SYNOPSIS

Kenneth Copeland stands today as one of the Faith movement’s leading spokesmen. His voluminous material (in print and broadcast media), combined with his crusades and international outreach centers, attest to his vast influence.

Copeland is responsible for spreading many of the Faith movement’s unbiblical teachings. He distorts the biblical concepts of faith and covenant. He reduces God to the image of man while elevating man to the status of God. He lowers Jesus to being a product of positive confession who took on a satanic nature at the cross. And he promotes the occult practice of creative visualization.

Copeland’s errors are largely due to his negative stance on reasoning, his poor handling of the Bible, his aversion toward theology, and his bias against tradition.

On the night of November 2, 1962, a young man twenty-five years of age, struggling against “sin, sickness, and strife,” asked Jesus to “come into [his] heart.”¹ His decision came two weeks after his wife had done likewise.² Today, these two individuals head a ministry that literally stretches around the globe, while remaining in the forefront of what has come to be known as the “Faith” movement. They are Kenneth and Gloria Copeland.

Part One of this series explored the roots of the Faith movement and surveyed some of its leading proponents today. In this installment, our primary attention will be devoted to cataloging and critiquing the core theology of one of the most widely recognized and respected Faith teachers to date — Kenneth Copeland.³

FROM OBSCURITY TO CENTER STAGE

Though best known for his “prosperity” message, Copeland began his ascent to Faith stardom from a state of financial disarray. Beset by monetary problems, in 1967 he decided to resume his education at Oral Roberts University (ORU), where he subsequently “landed a job as copilot on Oral Robert’s [sic] cross-country crusade flights.”⁴

It was not until August of 1967, however, that Copeland experienced a revolution in his outlook through the preaching of yet another evangelist — Kenneth E. Hagin, regarded by many to be the “father of the Faith movement.” With reference to his “distant mentor,” Copeland has been quoted “as saying that he ‘learned nothing’ during six months at Oral Roberts University but was so excited by Hagin’s teachings that…[he] spent the next month in his garage listening to them.”⁵

The Copelands returned to Fort Worth, Texas in 1968 where they established an evangelistic association. Within a few short years their home-based Bible studies reportedly grew into large revivals, sometimes with crowds large enough to fill entire “civic centers and international arenas.”⁶

In 1973 the ministry began publishing its own newsletter, Believer’s Voice of Victory. Two years later, Copeland claimed the Lord “commanded him to ‘preach the uncompromised Word on every available voice.’”⁷ This prompted him to launch the Believer’s Voice of Victory radio broadcast in 1976. By 1979 Copeland’s ministry was established firmly enough to enter the arena of television, paving the way for its 1981 venture into satellite communications. And in August of the following year “the ministry made history by initiating the first global religious broadcast” (emphasis in original).⁸

Copeland continues to experience popular acceptance within various charismatic and Pentecostal circles. His books, booklets, and taped messages can be found in a number of Christian bookstores, and his crusades and revivals consistently produce large turnouts. Furthermore, the ministry’s international scope and influence is well attested by its offices in England, the Philippines, South Africa, Australia, Canada, and Hong Kong.

While not every Faith teacher holds to all of Copeland’s doctrines, they, along with his followers, consider him a leading — if not the leading — authority on Faith theology. “Many have already coronated Copeland as the new king of the Faith movement,” writes one observer. “In a recent article, even Time magazine refers to Copeland as the ‘chief exponent’ of the Faith movement.”⁹

THE FORCE OF FAITH

Of the multiple views of faith held by Faith teachers,¹⁰ Copeland focuses primarily on an understanding of faith as a force. “Faith is a power force,” he claims. “It is a tangible force. It is a conductive force.”¹¹ Moreover, “faith is a spiritual force….It is substance. Faith has the ability to effect natural substance.”¹² As “the force of gravity…makes the law of gravity work…this force of faith…makes the laws of the spirit world function.”¹³

Copeland affirms that “God cannot do anything for you apart or separate from faith,”¹⁴ for “faith is God’s source of power” (emphasis in original).¹⁵ Moreover, “everything that you’re able to see or touch, anything that you can feel, anything that’s perceptive to the five physical senses, was originally the faith of God, and was born in the substance of God’s faith.”¹⁶ In other words, “faith was the raw material substance that the Spirit of God used to form the universe.”¹⁷

Copeland adds that “God used words when He created the heaven and the earth….Each time God spoke, He released His faith — the creative power to bring His words to pass.”¹⁸ For “words are spiritual containers,”¹⁹ and the “force of faith is released by words.”²⁰

Copeland derives his definition of faith from Hebrews 11:1: “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (KJV). He interprets the word “substance” as some transcendent, primary element that makes up the universe; it was and is activated by spoken words at the onset of creation (both God’s original creation of the world and all subsequent creations, whether by God or man).

Contrary to Copeland’s view, the word translated “substance” in the King James Version is the Greek word hypostasis which, in the context of Hebrews 11:1, means “an assured impression, a mental realizing.”²¹ Far from being some tangible material or energetic force, faith is a channel of living trust stretching from man to God. It is an assurance that God’s promises never fail, even if sometimes we do not experience their fulfillment during our mortal existence. Other translations render hypostasis more precisely as “being sure” (NIV), “to be sure” (TEV), and “assurance” (NASB).

Neither the original Greek text nor any of the modern translations support Copeland’s understanding of faith. The same holds true for his understanding of spoken words. Besides, the idea of words functioning as faith-filled containers makes no sense if there is no such thing as a “force of faith” (requiring packaging and transportation) in the first place.

A GOD OF HUMAN PROPORTIONS

Copeland’s view of God fares no better biblically than his understanding of faith. He describes God as someone “very much like you and me….A being that stands somewhere around 6’2,” 6’3,” that weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of a couple of hundred pounds, little better, [and] has a [hand]span nine inches across.”²²

Copeland’s statement is based on his hyperliteral reading of Isaiah 40:12 (“Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, marked off the heavens with a [nine inch] span,…” [AV]). Yet following the same line of interpretation, one would also have to conclude that God literally held a basket full of dust and weighed mountains on a gigantic set of scales (v. 12b) — an absurd proposition ruled out by the context of the passage. The fact is that Isaiah 40 makes extensive use of figurative language to underscore the vast difference between the Creator and His creation.

Giving a literal spin on verses that figuratively describe God in humanlike (anthropomorphic) terms, Copeland makes God out to be a “spirit-being with a body, complete with eyes, and eyelids, ears, nostrils, a mouth, hands and fingers, and feet.”²³ However, the Bible never intended to convey the notion that God has physical features like His human creation. Anthropomorphic descriptions were simply meant to help us understand and relate to our Maker. Jesus declared, “God is spirit” (John 4:24), not a spirit-being with a body (cf. Deut. 4:12). The Creator is, after all, “God, and not man” (Hos. 11:9).

The idea of God possessing a body (physical or spirit) implies the unbiblical view that the Trinity is actually composed of three separate beings. Moreover, a God who has a body with definite, measurable dimensions cannot truly be omnipresent, unlike the God of Scripture who is present everywhere in all His fullness (Jer. 23:23-24). (It is true that in His human nature Christ has a body and is localized in space and time. But in His divine nature He remains nonphysical and omnipresent, sharing this immutable nature with the Father and Holy Spirit.) Copeland’s deflation of God is best exemplified by his comment that “the biggest failure in the Bible…is God.”²⁴ In stark contrast, the biblical God is an all-powerful being (Dan. 4:35) whose plans cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2) and who considers nothing too difficult (Jer. 32:17; Luke 1:37).

Copeland’s diminished view of God is further amplified by a correspondingly inflated view of the universe in general and man in particular. He claims that the earth is “a copy of the mother planet [i.e., heaven] where God lives.”²⁵ Exactly how Copeland could “squeeze” God on any planet is difficult to fathom, especially since Solomon pointed out that heaven itself cannot contain God (1 Kings 8:27).

MEMBERS OF GOD’S CLASS

Copeland overemphasizes similarities between God and man to the point where any distinction becomes virtually nil: “God’s reason for creating Adam was His desire to reproduce Himself….Adam is as much like God as you could get, just the same as Jesus….Adam, in the Garden of Eden, was God manifested in the flesh” (emphasis added).²⁶

Referring to his so-called law of genesis, Copeland asserts, “Adam was created in God’s own image and likeness, a spirit-being…[and] takes on the nature of his spiritual father or lord.”²⁷ In explaining the terms “image” and “likeness” in Genesis 1:26, he adds: “If you stood Adam upside God, they look just exactly alike….If you stood Jesus and Adam side-by-side, they would look and act and sound exactly alike….The image is that they look just alike, but the likeness is that they act alike and they are alike….All of God’s attributes, all of God’s authority, all of God’s faith, all of God’s ability was invested in that man.”²⁸

Actually, the terms “image” and “likeness” refute Copeland’s point. The Hebrew word for “likeness” (demuth) simply means similarity or resemblance, not identity.²⁹ Furthermore, the term itself actually “defines and limits” the word “image” (Hebrew: tselem) in order “to avoid the implication that man is a precise copy of God, albeit miniature” (emphasis added).³⁰

Humans are created in God’s image in the sense that they share, in a finite and imperfect way, God’s communicable attributes (e.g, rationality and morality). These attributes, in turn, give individuals the capacity to enjoy fellowship with God, develop personal relationships with one another, and take care of God’s creation as He has commanded.³¹ God’s incommunicable attributes (e.g., omnipotence, omniscience, self-sufficiency), however, remain solely His.

Along with the “image of God,” Copeland also refers to “the life of God,” which he interchanges with the terms “the absolute life of God,” “absolute life,” “life force,” “life in the absolute sense,” “eternal life,” and “everlasting life.”³² He applies these terms to a quality of life, the source of which is God.³³ But he also speaks of it as “the substance — the source, the power — the unseen force that makes God, God…[and] places Him above everything else that exists.”³⁴

Copeland states that “man was created to know that great life force and he longs for it in his dreams. Adam had that life force in him before he committed high treason” (emphases added).³⁵ This is yet another sense in which Copeland believes Adam to be created in God’s class. He was made to partake of “the unseen force that makes God, God” — once again diminishing severely if not altogether destroying any final distinction between creator and creature.

Furthermore, this “force” is at times spoken of as a reality more ultimate than God Himself, conferring deity not only on the Creator but on His creation, man. This again puts God and redeemed man in the same class.

In Copeland’s theology, Adam (and, consequently, the rest of humanity) does not appear to have a uniquely human nature. Initially possessing the nature of God, “when Adam committed high treason [sinned] against God and bowed his knee to Satan, spiritual death — the nature of Satan — was lodged in his heart.”³⁶ Adam had, in effect, allegedly traded in his divine nature for a satanic nature, otherwise called “spiritual death.” However, Scripture reveals that mankind is wholly distinct from both God (2 Sam. 7:22; cf. Mark 12:32) and angelic/demonic beings (Ps. 8:5; cf. Heb. 2:7). And even after the Fall, man is still said to bear the image of God (1 Cor. 11:7).

