. The New Testament teaches that man is still in God’s image (1 Cor. 11:7; James 3:9), but also says that, in some unique sense, Christ is the image of God (2 Cor. 4:4; Col. 1:15). Christians are by virtue of their union with Christ being conformed to the image of God and of Christ resulting finally (after this life) in glorification (2 Cor. 3:18; Rom. 8:29-30), which includes moral perfection (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10) and an immortal physical body like Christ’s (1 Cor. 15:49; cf. Phil. 3:21).
            Orthodox biblical theologians and scholars do have some differences of opinion as to how best to define and explain what these passages mean by the “image of God.”[21] However, these differences are relatively minor, and do not obscure the basic truth of the image, which is that man was created as a physical representation (not a physical reproduction or “exact duplicate”) of God in the world. As such, he was meant to live forever, to know God personally, to reflect His moral character – His love – through human relationships, and to exercise dominion over the rest of the living creatures on the earth (Gen. 1:28-30; cf. Ps. 8:5-8).
            From the biblical teaching on the image of God, then, there is nothing which would warrant the conclusion that men are or will ever be “gods,” even “little gods,” as the “faith” teachers often put it.

Sons of God: Like Begets Like?
Although men are never called “gods” in an affirmative sense in Scripture, believers in Christ are called “sons” or “children” of God (John 1:12; Rom. 8:14-23; Gal. 4:5-7; 1 John 3:1-2; etc.). Based on the assumption that sons are of the same nature as their father, some conclude that since believers are sons of God, they must also be gods. This reasoning is thought to be confirmed by those passages in John’s writings which speak of believers as being “begotten” or “born” of God (John 1:13; 3:5-6; 1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1,4,18).
            As convincing as this argument may seem, it actually goes beyond the Bible’s teaching and is at best erroneous and at worse heretical. The above Scriptures do not mean that the “sonship” of believers is a reproduction of God’s essence in man for the following reasons.
            1/ In one sense all human beings are God’s “offspring” (Acts 17:28), so that even Adam could be called God’s “son” (Luke 3:38); yet this cannot mean that human beings are gods or have the same nature as God, for the reasons already given in our analysis of the “image of God”.
            2/ Paul speaks of our sonship as an “adoption” (Rom. 8:15,23; Gal. 4:5), which of course suggests that we are not “natural” sons of God.
            3/ John, who frequently speaks of Christians as having been “begotten” by God, also tells us that Jesus Christ is the “only-begotten” or “unique” Son of God (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). At the very least, this means that we are not sons of God in the same sense that Christ is the Son of God, nor will we ever be. Christ was careful to distinguish between His Sonship and that of His followers (e.g., John 20:17). For this reason Kenneth Copeland’s assertion that “Jesus is no longer the only begotten Son of God”[22] must be regarded as false doctrine.
            4/ Finally, the New Testament itself always interprets the spiritual birth which makes believers sons, not as a conversion of men into gods, but as a renewal in the moral likeness of God, produced by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and resulting in an intimate relationship with God as a Father who provides for His children’s needs (Matt. 5:9, 45; 6:8, 10, 32; 7:11,21; Rom. 8:14-17; Gal. 4:6-7; 1 John 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1-5).
            The biblical doctrine that believers in Christ are children of God is a glorious teaching, to be sure, and what it means we do not yet fully know (1 John 3:2). But we do know something about what it means, as well as what it does not mean. It does mean eternal life with Christ-like holiness and love, in which the full potential of human beings as the image of God is realized. But it does not mean that we shall cease to be creatures, or that “human potential” is infinite, or that men shall be gods.