Copeland also claims that Adam’s transgression empowered Satan to evict God from the earth. “God’s on the outside looking in,” says Copeland. “He doesn’t have any legal entree into the earth. The thing don’t belong to Him.”³⁷ (Psalm 24:1 says otherwise.) And supposedly, since “the sin of Adam went all the way up to, but not including, the throne of God…[even] the Heavenly Holy of Holies had to be purified.”³⁸

COVENANT OF CONVENIENCE

According to Copeland, “God had no avenue of lasting faith or moving in the earth. He had to have covenant with somebody….He had to be invited in, in other words, or He couldn’t come.”³⁹ In fact, “the reason that He’s making covenant is to get into the earth.”⁴⁰ “God is on the outside looking in,” says Copeland. “In order to have any say-so in the earth, He’s gonna have to be in agreement with a man here.”⁴¹

“Since man was the key figure in the Fall,” Copeland argues, “man had to be the key figure in the redemption, so God approached a man named Abram.”⁴² An agreement was struck between God and Abram that “gave God access to the earth.”⁴³ God, in turn, “promised to care for Abraham and his descendants in every way — spiritually, physically, financially, socially.”⁴⁴ Commenting on the deal, Copeland writes that God “re-enacted with Abram what Satan had done with Adam, except that God did not sneak in and use deception…and Abram bought it.”⁴⁵

As his comments indicate, Copeland views divine covenants no differently from business contracts.⁴⁶ They are benefit-oriented, not relationship-oriented. They are formed by mutual agreement (for mutual benefit) through negotiation, as opposed to being initiated by the stronger party offering non-negotiable help (not of necessity but of grace) — which is the traditional Christian understanding of God’s covenants. They focus on the fulfillment of certain terms (performance) rather than personal loyalty. Copeland himself states that “the Word of the living God is a contract.”⁴⁷

Copeland’s view deflates the biblical concept of God in numerous other ways. He parallels God’s actions with those of Satan. In effect he makes man to be the dominant party over God — even claiming that Abraham could have told God to “bug off” when God offered him a “proposition.”⁴⁸ And he seemingly attributes the ultimate sacredness of divine covenants not to the figure who stands behind them (viz. God), but to the fact that they are composed of words: “Words are the most sacred things….This is a word planet…governed by words…created by words….Words cause it to function…cause life…cause death….Words go on forever….Words are holy.”⁴⁹

Copeland maintains that God “used His right that Abraham had given Him”⁵⁰ to provide a way for Jesus to enter the earth. Abraham gave God what He needed: “the chance to use his [Abraham's] mouth, because what God was after was a vehicle in the earth that was a man to get His Word in there.”⁵¹

THE SPOKEN WORD MADE FLESH

“God is injecting His Word into the earth to produce this Jesus,” Copeland explains. “This [sic] faith-filled words that framed the image that’s in Him….He had to sneak it in here around the god of this world [Satan].”⁵² Using a combination of faith and confession, “God spoke His Word and then spoke His Word again….He kept saying, ‘He is coming. He is coming.’”⁵³ However, “the only avenue God had to get His words into the earth was through men… [t]hrough the mouths of His prophets….Finally, the great moment came when that Word was brought forth in human form.”⁵⁴

During this final phase, “the angels spoke the words of the covenant to her [Mary], and the Spirit of God hovered over her and generated that seed, which was the Word that the angel spoke to her. And there was conceived in her, the Bible says, a holy thing. The Word literally became flesh.”⁵⁵

The notion of Jesus being the end product of generations of positive confession is categorically unbiblical. It suggests that the Word of John chapter one was a creation (the personalization of the previously impersonal words of God) rather than the eternally existent Creator (see vv.1-3), thus subverting the deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity.

Copeland also gave a “prophecy” in which Jesus allegedly said, “They crucified Me for claiming that I was God. But I didn’t claim I was God; I just claimed I walked with Him and that He was in Me.”⁵⁶ Copeland asserts Jesus did not openly claim to be God because “He hadn’t come to earth as God, He’d come as man. He’d set aside His divine power.”⁵⁷ Citing Philippians 2:5-7, he states that the incarnate Christ “had no innate supernatural powers. He had no ability to perform miracles until after He was anointed by the Holy Spirit.”⁵⁸

The passage Copeland cites (v. 6), however, describes Christ as “being in very nature God.” The participle “being” is rendered in the present active tense (Greek: huparchon), denoting Christ’s ongoing condition as having the nature of God. Christ did not give up His divine attributes during His incarnation (cf. Col. 2:9; Heb. 13:8), but instead added to them (see Phil. 2:7, “taking”) a full human nature in the form of a servant. Moreover, Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of Man (Mark 2:5-10; cf. Dan. 7:13-14) and the unique Son of God the Father (John 5:18; 10:30-33), demonstrating His claim to be God.⁵⁹

In Copeland’s view, three basic factors enabled Jesus to perform miracles. First, “the force of faith was controlling His ministry.”⁶⁰ Second, “He exercised that authority by the use of words.”⁶¹ Third, “He used the Covenant to control the laws of nature.”⁶² Copeland’s view, however, rests upon a false understanding of faith, the spoken word, and the Abrahamic covenant, and is therefore erroneous.

SPIRITUAL DEATH AND REBIRTH IN HELL

When it comes to defining the Atonement, Copeland says, “It wasn’t a physical death on the cross that paid the price for sin…anybody can do that.”⁶³ Jesus supposedly “put Himself into the hands of Satan when He went to that cross, and took that same nature that Adam did [when he sinned].”⁶⁴ Copeland is here referring to the nature of Satan, as God pronounced that “Adam would die spiritually — that he would take on the nature of Satan which is spiritual death.”⁶⁵ He adds that “the day that Jesus was crucified, God’s life, that eternal energy that was His from birth, moved out of Him and He accepted the very nature of death itself.”⁶⁶

During an alleged conversation with Copeland, Jesus is said to have remarked, “It was a sign of Satan that was hanging on the cross….I accepted, in my own spirit, spiritual death; and the light was turned off.”⁶⁷ We are told that Jesus “had to give up His righteousness”⁶⁸ and “accepted the sin nature of Satan.”⁶⁹

Contrary to the teaching that Christ underwent a change of nature (into a satanic being), the Bible depicts Jesus as having an immutable divine nature (Heb. 13:8; cf. Mal. 3:6). Moreover, in saying that “spiritual death means separation from the life of God,”⁷⁰ Copeland tacitly admits that Jesus completely lost His deity. For, as we noted earlier, Copeland defines the “life of God” as “the unseen force that makes God, God.” However, Scripture declares that God is eternal and unchanging and thus never ceases to be God. The Father says of Christ, “But you remain the same, and your years will never end” (Heb. 1:12).

Finally, the notion of Jesus being overtaken by “the very nature of death” is contradicted by Jesus’ claim that He has “life in Himself” (John 5:26; cf. 1:4), is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25), and is “the way, the truth, and the life” (14:6). The “spiritual death of Christ” teaching entails an implicit denial of Christ’s deity and, in turn, of the Trinity.

Still, Copeland insists “Satan conquered Jesus on the Cross and took His spirit to the dark regions of hell” (emphasis in original).⁷¹ Copeland’s description of Christ’s ordeal in hell is nothing short of chilling: “He [Jesus] allowed the devil to drag Him into the depths of hell….He allowed Himself to come under Satan’s control…every demon in hell came down on Him to annihilate Him….They tortured Him beyond anything anybody had ever conceived. For three days He suffered everything there is to suffer.”⁷²

The situation seemed hopeless, as Jesus’ “emaciated, poured out, little, wormy spirit is down in the bottom of that thing; and the devil thinks he’s got Him destroyed.”⁷³ However, Copeland explains that “Satan fell into the trap. He took Him [Jesus] into hell illegally. He carried Him in there [when] He did not sin.”⁷⁴ God found the opening He needed: “That Word of the living God went down into that pit of destruction and charged the spirit of Jesus with resurrection power! Suddenly His twisted, death-wracked spirit began to fill out and come back to life….Jesus was born again — the firstborn from the dead the Word calls Him — and He whipped the devil in his own backyard.”⁷⁵

Copeland’s account, vivid though it may be, is not in the Bible. It misuses the phrase “firstborn from the dead” (Col. 1:18) to bolster the “born again Jesus” doctrine. Actually, the term “firstborn” (Greek: prototokos) primarily denotes primacy, headship, and preeminence. And the phrase itself points to Christ’s supremacy “over all creation” (v. 15) in general and those who will be raised from the dead in particular (alluding to Christ’s bodily resurrection — not some spiritual resuscitation in hell).

Moreover, Jesus was not dragged into hell by Satan, but instead committed His spirit to the Father (Luke 23:46) and went directly to paradise (v. 43). Nor was He tortured by a host of demons; He triumphed “over them by the cross” (Col. 2:15). Jesus paid for humanity’s sin in full (Greek: tetelestai) at the cross (John 19:30) — not by becoming a satanic being, but through His physical sacrifice (Heb. 10:10; Col. 1:22).

THE BELIEVER’S AUTHORITY

Copeland’s basis for the believer’s authority can be viewed in three distinct stages. First, upon conversion the believer undergoes a total and immediate change of nature. At the moment of spiritual birth “the spirit of God hovered over you, and there was conceived in your body a holy thing identical to Jesus….And there was imparted into you zoe, the life of God” (emphases added).⁷⁶ Hence, “you are to think the way Jesus thought. He didn’t think it robbery to be equal with God.”⁷⁷ Copeland’s remarks, “You are not a spiritual schizophrenic — half-God and half-Satan — you are all-God”⁷⁸ and “You don’t have a God in you; you are one,”⁷⁹ demonstrate that being born again means nothing less to him than becoming a god.

Yet Scripture states there is only one God who indwells all believers (John 14:17, 23). Additionally, the Bible views spiritual birth not in terms of a change of nature (from satanic to divine), but as the regeneration of a uniquely human spirit by God (2 Cor. 5:17; Tit. 3:5).

In the second stage of his discourse, Copeland teaches that the believer’s change of nature (into a god) brings with it a proportional change in ability. “Every man that has been born again has had this faith [viz. God's] put inside him,” he writes. “This faith is good enough to make all things possible to the believer.”⁸⁰

Copeland comments, “As a born-again believer, you are equipped with the Word. You have the power of God at your disposal. By getting the Word deep into your spirit and speaking it boldly out your mouth, you release spiritual power to change things in the natural circumstances.”⁸¹

The believer is thus allegedly able to speak things into existence by way of faith-filled words, or positive confession. But as we have already shown, Copeland’s views of faith and words are without legitimate scriptural warrant, and are therefore invalid when applied to the believer.

In the third stage of Copeland’s teaching on the believer’s authority, we are told that knowing and exercising the rights set forth under the covenant guarantee success in confession. He remarks that the Bible “is the wisdom of God placed in covenant contract….Everything in it is mine….You just keep looking at it, and keep reading it, and that covenant will turn you into that kind of person — whatever it is you decide to be.”⁸²

Copeland translates his concept of covenant rights into what has been termed the “health and wealth” or “prosperity” message. “The basic principle of the Christian life is to know that God put our sin, sickness, disease, sorrow, grief, and poverty on Jesus at Calvary,” he asserts. “For Him to put any of this on us now would be a miscarriage of justice.”⁸³

PRESCRIBING VISUALIZATION

Copeland combines his “legal” precedent for prosperity with his “mechanics” of confession to form a formula for speaking things into existence. He insists, “You have the same creative faith and ability on the inside of you that God used when he created the heavens and the earth.”⁸⁴ However, he adds that most believers are not able to make full use of their inner power because “our imagination…has been so fouled up and fathered up with wasted useless words [and] wasted useless images.”⁸⁵

As a corrective, Copeland instructs believers to “go to the New Testament, get the words of the covenant that cover the situation that you hope to bring to pass. Build the image of that hope inside of you….Keep the word before your eyes.”⁸⁶ As examples, he uses an inner picture of an 82-foot yacht that will transform into reality in the Holy of Holies in heaven, along with a “picture [of a Bible] that came right out of me and went into the Holy of Holies,”⁸⁷ where it developed into an actual, physical object.

Copeland also claims that “when you get to the place where you take the Word of God and build an image on the inside of you of not having crippled legs and not having blind eyes, but when you close your eyes you just see yourself just leap out of that wheelchair, it will picture that in the Holy of Holies and you will come out of there.”⁸⁸

Recognizing that his technique “sounds like that visualization they do in meditation and metaphysical practices,”⁸⁹ Copeland counters by reversing the tables. “What they’re doing sounds like this,” he retorts. “The devil is a counterfeiter. He never came up with anything real. That is the perverted form of the real thing. Where do you think he got it? That sucker doesn’t know anything on his own. Amen.”⁹⁰

During another occasion, however, Copeland revealingly affirms that both positive confession and creative visualization are based on the same principle: “Words create pictures, and pictures in your mind create words. And then the words come back out your mouth….And when that spiritual force comes out it is going to give substance to the image that’s on the inside of you. Aw, that’s that visualization stuff! Aw, that’s that New Age! No, New Age is trying to do this; and they’d get somewhat results out of it because this is spiritual law, brother.”⁹¹

Copeland says, “Any image that you get down on the inside of you that is so vivid when you close your eyes you see it, it’ll come to pass. When God came at the Tower of Babel, He said, ‘Anything they can imagine, they can do.’”⁹² He fails to note, however, that those individuals built the tower out of brick and tar (Gen. 11:3), not simply out of their imagination. Moreover, their venture incurred God’s judgment (vv. 6-9). Copeland can argue and fuss all he wants, but the fact of the matter is that through such teachings he has entered the world of the occult.

FATALLY FLAWED

Virtually every error we have noted in Copeland’s theology can be attributed to the following four reasons.

First, Copeland seems vehemently opposed to sound reasoning. “Believers are not to be led by logic,” he writes. “We are not even to be led by good sense” (emphasis in original).⁹³ Copeland’s statement is apparently based on his mistaken belief that the “ministry of Jesus was never governed by logic or reason….He was not led by logic. He was not led by the mind.”⁹⁴ Isaiah 1:18, on the other hand, quotes God as saying, “Come now, let us reason together.”

Second, Copeland fails to observe some basic principles of biblical interpretation (including fundamental rules of grammar and usage), at times relying instead on so-called revelation knowledge (information allegedly derived from direct, one-on-one communication with God). His neglect in this area is made embarrassingly apparent by his gross misunderstanding of key words (e.g., faith) and utter disregard of the context in which they appear. The Bible, however, stresses the importance of correctly handling the Word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15).

Third, Copeland does not seem to acknowledge the importance of systematic theology, as indicated by his statement, “I don’t preach doctrine, I preach faith.”⁹⁵ Although he may not realize it, his preaching on faith and other topics do in fact constitute doctrines, which combined form his theology (however inconsistent). He would do well to heed the apostle Paul’s advice to “watch your life and your doctrine closely” (1 Tim. 4:16).

Fourth, Copeland displays an open attitude of disdain and disrespect for the historically established views of the church. Admittedly, tradition must ultimately be tested by the Word of God. However, it should be recognized that certain historically accepted views, especially as they apply to essential Christian doctrine (e.g., the nature of faith, the nature of God, the nature of man, and the person and work of Jesus Christ), are significant, time-tested summations of fundamental Bible-based truths. To deviate from them is to reject the heart of Christian faith.

It is regrettable that someone so influential within contemporary Christianity continues to preach a message that overturns virtually every major biblical teaching. To date, Copeland refuses to discuss with his critics the issues raised in this article. We only hope that he will soon realize the dangerous road he is traveling. As Scripture warns, “Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly” (James 3:1). For now, Copeland, being a false teacher, has made himself an enemy of the gospel (Gal. 1:6-9).

notes

1. Kenneth Copeland, “The Word in My life…,” Kenneth Copeland Ministries Catalog (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, n.d.), 3.

2. Kenneth Copeland, The Music of Ministry (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1991, audiotape #53-0018), side 1.

3. Due to space limitations, this article will confine its focus on areas of Copeland’s teachings that form the framework for positive confession, which in turn provide the mechanism for the “health and wealth” gospel. Attempts to contact Copeland to resolve any possible misunderstanding of his teachings have been unsuccessful. Still, every effort has been made to present and evaluate Copeland’s views as accurately and fairly as possible.

4. Living to Give (pamphlet) (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, n.d.), 4.

5. Charles Farah, “A Critical Analysis: The ‘Roots and Fruits’ of Faith-Formula Theology,” PNEUMA: The Journal of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, Spring 1981, 15; cited in Bruce Barron, The Health and Wealth Gospel (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987), 183.

6. Living to Give, 4.

7. Ibid., 5.

8. Ibid., 8.

9. D. R. McConnell, A Different Gospel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), 95. Benny Hinn, Jerry Savelle, and Charles Capps number among those Faith teachers who have been profoundly impacted by Copeland.

10. Ibid., 135-42.

11. Kenneth Copeland, The Force of Faith (Fort Worth: KCP Publications, 1989), 10.

12. Forces of the Recreated Human Spirit (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1982), 8.

13. Kenneth Copeland, The Laws of Prosperity (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Publications, 1974), 18-19.

14. Kenneth Copeland, Freedom from Fear (Fort Worth: KCP Publications, 1983), 11.

15. Ibid., 12.

16. Kenneth Copeland, Spirit, Soul and Body I (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1985, audiotape #01-0601), side 1.

17. Kenneth Copeland, Authority of the Believer II (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1987, audiotape #01-0302), side 1.

18. Kenneth Copeland, The Power of the Tongue (Fort Worth: KCP Publications, 1980), 4.

19. Forces of the Recreated Human Spirit, 15; cf. 14.

20. Ibid., 17.

21. The Analytical Greek Lexicon (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), 419.

22. Copeland, Spirit, Soul and Body I, side 1.

23. Kenneth Copeland ministry letter, 21 July 1977.

24. Kenneth Copeland, Praise-a-Thon, TBN, 1988. Copeland has, in another instance, stated that God “is not a failure” (Kenneth Copeland, The Troublemaker [Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Publications, n.d.], 23).

25. Kenneth Copeland, Following the Faith of Abraham I (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1989, audiotape #01-3001), side 1.

26. Copeland, Following the Faith of Abraham I, side 1.

27. Kenneth Copeland, Our Covenant with God (Fort Worth: KCP Publications, 1987), 7-8.

28. Kenneth Copeland, Authority of the Believer IV (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1987, audiotape #01-0304), side 1.

29. Cf. James M. Kinnebrew, The Charismatic Doctrine of Positive Confession: A Historical, Exegetical, and Theological Critique (doctoral dissertation, Mid-America Baptist Seminary, 1988), 157.

30. R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, eds., Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 2 vols. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), 1:192.

31. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988), 510; cf. 514.

32. Copeland, Walking in the Realm of the Miraculous, 74-76. Copeland’s understanding of these terms, derived from the Greek word zoe (life), is similar to that of ancient Gnostics. See Rudolf Bultmann, “Zoe in Greek Usage,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (abridged in one volume), ed. by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co./Paternoster Press, 1985), 291.

33. Ibid., 74.

34. Ibid., 76.

35. Ibid., 74.

36. Copeland, Our Covenant with God, 9.

37. Kenneth Copeland, The Image of God in You III (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1989, audiotape #01-1403), side 1.

38. Kenneth Copeland, Inner Image of the Covenant (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1985, audiotape #01-4406), side 1.

39. Kenneth Copeland, God’s Covenant with Man II (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1985, audiotape #01-4404), side 1.

40. Ibid.

41. Ibid.

42. Copeland, Our Covenant with God, 10.

43. Ibid., 10-11.

44. Ibid., 15.

45. Ibid., 10.

46. See Elmer A. Martens, God’s Design: A Focus on Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981), 72-73. Cf. William Dyrness, Themes in Old Testament Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1979); and George Mendenhall, “Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition,” The Biblical Archaeologist, September 1954, 50-76.

47. Kenneth Copeland, “The Abrahamic Covenant” (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1985, audiotape #01-4405), side 1.

48. Copeland, God’s Covenants with Man II, side 2.

49. Copeland, The Abrahamic Covenant, side 1.

50. Kenneth Copeland, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1990, audiotape #02-0017), side 1.

51. Copeland, The Image of God in You III, side 1.

52. Ibid., side 2.

53. Copeland, The Power of the Tongue, 9-10.

54. Ibid.

55. Copeland, The Abrahamic Covenant, side 2.

56. Kenneth Copeland, “Take Time to Pray,” Believer’s Voice of Victory, February 1987, 9.

57. Kenneth Copeland, “Question & Answer,” Believer’s Voice of Victory, August 1988, 8.

58. Ibid.

59. On Jesus’ self-witness, see Robert L. Reymond, Jesus, Divine Messiah (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1990), 44-126.

60. Copeland, The Force of Faith, 9.

61. Copeland, The Power of the Tongue, 15.

62. Copeland, Our Covenant with God, 21.

63. Kenneth Copeland, What Satan Saw on the Day of Pentecost (Fort Worth: Messages by Kenneth Copeland, n.d., audiotape #BCC-19), side 1.

64. Kenneth Copeland, The Incarnation (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1985, audiotape #01-0402), side 1.

65. Copeland, Our Covenant with God, 9.

66. Kenneth Copeland, “The Price of It All,” Believer’s Voice of Victory, September 1991, 3.

67. Copeland, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, side 2.

68. Copeland, The Incarnation, side 2.

69. Copeland, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, side 2.

70. Copeland, Inner Image of the Covenant, side 1.

71. Kenneth Copeland, Holy Bible: Kenneth Copeland Reference Edition (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1991), 129.

72. Copeland, “The Price of It All,” 3.

73. Kenneth Copeland, Believer’s Voice of Victory (television program), TBN, 21 April 1991.

74. Copeland, What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, side 2.

75. Copeland, “The Price of It All,” 4-6.

76. Copeland, The Abrahamic Covenant, side 2.

77. Kenneth Copeland, Now We Are in Christ Jesus (Fort Worth: KCP Publications, 1980), 23-24.

78. Ibid., 16-17.

79. Kenneth Copeland, The Force of Love (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1987, audiotape #02-0028), side 1.

80. Copeland, The Force of Faith, 13.

81. Copeland, The Power of the Tongue, 15.

82. Copeland, The Abrahamic Covenant, side 1.

83. Copeland, The Troublemaker, 6.

84. Copeland, Inner Image of the Covenant, side 2.

85. Ibid.

86. Ibid.

87. Ibid.

88. Ibid.

89. Ibid.

90. Ibid.

91. Kenneth Copeland, Believer’s Voice of Victory (television program), TBN, 28 March 1991.

92. Copeland, Inner Image of the Covenant, side 2.

93. Copeland, The Force of Faith, 7.

94. Ibid., 7-8.

95. Copeland, Following the Faith of Abraham I, side 2.

SYNOPSIS

What’s wrong with the “Faith” movement? Its leaders include many of the most popular television evangelists. Its adherents compose a large percentage of charismatic evangelical Christians. Its emphases on faith, the authority of the believer, and the absolute veracity of Scripture could appear to be just what today’s church needs. And yet, I am convinced that this movement poses one of the greatest contemporary threats to orthodox Christianity from within. Through it, cultic theology is being increasingly accepted as true Christianity.

This article will highlight several serious problems with the Faith movement by providing an overview of its major sources and leaders. Part Two will focus on the movement’s doctrinal deviations as represented by one of its leading proponents.1

ITS DEBT TO NEW THOUGHT

It is important to note at the outset that the bulk of Faith theology can be traced directly to the cultic teachings of New Thought metaphysics. Thus, much of the theology of the Faith movement can also be found in such clearly pseudo-Christian cults as Religious Science, Christian Science, and the Unity School of Christianity.