Union with Christ: Are Christians Incarnations of God?
The doctrine that Christians are adopted sons of God is closely related to the doctrine of the spiritual union between Christ and Christian believers. This union is expressed both as a union between Christ and the individual believer and as a union of Christ and the church. Paul in particular teaches that Christians are “in Christ” (a phrase which occurs over 160 times in Paul’s letters), “with Christ” in His death, burial, resurrection, and ascension (Rom. 6:3-8; Eph. 2:5-6), corporately the “body” of Christ (Rom. 12:4-5; 1 Cor. 12:12-27; Eph. 1:22-23; 4:12; Col. 1:18), that they have Christ, or the Spirit of Christ, dwelling within (Rom. 8:9-11; 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:17-20; 2 Cor. 13:5; Eph. 3:16-17), and that Christ Himself is their “life” (Gal. 2:20; Col. 3:4). On the basis of this teaching, many have concluded that Christians are in fact either a corporate extension of the Incarnation (as the church) or replications of the Incarnation (as individual Christians). Such a conclusion is often tied to the teaching of some concept of deification. The question is, does the Bible support such a conclusion?
            As with the doctrine of Christians as the sons of God, such ideas go far beyond the teaching of Scripture. To say that believers are “in Christ” means that they are somehow spiritually united to Christ, not that they are Christ. When Paul says that we have been crucified, buried, raised, and ascended with Christ, he is not speaking literally, but means simply that by virtue of our legal identification and close spiritual relationship with Christ we benefit by His death and resurrection. The teaching that the church is the body of Christ is also not to be taken literally, and should not be pressed to imply that the church is Christ or even an essential part of Christ. That the relationship between Christ and the church involves a substantial union without the church becoming Christ is best seen in the figure of the church as the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:28-32): the bride is physically united to her husband, yet they remain distinct. The Spirit indwells the believer, to be sure, but the believer does not become divine as a result, any more than the temple under the old covenant became a part of God simply because His presence filled it (cf. 1 Cor. 3:17). Christ is our life, not in the sense that our individuality is replaced by His person, but in the sense that we have eternal and spiritual life through our union with Him.
            Finally, the notion that each believer is somehow a duplicate of the Incarnation deserves a closer look. The rationale for this view is that an “incarnation” is defined as the indwelling of God in a human being; and since, we are told, this is as true of the Christian as it was of Christ, it follows that the Christian, as Kenneth Hagin puts it, “is as much an incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth.”[23] The error in this reasoning lies in the definition of “incarnation.” Christ was not merely God dwelling in a human being, a heresy (known as Nestorianism) the early church condemned because it meant that the Word did not actually become flesh (John 1:14) but only joined Himself to a human being. Rather, the incarnate Christ was one person in whom were perfectly united two natures, deity and humanity; the Christian is a person with one nature, human, in whom a separate person, God the Holy Spirit (and through Him, the Father and the Son as well), dwells.

Does Partaking of the Divine Nature Make Us Gods?
In 2 Peter 1:4 we are told that through God’s promises Christians may “become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust.” This text, even more so than Psalm 82, has suggested to many a doctrine of deification. And indeed, if by deification one means simply “partaking of the divine nature,” then such “deification” is unquestionably biblical. The question, then, is what does Peter mean by “partakers of divine nature”?
            Since the word “divine” is used earlier in the same sentence (“His divine power”, verse 3), where it must mean “of God,” “divine nature” must mean God’s nature. The word “nature,” however, should not be understood to mean “essence.” Rather, as the context makes evident, Peter is speaking of God’s moral nature or character. Thus Christians are by partaking of the divine nature to escape the corruption that is in the world because of sinful lust, and are instead to exhibit the moral attributes of Christ (cf. verses 5-11).

DISCERNING ORTHODOX FROM HERETICAL TEACHINGS
It is not always easy to tell the difference between heretical and orthodox doctrines. Often people of different religions use the same or nearly the same words to express widely different ideas. One of the marks of the “cults,” in fact, is the use of Christian terminology to express non-Christian concepts.[24] This is very much the case with deification.
            How, then, can Christians tell the difference? There are four essential elements to an orthodox view of the relationship between God and man, and any doctrine which compromises or denies these teachings is less than soundly orthodox. These four elements are monotheism, trinitarianism, incarnationalism, and evangelicalism.
            Monotheism, as has already been explained, is the view that a single, unique, infinite Being (called God) created all other beings out of nothing, and that this Creator will forever be the only real, true God. Trinitarianism is the distinctive Christian revelation of God, according to which the one God exists eternally as three distinct but inseparable persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[25] Incarnationalism is the teaching that the second person of the Trinity (called the “Word” in John 1:1, 14, and the “Son” in Matthew 28:19), without ceasing to be God, became flesh, uniting uniquely in His one undivided person the two natures of deity and humanity. Evangelicalism is the belief that salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.
            With these four criteria of orthodoxy in mind, how do the various doctrines of deification measure up? The doctrines of the church fathers, as well as of Eastern Orthodoxy, are, as we have already indicated, thoroughly orthodox on all four points. Mormonism and Armstrongism fail on all four counts, and are therefore heretical. Union Life appears to hold to the Trinity and salvation by grace, but sets these doctrines in the context of panentheism; therefore, it too is heretical.
            But what shall we say about the “faith” teachers? They do affirm a monotheistic world view and generally affirm the Trinity (though there is some evidence of confusion on that score). Some at least of these teachers consider the Christian to be as much an incarnation as Jesus, and thus fail the third test. Most speak unguardedly of man as existing in “God’s class,” of being the same “kind” as God, and so forth, even while occasionally making disclaimers about men never becoming equal to God. Are these teachers heretics, or are they orthodox?
            It may be that a simple black-or-white approach to this question is inappropriate in some cases. Certainly these teachers are not to be placed in the same category as Mormonism and Armstrongism, since the “faith” teachers affirm monotheism and trinitarianism. Yet too many statements have been made by these teachers which can only be called heretical, though it may be that such statements are due to carelessness or hyperbole and not actual heretical belief. It is to be hope that the “faith” teachers will recognize the errors of their unbiblical statements and repent of them. Until that time, their doctrine of men being “little gods” is so far from being orthodox that it should not be placed in that category either. How, then, should we categorize such teachings?
            In recent years ministries which specialize in discerning orthodox from heretical teachings have been using the term “aberrational” to describe teachings which do not fit neatly into either the orthodox or heretical category. Specifically, “heretical” teaching explicitly denies essential biblical truth, while “aberrational” teaching compromises or confuses essential biblical truth. Both are in error, but a heresy is an outright rejection or opposition to truth, while an aberration is a distortion or misunderstanding of truth only. Aberrational teachers affirm the essential doctrines of orthodoxy, and then go on to teach doctrines that compromise or are otherwise inconsistent with orthodoxy, while heretics actually deny one or more of the essentials.
            It we apply this distinction to the cases at hand, their usefulness becomes apparent. Mormonism and Armstrongism both explicitly reject certain essential teachings of orthodoxy; they are therefore heretical. Union Life rejects monotheism in favor of panentheism; it is also heretical. Many of the “faith” teachers affirm the essentials, but then go on to teach doctrines which undermine their professed orthodoxy; their doctrine is aberrational and false. On the other hand, there are, unfortunately, at least some “faith” teachers (for example, Kenneth Copeland) whose teachings are so opposed to orthodoxy that they can only be regarded as heretical.
            It is not always easy to decide whether a teaching is orthodox, aberrational, or heretical. Nevertheless, it can be done, and we should not allow the unpopularity of making doctrinal judgments to deter us from the necessary (if sometimes unpleasant) task of evaluating questionable teaching. In doing so, we must avoid the extreme of labeling as heretics absolutely everyone who uses the term “deification,” as well as the extreme of regarding as Christian any doctrine of deification which makes reference to Christ. It is the substance of each doctrine which must be examined as the basis for discerning whether it is orthodox, aberrational, or heretical. Only in this way can the church’s calling to “test the spirits, to see whether they are from God” (1 John 4:1) be fulfilled.