Over a century before the Faith movement became a powerful force within the Christian church, Phineas Parkhurst Quimby (1802-1866), the father of New Thought, was popularizing the notion that sickness and suffering ultimately have their origin in incorrect thinking.² Quimby’s followers held that man could create his own reality through the power of positive affirmation (confession).³ Metaphysical practitioners have long taught adherents to visualize health and wealth, and then to affirm or confess them with their mouths so that the intangible images may be transformed into tangible realities.⁴

Although proponents of Faith theology have attempted to sanitize the metaphysical concept of the “power of mind” by substituting in its stead the “force of faith,” for all practical purposes they have made a distinction without a difference. New Thought writer Warren Felt Evans, for example, wrote that “faith is the most intense form of mental action.”⁵ In treating a patient, Evans commented that “the effect of the suggestion [or positive affirmation that the patient is well] is the result of the faith of the subject, for it is always proportioned to the degree in which the patient believes what you say” (emphasis in original).⁶ Likewise, H. Emilie Cady, a well-known writer for Charles and Myrtle Fillmore’s Unity School of Christianity, explained that “our affirming, backed by faith, is the link that connects our conscious human need with His power and supply.”⁷ Cady also claimed that “there is power in our word of faith to bring all good things right into our everyday life.”⁸ Such statements strongly indicate that the distinction between the “mind” of metaphysics and the “faith” of Faith theology is nothing but a figment of the imagination.

SUBSTANCE, STYLE, AND SCAMS

There is no denying that much of Faith theology is derived directly from metaphysics. Some of the substance, style, and scams endemic to the movement, however, can be traced primarily to the teachings and practices of certain post-World War II faith healers and revivalists operating within Pentecostal circles.⁹ With regard to substance, for example, both Kenneth Copeland and Kenneth Hagin point to T. L. Osborn and William Branham as true men of God who greatly influenced their lives and ministries. Of course, Osborn himself has consistently followed E. W. Kenyon’s (see below) Scripture-twisting antics,¹⁰ and Branham has (among other things) denounced the doctrine of the Trinity as coming directly from the Devil.¹¹

Unfortunately, Hagin and Copeland are not alone in affirming Branham; Faith proponent Benny Hinn gives him a hearty “thumbs up” as well.¹² When it comes to style, however, Hinn gravitates more toward such faith healers as Aimee Semple McPherson and Kathryn Kuhlman. In addition, Hinn has given his endorsement to notorious revivalist A. A. Allen,¹³ who was truly a huckster if there ever was one — which brings us to our third “s,” the scams.

Faith teachers such as Robert Tilton and his female counterpart, Marilyn Hickey, have copied many of the scams pioneered by Pentecostal preachers such as Oral Roberts and A. A. Allen. In fact, Tilton and Hickey have managed to exceed even their predecessors’ outrageous ploys. This is hard to believe when one considers what sort of schemes they had to outdo.

Roberts, the reader may recall, is the man who claimed that Jesus appeared and told him God had chosen him to find the cure for cancer. In a lengthy appeal, Roberts avowed that the Lord told him, “I would not have had you and your partners build the 20-story research tower unless I was going to give you a plan that will attack cancer.” Roberts then said that Jesus instructed him to tell his partners that “this is not Oral Roberts asking for the money but their Lord.”¹⁴ (The project was completed, but has since been “shut down and sold to a group of investors for commercial development.”¹⁵ Not surprisingly, no cure for cancer was ever found.)

In like fashion, A. A. Allen “scammed” his followers by asserting that he could command God to “turn dollar bills into twenties.”¹⁶ He was also known to have urged his followers to send for his “prayer cloths anointed with the Miracle Oil,”¹⁷ and he offered “Miracle tent shavings” as points of contact for personal miracles.¹⁸ Allen even “launched a brief ‘raise the dead’ program.”¹⁹ Of course, it died.

Allen was eventually kicked out of the Assemblies of God denomination when he jumped bail after being arrested for drunk driving.²⁰ In 1970 he died from what “news accounts report [as] sclerosis of the liver.”²¹

As we proceed to examine the primary purveyors of Faith theology, we will see living proof of the maxim that “error begets error and heresy begets heresy.” If, for example, one examines the cultic progression of E. W. Kenyon’s theology, one will discover that his original deviations from orthodox Christianity were minor compared to those that characterized the later stages of his ministry. And with each of Kenyon’s successive disciples, the errors become even more pronounced. Hagin, who popularized and plagiarized Kenyon prolifically, not only expanded Kenyon’s perversions but added to them as well.²² The progression from bad to worse has continued with people like Kenneth Copeland and Charles Capps, and is now reaching heretical heights that are almost inconceivable through ministry leaders like Frederick Price, Benny Hinn, and Robert Tilton.

THE CAST OF CHARACTERS

Twisted texts, make-believe miracles, and a counterfeit Christ are all common denominators of the Faith movement’s leading teachers. And, as all who look into the matter will clearly see, it all began with the metaphysical teachings of Essek William Kenyon.

Essek William Kenyon

Essek William Kenyon, whose life and ministry were enormously impacted by such cults as Science of Mind, the Unity School of Christianity, Christian Science, and New Thought metaphysics,²³ is the true father of the modern-day Faith movement. Many of the phrases popularized by present-day prosperity preachers, such as “What I confess, I possess,” were originally coined by Kenyon. Kenneth Hagin, to whom we next turn our attention, plagiarized much of Kenyon’s work, including the statement, “Every man who has been ‘born again’ is an Incarnation, and Christianity is a miracle. The believer is as much an Incarnation as was Jesus of Nazareth.”²⁴

Kenneth E. Hagin

As I thoroughly demonstrate in my book Christianity in Crisis (Harvest House, 1993), Kenneth Hagin takes Kenyon’s theology from bad to worse. Not only does he boast of alleged visits to heaven and hell, he recounts numerous out-of-body experiences (OBEs) on the earth as well.

On one occasion, Hagin claims he was in the middle of a sermon when, suddenly, he was transported back in time. He ended up in the back seat of a car and watched as a young woman from his church committed adultery with the driver. The entire experience lasted about fifteen minutes, after which Hagin abruptly found himself back in church, summoning his parishioners to prayer.²⁵

Despite his propensity for telling tall tales and describing false visions, virtually every major Faith teacher has been impacted by Hagin — including such “luminaries” as Frederick K. C. Price and Kenneth Copeland.

Kenneth Copeland

Kenneth Copeland got his start in ministry as a direct result of memorizing Hagin’s messages. It wasn’t long before he had learned enough from Hagin to establish his own following. To say his teachings are heretical would be an understatement — blasphemous is more like it. Copeland brashly pronounces God to be the greatest failure of all time, boldly proclaims that “Satan conquered Jesus on the Cross” (emphasis in original),²⁶ and describes Christ in hell as an “emaciated, poured out, little, wormy spirit.”²⁷

Yet, despite such statements, Benny Hinn ominously warned that “those who attack Kenneth Copeland are attacking the very presence of God!”²⁸

Benny Hinn

Benny Hinn is one of the fastest rising stars on the Faith circuit. According to an October 5, 1992 article in Christianity Today, sales of his books in the last year-and-a-half have exceeded those of James Dobson and Charles Swindoll combined.²⁹ While claiming to be “under the anointing,” Hinn has uttered some of the most “off-the-wall” statements imaginable — including the claim that the Holy Spirit revealed to him that women were originally designed to give birth out of their sides.³⁰

Hinn also admits to frequenting the graves of both Kathryn Kuhlman and Aimee Semple McPherson to get the “anointing” from their bones.³¹ Despite his outrageous antics, Hinn has somehow managed to gain wide acceptance and visibility within the evangelical Christian church. His platform on the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), as well as his promotion by a mainstream Christian publisher (Thomas Nelson), have catapulted him into prime-time visibility.

Whether Hinn is referring to his family history or his rendezvous with the Holy Spirit, fantasy is often passed on as fact. A case in point are the thousands of “documented” healings claimed by Hinn. Recently, he sent me three examples — presumably, the cream of the crop — as proof of his miracle-working power. One of the cases involved a man who was supposedly healed of colon cancer. A medically naive person reading the pathology report may well see the notation “no evidence of malignancy” and be duped into thinking that a bona fide healing had indeed taken place. CRI’s medical consultant, Dr. Preston Simpson, however, was not fooled by the report. His investigation revealed that the colon tumor in question was surgically removed rather than miraculously healed. The other two cases had comparably serious problems.³²

Frederick K. C. Price

Fred Price is the most notable of a growing number of black prosperity preachers. His church in Los Angeles now claims some 16,000 members. He is seen nationally on television and has referred to himself as the “chief exponent of Name It and Claim It.”³³ Price has added his own unique twists to Faith theology by asserting that Jesus took on the nature of Satan prior to the crucifixion³⁴ and by claiming that the Lord’s Prayer is not for Christians today.³⁵ Despite telling his followers that he doesn’t allow sickness in his home, Price’s wife has been treated for cancer in her pelvic area.³⁶ Referring to his wealth, Price says the reason he drives a Rolls Royce is that he is following in Jesus’ steps.³⁷

John Avanzini

John Avanzini is billed by his Faith peers as a recognized authority on biblical economics. The truth, however, is that Avanzini is an authority on perverting Scripture as a means to picking the pockets of the poor. He has honed his craft into such an art form that when Faith teachers need money, they inevitably call on “Brother John.” Armed with a bag full of Bible-twisting tricks, he tells the unsuspecting that “a greater than a lottery has come. His name is Jesus!”³⁸

According to Avanzini, if Jesus was rich, we should be rich as well. Thus, he recasts Christ into a mirror image of himself — complete with designer clothes, a big house, and a wealthy, well-financed advance team.³⁹ Thinking otherwise, Avanzini claims, will prevent Christians from reaping the prosperity God has laid out for them.⁴⁰

Avanzini runs the gamut from teaching people how to get their hands on the “wealth of the wicked” to what might best be described as his “hundredfold hoax.”⁴¹ When it comes to fleecing God’s people, few can match the effectiveness of John Avanzini. There is an exception, however; his name is Robert Tilton.

Robert Tilton

Robert Tilton hit the big time as a fisher of funds by developing a religious infomercial called Success-N-Life. It all began when he traveled to Hawaii to hear from the Lord. Says Tilton, “If I’m going to go to the cross, I’m going to go in a pretty place. Not some dusty place like Jerusalem. That’s gravel is all that place is.”⁴² While languishing in his exotic wilderness, Tilton “realized his mission was to persuade the poor to give what they could to him — as God’s surrogate — so they too could be blessed.”⁴³

Then, one day, Tilton tuned in to television and turned on to Dave Del Dotto’s real estate infomercials. The rest is history. Tilton used what he saw as a prototype⁴⁴ for building an empire that takes in as much as $65 million per year.⁴⁵

It now appears that Tilton’s ill-gotten gains may dwindle rapidly amid reports of scandal and a variety of lawsuits.⁴⁶ Responding to charges from ABC’s Prime Time Live that the prayer request letters he promises to pray over end up in dumpsters, Tilton claims, “I laid on top of those prayer requests so much that the chemicals actually got into my bloodstream, and . . . I had two small strokes in my brain.”⁴⁷

Marilyn Hickey

Marilyn Hickey, much like Tilton, employs a broad range of tactics to manipulate followers into sending her money. Among her many ploys are anointed prayer cloths, ceremonial breastplates, and ropes that can be used as points of contact. In one of her appeal letters, Hickey promises she will slip into a ceremonial breastplate, “press your prayer request to my heart,” and “place your requests on my shoulders” — all for a suggested donation.⁴⁸

For the most part, Hickey’s tricks and teachings are recycled from other prosperity peddlers like Tilton, Hagin, and Copeland. Her message is peppered with such Faith jargon as “the God-kind of faith,” “confession brings possession,” and “receiving follows giving.”

Paul Yonggi Cho (David Cho)

Paul Yonggi Cho — pastor of the world’s largest church, located in Seoul, South Korea — claims to have received his call to preach from Jesus Christ Himself, who supposedly appeared to him dressed like a fireman.⁴⁹ Cho has packaged his faith formulas under the label of “fourth dimensional power.”⁵⁰ He is well aware of his link to occultism, arguing that if Buddhists and Yoga practitioners can accomplish their objectives through fourth dimensional powers, then Christians should be able to accomplish much more by using the same means.⁵¹ In case one is tempted to confuse the size of Cho’s following with the truth of his teachings, let me point out that the Buddhist version of “name it and claim it” (Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism) has an even larger following than does Cho.⁵²

Cho recently made the news by changing his name from Paul to David. As Cho tells the story, God showed him that Paul Cho had to die and David Cho was to be resurrected in his place. According to Cho, God Himself came up with his new name.⁵³

Charles Capps

Charles Capps was ordained as a minister in the International Convention of Faith Churches and Ministers by Kenneth Copeland and derived his teachings directly from Kenneth Hagin. This unfortunate combination has led Capps to make some of the most blasphemous statements in Faith lore. Capps has gone so far as to teach that Jesus was the product of God’s positive confession: “This is the key to understanding the virgin birth. God’s Word is full of faith and spirit power. God spoke it. God transmitted that image to Mary. She received the image inside of her….The embryo that was in Mary’s womb was nothing more than the Word of God….She conceived the Word of God.”⁵⁴

Capps not only preaches the blasphemous, he also preaches the ridiculous. For example, he claims that if someone says, “I’m just dying to do that” or “That just tickled me to death,” their statements may literally come true (i.e., they may die). According to Capps, this is precisely why the human race now lives only about seventy years instead of 900 years, as was the case with Adam.⁵⁵

Jerry Savelle

Jerry Savelle has made his fortune by mimicking virtually all of the Faith teachers mentioned above. His greatest claim to fame, however, may well be his ability to mimic Kenneth Copeland. In fact, Savelle appears to be an exact duplicate of Copeland. Savelle demonstrates a total lack of biblical acumen, as he blindly regurgitates virtually every heresy in the Faith movement.

With regard to health, Savelle boasts that sickness and disease cannot enter his world.⁵⁶ As for wealth, he says that words can speak your world into existence.⁵⁷ Savelle now peddles his books and tapes to thirty-six countries at the astonishing rate of some 300,000 copies per year.

Morris Cerullo

Morris Cerullo claims that he gave up a driving ambition to be the governor of New Jersey in order to become a minister of the gospel.⁵⁸ He purports to have first met God at the tender age of eight. Since then his life has been one mind-blowing experience after another: he says he was taught by leading rabbis;⁵⁹ led out of a Jewish orphanage by two angelic beings;⁶⁰ transported to heaven for a face-to-face meeting with God;⁶¹ and told he would be capable of revealing the future.⁶²

On one occasion, Cerullo informed his audience, “You’re not looking at Morris Cerullo — you’re looking at God. You’re looking at Jesus.”⁶³ Not only is Cerullo a master of make-believe, he is also a master of manipulation. Claiming that God was directly speaking through him, Cerullo uttered, “Would you surrender your pocketbooks unto Me, saith God, and let me be the Lord of your pocketbooks….Yea, so be thou obedient unto my voice.”⁶⁴

Paul Crouch

Paul Crouch and his wife, Jan, are the founders of the Trinity Broadcasting Network, which today has an estimated net worth of half a billion dollars. As Crouch himself puts it, “God has, indeed, given us the MOST POWERFUL VOICE in the history of the WORLD.”⁶⁵ Unfortunately, this voice is being used to promote teachings straight from the kingdom of the cults. Crouch’s influence has become so vast that he can now raise as much as $50 million during a single “Praise-a-Thon.” What many of the well-intentioned Christians who support TBN do not know, however, is that part of this money goes to promoting cultic groups and individuals who not only deny the Trinity but claim that this essential of Christianity is a pagan doctrine.⁶⁶ It is indeed ironic that a broadcasting network called “Trinity” would promote anti-Trinitarian doctrine.

To those who would speak out against the false teachings proliferated on his network, Crouch has this to say: “I think they’re damned and on their way to hell; and I don’t think there’s any redemption for them.”⁶⁷ Shortly after I met with Crouch to prove that the Faith movement compromises essential Christian doctrine, Crouch looked into the lens of the television camera and angrily declared, “If you want to criticize Ken Copeland for his preaching on faith, or Dad Hagin, get out of my life! I don’t even want to talk to you or hear you. I don’t want to see your ugly face. Get out of my face, in Jesus’ name.”⁶⁸

Sadly, Crouch refers to the Faith message as a “revival of truth . . . restored by a few precious men.”⁶⁹

GENETIC DEFECT?

The Faith movement was spawned by the unholy marriage of 19th-century New Thought metaphysics with the flamboyance and abuses of post-World War II revivalism. It should therefore come as no surprise that its doctrine and practices are palpably unbiblical. Yet, some charge that critics of the movement are guilty of committing a logical error known as the genetic fallacy — “that is, rejecting an assumption because of where it comes from rather than disproving the argument.”⁷⁰

While the charge appears formidable, it is in fact defective. For it assumes that the criticisms against the Faith movement are made primarily if not solely on the basis of its historical roots. In truth, the bulk of critical evaluations are leveled directly against the unbiblical teachings of the movement’s leading proponents today.⁷¹ Historical discussions have, for the most part, served to place the phenomenon in its proper context.⁷²

Now that we’ve dug up the roots and sampled the topsoil of the Faith movement, we are ready to take a penetrating look at its ripened fruit. Part Two of this article will do just that, by systematizing and critiquing the theology of the movement’s premier preacher of another gospel.

notes

1. This article is adapted from chapter two of my forthcoming book, Christianity in Crisis (Harvest House). Part Two in this series will be an article specially written for the Christian Research Journal.

2. See, for example, Phineas P. Quimby, quoted in The Quimby Manuscripts, ed. Horatio W. Dresser (New Hyde Park, NY: University Books, 1969 [orig. 1921]), 32-35, 61, 165, 186, 279, 295. Quimby’s writings in this book were taken from his manuscripts dating between 1846 and 1865. Note the striking parallel in Kenneth Hagin’s remark: “It makes a great deal of difference what one thinks….The reason they [sick people] are not getting healed is that they are thinking wrong.” (Kenneth E. Hagin, Right and Wrong Thinking [Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries, 1978], 19.)

3. New Thought writer Warren Felt Evans (1817-1889) is one such example. See Charles S. Braden, Spirits in Rebellion (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1970), 121-23.

4. See, for example, Claude Bristol, The Magic of Believing (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1948), 122; H. Emilie Cady, Lessons in Truth (Unity Village, MO: Unity Books, n.d.), 41:9, 43:17, 45:25, 46:31, 48:40-42, 51:6, 52:9, 53:11, 55:22, 57:32; Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures (Boston: The First Church of Christ, Scientist, 1971 [orig. 1875]), 376:21-27; Charles Fillmore, Prosperity (Lee’s Summit, MO: Unity Books, 1967), 103-4; and Ernest Holmes, How to Use the Science of Mind (New York: Dodd, Mead and Co., 1950), 39-45.

5. Warren Felt Evans, Mental Medicine: A Treatise on Medical Psychology, 15th ed. (Boston: H. H. Carter & Co., 1873 [orig. 1885]), 152; quoted in Braden, 121.

6. Warren Felt Evans, Esoteric Christianity and Mental Therapeutics (Boston: H. H. Carter & Karrick, 1886), 152; quoted in Braden, 122-23.

7. Cady, 56:30; cf. Holmes, 72, 78.

8. Cady, 52:8.

9. For a fine historical treatment of the healing revivalists, see David Edwin Harrell, Jr., All Things Are Possible: The Healing and Charismatic Revivals in Modern America (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1975). A number of the healing revivalists’ unsound teachings and practices can be found in the ministries of their predecessors — most notably John Alexander Dowie, Maria B. Woodworth-Etter, Smith Wigglesworth, F. F. Bosworth, and Thomas Wyatt.

10. Osborn’s indebtedness to both Kenyon and faith healer F. F. Bosworth (another “Kenyonite”) is mentioned in T. L. Osborn, Healing the Sick, 23d ed. (Tulsa, OK: Osborn Foundation, 1959), 6, 203, 205. Cf. Richard M. Riss, “Kenyon, Essek William,” Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, ed. Stanley Burges, Gary B. McGee, and Patrick H. Alexander (Grand Rapids: Regency/Zondervan, 1988), 517; and Don Gossett and E. W. Kenyon, The Power of the Positive Confession of God’s Word (Blaine, WA: Don & Joyce Gossett, 1979), 3.

11. William Marrion Branham, “Revelation Chapter Four #3 (Throne Of Mercy and Judgment)” (Jeffersonville, IN: Voice of God Recordings, 1961), audio tape #61-0108, side 2; cf. William Marrion Branham, Footprints on the Sands of Time: The Autobiography of William Marrion Branham, Part Two (Jeffersonville, IN: Spoken Word Publications, 1975), 606-7.

12. Benny Hinn, Praise the Lord (television program), Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), 12 April 1991.

13. Benny Hinn, Praise the Lord, TBN, 16 April 1992.

14. Quoted in Russell Chandler, “Talked with Jesus, Evangelist Says,” Los Angeles Times, 3 February 1983, 3,16

15. Clark Morphew, “What’s to Become of Oral Roberts’ City of Faith?” St. Paul Pioneer Press, 27 June 1992; reprinted in The Christian News, 20 July 1992, 2.

16. A. A. Allen, The Secret to Scriptural Financial Success (Miracle Valley, AZ: A. A. Allen Publications, 1953); quoted in Harrell, 75.

17. A. A. Allen, “Miracle Oil Flows at Camp Meeting,” Miracle Magazine, June 1967, 6-7; quoted in Harrell,200.

18. Reported in “New Revival Tent Dedicated in Philadelphia,” Miracle Magazine, September 1967, 15; quoted in Harrell, 200.

19. See Harrell, 199.

20. Ibid., 70-71.

21. Ibid., 202. One writer describes Allen’s cause of death as “cirrhosis” of the liver (see Gary L. Ward, “Allen, Asa Alonzo,” in J. Gordon Melton, Religious Leaders of America [Detroit: Gale Research, 1991], 9).

22. See D. R. McConnell, A Different Gospel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), 3-14.

23. See McConnell, 24-56.

24. E. W. Kenyon, The Father and His Family, 17th ed. (Lynnwood, WA: Kenyon’s Gospel Publishing Society, 1964), 100; cf. Kenneth E. Hagin, “The Incarnation,” The Word of Faith, December 1980, 14.

25. Kenneth E. Hagin, The Glory of God (Tulsa, OK: Kenneth Hagin Ministries, 1987), 13-15.

26. Kenneth Copeland, Holy Bible: Kenneth Copeland Reference Edition (Fort Worth, TX: Kenneth Copeland Ministries, 1991), 129.