NOTES

1 Norman Geisler and William Watkins, Perspectives: Understanding and Evaluating Today’s World Views (San Bernardino, CA: Here’s Life, 1984).
2 See, for example, Gerald Bonner, “Augustine’s Conception of Deification,” Journal of Theological Studies, n.s., 37 (Oct. 1986): 369-386.
3 Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed. (Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1966), 317.
4 Van Hale, “Defining the Mormon Doctrine of Deity,” Sunstone 10, 1 (1985), 25-26.
5 See especially Philip Barlow, “Unorthodox Orthodoxy: The Idea of Deification in Christian History,” Sunstone 9 (Sept.-Oct. 1984), 13-18.
6 See “A Summary Critique: Mystery of the Ages, Herbert W. Armstrong,” elsewhere in this issue of CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL.
7 “A Case in Point: Union Life,” Cornerstone, 9, 52 (1980), 32-36.
8 Norman Grubb, “The Question Box,” Union Life 6 (May-June 1981), 23.
9 Norman Grubb, “The Question Box,” Union Life 6 (July-Aug. 1981), 23.
10 See “A Case in Point: Union Life,” 32-33.
11 Tom Carroll, “The Mystery According to St. Augustine,” Union Life 10 (Nov.-Dec. 1985), 20-21.
12 Brian A. Onken, “A Misunderstanding of Faith,” FORWARD 5 (1982), and Onken, “The Atonement of Christ and the ‘Faith’ Message,” FORWARD 7 (1984).
13 E.g., Casey Treat, Complete Confidence: The Attitude for Success (Seattle, WA: Casey Treat Ministries, 1985), 319-324.
14 At private meetings between Walter Martin and Larry Duckworth with Frederick K.C. Price on May 1, 1986, and between Walter Martin and Casey Treat in early April, 1987.
15 Treat, 82-83, 306-327; Holy Bible: Kenneth Copeland Reference Edition (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1972), iii.
16 Holy Bible: Kenneth Copeland Reference Edition, lvi.
17 On the biblical teaching on the nature of God, see The Nature and Attributes of God, by Robert and Gretchen Passantino of CARIS (write to CARIS, P.O. Box 2067, Costa Mesa, CA 92628), or this author’s outline study, “The Attributes of God,” available from CRI (order #DA-250).
18 E. Jungkuntz, “An Approach to the Exegesis of John 10:34-36,” Concordia Theological Monthly 35 (1964):560.
19 Casey Treat, Renewing the Mind: The Arena for Success (Seattle, WA: Casey Treat Ministries, 1985), 90.
20 Barlow, 17.
21 See G.C. Berkouwer, Man: The Image of God, Studies in Dogmatics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1962), 37-118.
22 Kenneth Copeland, Now We Are in Christ Jesus (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1980), 24.
23 Kenneth E. Hagin, “The Incarnation,” The Word of Faith (Dec. 1980), 14.
24 Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, rev. ed. (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1985), 18-24.
25 Introductory literature on the Trinity is available from CRI.

link here