27. Kenneth Copeland, Believer’s Voice of Victory (television program), TBN, 21 April 1991.

28. Benny Hinn, Benny Hinn (television program), TBN, 8 June 1992.

29. Randy Frame, “Same Old Benny Hinn, Critics Say,” Christianity Today, 5 October 1992, 52.

30. Benny Hinn, “Our Position In Christ #5 — An Heir of God” (Orlando, FL: Orlando Christian Center, 1990), audio tape #A031190-5, side 2.

31. Benny Hinn, “Double Portion Anointing, Part #3″ (Orlando Christian Center, n.d.), audio tape #A031791-3, sides 1 and 2. This sermon was also aired on TBN (7 April 1991).

32. See the concluding section of my book, Christianity in Crisis.

33. Frederick K. C. Price, “Name It and Claim It! What Saith the WORD? . . ,” Ever Increasing Faith Messenger, Summer 1989, 2.

34. Frederick K. C. Price, “Identification #3″ (Inglewood, CA: Ever Increasing Faith Ministries, 1980), audio tape #FP545, side 1.

35. Frederick K. C. Price, personal correspondence, 14 October 1992.

36. Pat Hays, “Betty Price Speaks at 1991 ‘Wisdom from Above’ Luncheon,” Ever Increasing Faith Messenger, Winter 1992,12-13.

37. Frederick K. C. Price, Ever Increasing Faith (television program), TBN, 9 December 1990, available from Crenshaw Christian Center, Inglewood, CA (audio tape #CR-A2).

38. John Avanzini, Praise-a-Thon (television program), TBN, April 1991.

39. John Avanzini, “Was Jesus Poor?” Believer’s Voice of Victory, July/August 1991, 6-7; cf. Believer’s Voice of Victory (television program), TBN, 20 January 1991, and Praise the Lord, TBN, 1 August 1989.

40. Avanzini, “Was Jesus Poor?” 6.

41. See, for example, John Avanzini, Praise-a-Thon, TBN, 5 November 1990. According to the so-called hundredfold principle, those who financially support the Faith teachers will get back 100 times the amount (a hundredfold) of their original donation.

42. Scott Baradell, “Robert Tilton’s Heart of Darkness,” Dallas Observer, 6 February 1992, 19-20.

43. Ibid., 18.

44. Ibid., 13.

45. Nancy St. Pierre, “Tilton’s Wife Tells of Finances,” Dallas Morning News, 5 March 1992, 1A, 7A; and Terry Box, “Tax Appraiser Is Scrutinizing Tilton’s Church,” Dallas Morning News, 22 March 1992, 1A. Cf. Trinity Foundation (Dallas) release, “Does Word of Faith = Wheel of Fortune?” 9 December 1991; and Terry Box, “Backers Think Tilton Will Endure,” Dallas Morning News, 16 February 1992, 1A, 12A-13A.

46. At least two of these suits involve widows who have each filed a $40-million claim against Tilton’s healing ministry for sending letters seeking donations and promising to heal their already-dead husbands (see Risa Robert, “Tilton Sent Dead Man ‘Personal’ Mail,” Tulsa Tribune, 27 February 1992, 7A; and Nancy St. Pierre, “2nd Widow Sues Tilton over Letters,” Dallas Morning News, 18 March 1992, 28A).

47. Robert Tilton, Success-N-Life, 22 November 1991. Tilton has also alleged that the dumpster full of prayer requests found by ABC was actually planted by enemies to discredit him (see Christopher Lee, “Tilton’s Wife Defends Ministry, Blasts TV Expose of Husband,” Dallas Morning News, 25 November 1991, 1A, 12A).

48. Marilyn Hickey Ministries, direct-mail piece, on file.

49. Dwight J. Wilson, “Cho, Paul Yonggi,” Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, 161.

50. According to Cho, the material world makes up the first three dimensions, which is under the control of the fourth dimension — the spirit.

51. Paul Yonggi Cho, The Fourth Dimension, vol. 1 (South Plainfield, NJ: Bridge Publishing, 1979), 37, 41.

52. See John Weldon, “Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism: Mystical Materialism for the Masses,” Christian Research Journal, Fall 1992, 8-13.

53. Paul Yonggi Cho interviewed by C. Peter Wagner, “Yonggi Cho Changes His Name,” Charisma & Christian Life, November 1992, 80.

54. Charles Capps, Dynamics of Faith and Confession (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1987), 86-87; cf. Charles Capps, Authority in Three Worlds (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1982), 76-85.

55. Charles Capps, The Tongue — A Creative Force (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1976), 91.

56. Jerry Savelle, “Framing Your World with the Word of God, Part 1″ (Fort Worth, TX: Jerry Savelle Evangelistic Association, n.d.), tape #SS-36, side 1.

57. Ibid., side 2.

58. Morris Cerullo, The Miracle Book (San Diego: Morris Cerullo World Evangelism, 1984), x.

59. “God’s Faithful, Anointed Servant, Morris Cerullo” (promotional literature, on file).

60. Cerullo, The Miracle Book, ix; and 7 Point Outreach — World Evangelism and You (pamphlet), 4.

61. Cerullo, The Miracle Book, xi.

62. “God’s Faithful, Anointed Servant, Morris Cerullo.”

63. Morris Cerullo, “The Endtime Manifestation of the Sons of God” (San Diego: Morris Cerullo World Evangelism, n.d.), tape 1, sides 1 and 2.

64. Morris Cerullo, “A Word from God at the Deeper Life World Conference,” Deeper Life, March 1982, 15.

65. Paul Crouch, Praise the Lord (newsletter), July 1992, 1.

66. Crouch, for example, pays for and promotes people like Roy Blizzard and Joseph Good, both of whom openly deny the Trinity. Crouch also gave his staunch support to the United Pentecostal Church (UPC), a cult which claims that the Trinity is a pagan doctrine (see Praise the Lord, TBN, 5 September 1991).

67. Paul Crouch, Praise-a-Thon, TBN, 2 April 1991.

68. Ibid.

69. Paul Crouch, Praise the Lord, TBN, 18 February 1986, rebroadcast on 6 August 1991.

70. William DeArteaga, Quenching the Spirit (Lake Mary, FL: Creation House, 1992), 230; cf. William DeArteaga, “Confusing the Roots with the Fruits,” Ministries Today, July/August 1991, 56-62.

71. See, for example, Gordon D. Fee, The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospels (Beverly, MA: Frontline Publishing, 1985); Elliot Miller, Healing: Does God Always Heal? (San Juan Capistrano: Christian Research Institute, 1979); Brian Onken, “The Atonement of Christ and the ‘Faith’ Message,” Forward, 7:1 (1984), 1, 10-15; and Ken L. Sarles, “A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel,” Bibliotheca Sacra, October-December 1986, 329-52.

72. See, for example, the Fall 1988 issue of the Trinity Journal, which was devoted entirely to the “Health and Wealth Gospel.” This, of course, is not intended to minimize the importance of historical continuity when evaluating theological systems.

SYNOPSIS

Hank Hanegraaff wrote in his book Christianity in Crisis that because of the influence of the Word of Faith movement, the true Christ and true faith of the Bible were being replaced by diseased substitutes. This movement has continued to grow rapidly in the years following the book’s release and several new teachers since have risen to prominence. Among them are Creflo Dollar, T. D. Jakes, Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen, and Rod Parsley. Along with these new teachers, distortions of biblical truth have emerged. Word of Faith teachers have replaced the all-powerful God of the Bible with a god who has limited power, and have elevated humanity to the status of godhood, placing at its disposal seemingly unlimited power. These modern-day prophets of health and wealth believe that people can speak things into existence, thwart God’s plans, and purchase salvation; that money is the root of all happiness; that Christians are not sinners; and that Jesus did not come into the world as God. Rather than saying to Christ, “Thine is the kingdom, and the power and the glory,” today’s self-absorbed brand of Christianity insists that ours is the kingdom and that we have all the power and the glory. Another gospel clearly is being preached in many of today’s most prominent churches, and the prevention of its propagation demands our utmost attention.

Hank Hanegraaff, president of the Christian Research Institute, wrote when his book Christianity in Crisis¹ first was published in 1993 that Christianity needed a “megashift.” He warned, “[we need] to avert a very real and present crisis in Christianity. Without such a megashift in both perception and perspective, the church is in horrifying danger….The true Christ and the true faith of the Bible are being replaced rapidly with diseased substitutes offered by a group of teachers who belong to what has been labeled the ‘Faith movement.’”²

More than a decade later, the church, for the most part, has ignored this warning and the movement has continued to grow rapidly. This article will examine in alphabetical order the teachings of five Word of Faith teachers who have come to the forefront in recent years: Creflo Dollar, T. D. Jakes, Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen, and Rod Parsley.

CREFLO DOLLAR

Creflo A. Dollar is the founder of the nearly 24,000-member World Changers Church International in College Park, Georgia.³ The Trinity Broadcasting Network airs his Changing Your World television program worldwide. Dollar holds no degree in theology, and much of his prosperity message is based on the teachings of spiritual mentor Kenneth Copeland.⁴

It is common for teachers of false doctrine to redefine the nature of God. For example, a Jehovah’s Witness denies the three-personed nature of the Godhead, considering Jesus to be the archangel Michael incarnate. A Mormon considers Jesus to be one of many gods and the spirit brother of Lucifer. It becomes painfully apparent that without a correct understanding of the nature of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, people find themselves worshipping a false god.

Creflo Dollar is typical of many Word of Faith teachers who redefine and re-create God in man’s image. He teaches that “Jesus didn’t come as God, He came as a man, and He did not come perfect.”⁵ Realizing how controversial this statement is, he then adds: “How many of you know the Bible says God never sleeps nor slumbers? And yet in the Book of Mark we see Jesus asleep in the back of the boat. This ain’t no heresy. I’m not some false prophet. I’m just reading this thing to you out of the Bible.”⁶

This teaching flatly contradicts John 1:14, which says “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.”⁷ The Word—God in Jesus Christ—became flesh, not the other way around, and to claim that God was anything less than perfect is heresy. Jesus was the God-Man and as such He had human limitations, such as having to eat and sleep like the rest of us. Carrying Dollar’s teaching to its logical conclusion, Jesus must have been a sinner, given the fact that anything less than perfection involves sin. Such a Savior, however, would have been unable to rescue us from our sins.

Dollar’s next strategy is to elevate man to the status of godhood. “I’m gonna say to you right now that you are gods, little ‘g.’ You are gods because you came from God and you are gods.”⁸ Isaiah rejects Dollar’s claim when he writes, “’You are my witnesses,’ declares the Lord, ‘and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me’” (Isa. 43:10).

Dollar attempted to prove while in conversation with Kenneth Copeland that we have equality with God:

In Philippians chapter 2, I want you to look at verse 5…. ‘Let this mind, let this attitude be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.’ So now, what mind, what attitude is it that you want me to make sure that this same attitude is in me?… ‘Who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God.’…Now, if I’m to take what he said here and put it on, then my whole attitude now should be I have equality with God….Now somebody says, well it’s hard to think that way. Well, keep saying it….Talk yourself into it.’”⁹

God responds, “‘To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?’ says the Holy One. Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name” (Isa. 40:25–26b). It is nothing less than blasphemy to try and claim that we have equality with God.

Philippians 2:5-11, in context, tells us that just as Christ, who is greater than us, humbled Himself, so we are to humble ourselves in relation to each other. This is just the opposite of Dollar’s explanation. He is asking his followers to exalt themselves, while Jesus makes it clear that “whoever exalts himself will be humbled” (Matt. 23:12).

Psalm 111:10a states, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” By treating God as an equal, however, Dollar doesn’t appear to exhibit any reverential fear of Him whatsoever. Having led his followers to believe that they are little gods who have equality with God, it follows that they should have everything their hearts desire. They thus believe that they simply can’t be happy without money. “See, there are some people that believe not in prosperity….They don’t want to hear about that God is a God that wants to put money in your hand….Well, you need to hear about money, because you ain’t gonna have no love and joy and peace until you get some money!”¹⁰

This teaching inevitably leads to a different gospel than the one in the Bible. Dollar questions: “What’s the Gospel to those who are poor? Prosperity! What’s the Gospel to those who lack? Prosperity! And if you don’t preach it, then you won’t be able to do anything about the poverty situation.”¹¹

Jesus often healed the blind and the lame, but the Gospels fail to give us a single example of Jesus bestowing riches on the poor. Dollar maintains that material possessions are important for preaching the gospel “because you have a world of people out there that don’t know your Jesus, but when they start seeing you with their stuff, they’re going to want to know how you got it and they’ll want you to introduce them to the Jesus that’s able to open doors up without the college degree.”¹² Dollar’s gospel has people coming to Jesus for material gain instead of forgiveness of sins.

Scripture clearly teaches us not to labor for earthly goods. Matthew 6:19–20 says, “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal.”

Scripture promises that trials will come “so that your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire—may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1 Pet. 1:7). The church ignores Christ’s words at its own peril.

T. D. JAKES

T. D. Jakes was the subject of a Christian Research Journal cover story in 1999.¹³ His aberrant Word of Faith doctrine and his denial of the trinity¹⁴ continue to the present. Not content with his modalist view that God is only one person who manifests Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, he now takes the heretical view that God manifests Himself in other ways as well. Jakes says:

When God says ‘I AM that I AM,’ He says, ‘I can become whatever,’ and He showed off from that point on all through the wilderness. He just kept turning into stuff….They said ‘We want meat.’ He became quail and started flying through the air. They said ‘What are we going to do for water?’ He became water, came gushing out of a rock….They said ‘We can’t drink this bitter water.’ He became a tree and turned the bitter water sweet. I mean, He just kept turning into stuff! One God manifesting in a multiplicity of ways. One God. Now, you don’t divide all of those manifestations into different Gods, the God of Bread, the God of Quail, the God of Water, the God of Tree, the God of Cloud, the God of Fire. Just one God Who manifests Himself in many different ways….Your God is multifaceted, manifold, many shades.¹⁵

Jakes places great emphasis on the power of words, making the incredible claim that “it’s the Word of God that makes the difference, so powerful that as long as Jesus was talking on the cross He couldn’t die. It was only when He shut His mouth and hung His head in the locks of His shoulder that death could come and take Him, because He had so much life in His mouth that as long as He was talking death couldn’t get near Him.”¹⁶

We too, according to Jakes, can exercise the power of words to get whatever we want from God. Jakes, in relating the story of the blind man, Bartimaeus, said:

But it was not what was in Christ’s mouth that got him healed. The power was in Bartimaeus’ mouth. He would have whatever he said. And Jesus was saying ‘My hands are tied because I can’t do any more for you than what you say.’…If the power of life and death is in the tongue and you can have whatever you say and if you’ve been praying and praying and praying and you finally got God’s attention and now He’s looking at you and saying ‘What do you want?’…What do you want? Name it, baby, name it ….Declare it! Speak it! Confess it! Get your list out!¹⁷

Jakes warns of the power of the tongue when he says, “That Word of God is how God procreates. It’s how God regenerates. It’s the Word of God that does it every time. And that’s why once you get in the Word of God you gotta be careful what you speak to, because the power of life and death is in your tongue.”¹⁸

Jakes and other proponents of such teaching refer to Proverbs 18:21, “The tongue has the power of life and death, and those who love it will eat its fruit.” Proverbs isn’t teaching that when you speak a limited God has to give you whatever you say. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary’s explanation of this passage is that “those who enjoy talking, i.e., indulging in it, must bear its fruit, whether good or bad. The lesson is to be warned, especially if you love to talk.”¹⁹ The New Testament book of James devotes chapter three to warnings of the dangers of the tongue—perhaps a chapter Jakes would do well to read before opening his mouth to teach these kinds of false doctrines.

Jakes, instead of teaching that the reason for giving to the Lord is to further the spread of the gospel, espouses an extremely selfish reason for giving to the Lord—giving in order to receive more:

I want to pray over your seed, and it would be ridiculous for me to pray that God would give it back to you, because if all He was going to do was give it back to you, you ought to keep it and let you just have it….If you get a hundred dollars or a thousand dollars and you were going to give a thousand dollars, I tell you what, God is just going to give that thousand dollars back, well you just broke even. You could have kept that thousand dollars and not gone through the trouble. Come on, church folks! But God is going to give you some more on top of that.²⁰

Jakes says that if you want something from God, you must invest something. “Many people do not understand, if you are going to receive something from the Lord you have to be prepared to invest something. So many times people want things out of life without any kind of investment. You can’t in the natural, in the stock market, you can’t get a return on a stock where you have not bought shares.”²¹

Would Jakes not give things to his children unless they gave him something first? Of course not! Likewise, God provides us with all of our needs—food, clothing, home, and all other necessities of life, and He does this out of His goodness and mercy, without any merit or worthiness on our part.

JOYCE MEYER

Joyce Meyer was named one of the top 25 evangelical leaders in the United States in 2005.²² Based in St.Louis, Missouri, she is best known for her personal testimony of abuse as a child by her father and her struggles in subsequent years. She has authored more than 70 books and hosts a daily television and radio show called Enjoying Everyday Life.²³

Meyer holds an honorary doctorate of divinity degree from Oral Roberts University in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and a PhD in theology from Life Christian University in Tampa, Florida,²⁴ a university and seminary that has given degrees in theology to Benny Hinn, Rodney Howard-Browne, and Kenneth Copeland.²⁵

She undoubtedly has helped many who have suffered the abuse she did; still, there is great danger in her Word of Faith teachings. For example, she holds to the popular Word of Faith belief that faith is a force: “Unto every man is given the measure of faith, and faith is a powerful force….And the two greatest ways that we release our faith…is through sincere, heartfelt prayer and through the words of your mouth.”²⁶

Faith is described in Scripture as trust in God’s promises, not as a tangible force. Hebrews 11:1 clearly states, “Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.”

Meyer also believes that people can speak things into existence: “It says in Romans 4:17 that….we have a God who gives life to the dead and He calls things that be not as though they already existed….If there’s something in your way, speak to it.”²⁷ Yes, God can call things that do not exist as though they do, and He does give life to the dead, but Scripture does not say that people can.

Meyer embraces the “give-to-get” message espoused by her close friend Oral Roberts. “When I talked with Dr. Roberts today and we talked about this seed-faith thing, he said…when you give you get a receipt in heaven that when you have a need you can then go with your receipt and say ‘You see, God, I have got my receipt from my sowing and now I have a need and I’m cashing in my receipt.’”²⁸

Meyer undoubtedly doesn’t intend to encourage people to come to the Master for the love of what is on the Master’s table, but that is the result of this mindset. The apostle John described true biblical love in 1 John 4:16–21 as love that we have “because Christ first loved us,” and, as Galatians 2:20 says, “gave himself for us.” We are to love sacrificially, as Christ did. Selfish love is interested only in what it can get for itself; that type of love is what results when people embrace the philosophy of the Faith movement.

It is Meyer’s contention that Jesus died to bestow, among other things, financial blessings on us:

He has unbelievably wonderful, awesome, radical blessings…. Every blessing is not just a financial blessing, but yes, financial blessings….And I really would like to just claim and use and enjoy as many of my blessings and as much of my inheritance as I possibly can, for two reasons: one, we all want to enjoy life, and second, I believe Jesus died for this purpose and I believe it brings Him joy when we mature enough to be able to receive the fullness of what He has for us.”²⁹

Jesus died to pay the price for our sins. If we say that He died for any other reason, we detract from the central message of Scripture.

Finally, Meyer makes the startling claim that she is not a sinner: “I didn’t stop sinning until I finally got it through my thick head I wasn’t a sinner anymore. And the religious world thinks that’s heresy and they want to hang you for it. But the Bible says that I’m righteous, and I can’t be righteous and a sinner at the same time.”³⁰

Meyer elaborated during an interview on KFUO radio in St. Louis, Missouri: “I know that I sin all the time and when I say that I’m not a sinner, I don’t mean that I don’t sin. I just mean that I’m not going to go around all the time identifying myself as a sinner, because that gives me the mentality then that that’s all I am.”³¹

Martin Luther addressed this concept and summed up the danger of this type of thinking superbly:

The saints at the same time as they are righteous are also sinners; righteous because they believe in Christ, whose righteousness covers them and is imputed to them, but sinners because they do not fulfill the Law, are not without concupiscence, and are like sick men under the care of a physician; they are sick in fact but healthy in hope and in the fact that they are beginning to be healthy, that is, they are ‘being healed.’ They are people for whom the worst possible thing is the presumption that they are healthy, because they suffer a worse relapse.³²

JOEL OSTEEN

Joel Osteen took over as pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, Texas, following the death of his father, John Osteen, in 1999. He has little theological training, having dropped out of Oral Roberts University in 1982 to run his father’s television ministry.³³ Despite this lack of training, Lakewood Church has grown enormously, from a congregation of 6,000 in 1999 to one of 30,000 today,³⁴ thanks largely to his gospel of self-esteem. His best-selling book Your Best Life Now has sold more than three million copies in hardback and has led to a multimillion-dollar contract for another book with Free Press, a division of Simon and Shuster, slated for publication in 2007.³⁵

In addition to his gospel of self-esteem, Osteen also preaches the Word of Faith theology that his father taught. He says, for example, that words have creative power: “Our words are vital in bringing our dreams to pass. It’s not enough to simply see it by faith or in your imagination. You have to begin speaking words of faith over your life. Your words have enormous creative power. The moment you speak something out, you give birth to it.”³⁶

Osteen, like Meyer and others, believes that every day “you should declare good things. Just look in the mirror and say ‘I am strong, I am healthy, I’m rising to new levels, I’m excited about my future.’ When you say that, it may not be true. You may not be very healthy today, or maybe you don’t have a lot of things to look forward to, but the Scripture tells us in Romans we have to call the things that are not as if they already were.”³⁷

Osteen allots so much power to our words that they can even thwart God’s plans, as nearly happened, he claims, at the angel’s announcement of the birth of John the Baptist:

[Zechariah] was so surprised because he and his wife Elizabeth were well up there in years. He said to the angel, “Are you really sure this is going to happen? Do you see how old we are? I just don’t think this could be possible.”…The angel went on to say “But, Zechariah, because you didn’t believe, because you questioned God, you shall remain silent and not be able to speak until the baby is born.”…Well, why did God shut his mouth?…He knew Zechariah would go out and start talking to his friends. “Well, they said we’re gonna have a baby, but they must have gotten the wrong person. Man, we’re way too old!” See, God knows the power of our words. He knows we prophesy our future, and He knew Zechariah’s own negative words would stop His plan.³⁸

Acknowledging that we may have negative thoughts, he adds, “But let me encourage you: don’t make the mistake of verbalizing those thoughts. The moment you speak something out it takes on a whole new meaning. See, one of the main ways we release our faith is through our words. That’s how we give life to our faith.”³⁹

Osteen is giving more power to the creature—us—than to the Creator. As sons and daughters of God, we reflect the communicable attributes of God, such as love and intelligence, but we don’t reflect His incommunicable attributes, such as omnipotence. Our words don’t contain any magical power that can upset God’s plans.

Osteen promises that we can expect to receive preferential treatment in life from God:

I know when Victoria and I used to travel with my father overseas, a lot of times we would go over a few days early, and it was amazing how many times we would get upgraded to first class. When I’d go up to that counter I’d kid with Victoria and I’d say ‘Watch this! We’re going to get upgraded.’ And I’d go up there expecting to get preferential treatment. I’d go up there knowing that I have an advantage, I’ve got the favor of God….when I’d go up there I’d just smile real big and be real friendly and that whole time under my breath I’d be saying ‘Father, I thank you that I have your favor. I thank you that you’re causing me to stand out in the crowd. I thank you that your light is shining down on me.’ And Victoria will tell you time after time, for no reason at all, they’d bump us up to first class. See, that’s the favor of God….That’s God’s favor giving us preferential treatment.⁴⁰

God isn’t inclined to fall for flattery, resulting in preferential treatment being given to some Christians over other people. If He were, He certainly has been falling asleep at the wheel when it comes to the persecuted Christians in the Sudan. This type of thinking is a trait of the North American church, which, for too many years, has expected God to serve it rather than expecting itself to serve God.

Lastly, Osteen holds to the popularly held Word of Faith error that Jesus did battle with Satan in hell. “For three days Jesus fought with the enemy. It was the battle of the ages, light versus darkness, good versus evil. But thank God Satan was no match for Jesus.”⁴¹

Osteen elaborates, “He grabbed Satan by the nap [sic] of his neck and He began to slowly drag him down the corridors of hell. All beat up and bruised because He wanted to make sure that every single demon saw very clearly that Jesus was indeed the undisputed Champion of all time!”⁴²

In addition to the fact that Satan isn’t in hell, Jesus didn’t partially succeed on the cross and then finish the work in hell. He completed the work on the cross and pronounced that the debt had been paid (see, e.g., Rom. 6:10; John 19:30).

ROD PARSLEY

Rod Parsley attended Circleville Bible College in Circleville, Ohio, but dropped out during his second year.⁴³ He began teaching a Bible study in 1977 that grew within two years into a church of 180 seats in Columbus, Ohio.⁴⁴ Under the mentoring of Word of Faith teacher Lester Sumrall,⁴⁵ Parsley opened the 5200-seat World Fellowship Church in Columbus in 1987. The relationship between Sumrall and Parsley, according to Parsley, was like that of Elijah and Elisha, and Parsley claims that in 1992 Sumrall passed his “sword of anointing” to him.⁴⁶ Today Parsley’s television program, Breakthrough, is seen in 136 countries around the world.⁴⁷

Like other Word of Faith teachers, Parsley greatly diminishes God’s powers while elevating humanity’s powers. He says, for example,

When you ask God what He wants, He only tells you one time in the whole 1,166 pages of your Bible….‘Here’s what I want: Ask of Me!’ Why does He say that? Because He can’t do it on His own. He can’t get what He wants on His own because He placed you in authority on this earth. Did you hear me? So He has to compel you to ask Him so that then He can answer, because He said ‘Call and I will answer.’⁴⁸

1 Chronicles, in contrast to Parsley’s statement, tells us just how powerful God is: “Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the majesty and the splendor, for everything in heaven and earth is yours. Yours, O Lord, is the kingdom; you are exalted as head over all” (1 Chron. 29:11; see also Gen. 18:14; Job 42:2). Does that sound like a helpless God who needs our permission to operate on earth?

Parsley, too, endorses the give-to-get philosophy, as seen when trying to explain Deuteronomy 14:26: “God is saying you can sow that money for whatever you want….Your job. For sheep. That’s your covering and your food. How about for wine? That symbolizes to us fruit, joy, peace….You mean if you need some love you can sow money? Well, that’s what it says.”⁴⁹

Salvation, too, is among the bounty. “Salvation for your family….Is that what you really want, to know that all of your children are saved, to pillow your head at night knowing if Jesus split the eastern sky, that your children are all within the ark of safety? Is that what you want? Then sow for it.”⁵⁰

Parsley, at the end of one broadcast, asked some of his followers to sow a gift of $50, stating, “I believe God will give you a harvest of protection from deception and an uncommon ability to discern between truth and error in your life….First, God is going to release to you the ability to hear and recognize His voice as never before. Second, protection over your decisions. I’m believing with you for one year of no bad choices in your life. Finally, thirdly, protection from the deception of the adversary.”⁵¹

If doing this actually worked, I’d recommend that everyone send Parsley $50, as that would end the deception the Faith movement has foisted on the church all these years! God never says, “Give me your money and I’ll see to it that your family is saved, and that you’ll become wealthy.” Salvation is not for sale (see, e.g., Eph. 2:8–10).

Parsley also maintains that healing is guaranteed: “Don’t you pray ‘If it’s Thy will.’ Perfect faith cannot exist where the will of God is not known. Did you hear me? I said healing is not a promise, it’s an established fact.”⁵² He takes Peter out of context to back up this teaching, stating, “First Peter 2:24 records that sickness was defeated as a result of the stripes Jesus bore on His back. When the Roman cat-of-nine-tails whistled through the air and stripped His back until His flesh hanged round His legs like ribbons, every lash laid on Him purchased healing for our sick bodies. Because Jesus bore those stripes you don’t have to be sick anymore.”⁵³

What Peter actually says is that Christ “bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness: by his wounds you have been healed.” Note that Christ bore our sins—not our sicknesses—so that we could die to sins—not sicknesses. It is through His sacrifice on the tree that our sins have been removed, or healed.

Paul was never healed of the thorn in his flesh and he recommended wine, not healing, for Timothy’s stomach problem. It’s also worth noting that Rod Parsley’s son has not been cured of Asperger syndrome, a form of autism.⁵⁴ Healing is provided for in the atonement, but it is never guaranteed.

Finally, Parsley teaches that his viewers will receive luxury homes and cars from God:

Some of you better get ready to drive around in neighborhoods where you never thought you’d be able to afford to live. Some of you better go down to that Lexus and Mercedes dealership and just sit down in one of those things with that leather all over it. And when they say, ‘what are you doing,’ just say, ‘well, I’m, I’m just feeling out what my Father is going to give me.’ How’s He gonna give it to you? ‘Because I’m gonna be obedient. I heard a word from the man of God and when I obey that word, it unleashes that anointing into my life and I’m on my way to houses I didn’t build, full of good things I didn’t have to buy.’⁵⁵

A year after making this statement he lamented, “Five years ago the number one request coming into prayer lines across America was ‘Pray for my lost family and loved ones that they do not go to hell.’ Number one request five years ago. It’s number eight today. It has been replaced by—neck and neck—number one, ‘Pray for my physical body,’ number two, ‘Pray for my financial prosperity.’ This has become the cry of the church.”⁵⁶

It’s little wonder the main requests today are for healing and prosperity considering the message he has been preaching all these years! He and other Word of Faith teachers have succeeded in taking peoples’ eyes off of Jesus Christ and placing them on the things of this world.

THE GOSPEL BEYOND CRISIS

There is a tendency in the church today to downplay the importance of doctrine. Scripture, however, places a great deal of emphasis not only on doctrine, but correct doctrine. Paul urged Timothy to “watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers” (1 Tim. 4:16). He did this because “the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear” (2 Tim. 4:3).

The gospel we hear today appeals to those itching ears. It is appealing to think that you can order God around like a divine butler, or to think that you are equal with God. Who wouldn’t be fascinated with the idea that they can speak things into existence, or that they’re going to receive houses and cars they didn’t work for? Who among us doesn’t want to hear that they aren’t sinners? The teachings of the Word of Faith movement are nothing more than an appeal to the flesh—thus their popularity.

Much of today’s church is listening to a false gospel in which we are the center of attention instead of Christ. We have all the power and God is just a puppet. The result is that we end up like a spoiled child who thinks he knows what is best for him and who thinks he can manipulate his father into giving him anything he wants. Is this the kind of God we really need—a God who will give us our heart’s desire, even if it will harm us?

We have shown with passages such as Isaiah 43:10, Matthew 6:19-20, and Romans 3:23 that Scripture disagrees with all of these assertions. Christ is the center of attention in the true gospel of the Bible. He holds all the power and authority. He knows what is best for us, and it isn’t necessarily what we want that He offers us, but what we need. The gospel of the Bible focuses on one person, Jesus Christ, and what He did for us at Calvary—purchase our salvation. Many of today’s most prominent churches and preachers clearly are preaching another gospel, a gospel that not only cannot save, but that is doing devastating damage to the souls of thousands of Christians every year.

notes

1. Christianity in Crisis is Hank Hanegraaff’s highly-regarded ECPA Gold Medallion award–winning book that exposes the cancer of the Word of Faith movement.

2. Hank Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis (1993; Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1997), 10–11.

3. “Dr. Creflo A. Dollar Biography,” About CDM, Creflo Dollar Ministries, http://www.creflodollarministries.org/about/bio_t.html.

4. John Blake, “Dollar and the Gospel,” The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, March 5, 2000, 1G.

5. Creflo Dollar, Changing Your World, TBN, December 8, 2002.

6. Ibid.

7. All Bible quotations are from the New International Version.

8. Creflo Dollar, Changing Your World, TBN, September 15, 2002.

9. Creflo Dollar, conversation with Kenneth Copeland, Believer’s Voice of Victory, TBN, May 23, 2002.

10. Creflo Dollar, Praise the Lord, TBN, June 20, 1999.

11. Ibid., April 1, 2004.

12. Ibid., April 6, 2000.

13. Jerry Buckner, “The Man, His Ministry, and His Movement: Concerns about the Teachings of T. D. Jakes,” Christian Research Journal 22, 2 (1999): 12, http:// www.equip.org/DJ900.htm.

14. See, for example, The Potter’s House, Doctrinal Statement, http://www.thepottershouse.org/ PH_doctrine.html (Web site for the church that Bishop Jakes pastors and its television broadcast). The word “triune” is used, but it is used only in the sense that God appears in three manifestations, and never at the same time.

15. T. D. Jakes, The Potter’s House, TBN, June 30, 1999.

16. Ibid., June 7, 2004.

17. Ibid., December 3, 2001.

18. Ibid.

19. Allen P. Ross, “Proverbs,” The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 5, Frank E. Gaebelein, gen. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1991), 1028.

20. T. D. Jakes, Praise the Lord, TBN, November 12, 2001.

21. Ibid., November 5, 2003.

22. David Van Biema, et al., “The 25 Most Influential Evangelicals in America,” Time Magazine, February 7, 2005, 34.

23. Joyce Meyer Ministries, “FAQ,” http://www.joycemeyer.org/AboutUs/FAQ/.

24. Ibid.

25. “Join These Distinguished LCU Degree Holders!” Life Christian University, http://www.lcus.edu/main2.htm (last accessed March 22, 2007).

26. Joyce Meyer, “Interrupting Satan’s Plan: Releasing the Supernatural Power of God through Prayer,” from the tape series “Violent Christians in a Violent Society,” recorded July 19, 2001.

27. Joyce Meyer, Enjoying Everyday Life, Internet broadcast, July 13, 2005, available upon request from Joyce Meyer Ministries.

28. Joyce Meyer, Praise the Lord, TBN, November 3, 2003.

29. Joyce Meyer, Enjoying Everyday Life, Internet broadcast, July 11, 2005, available upon request from Joyce Meyer Ministries.

30. Joyce Meyer, From the Cross to the Throne, audiocassette (St. Louis: Life Christian Center, n.d.). Tape on file at CRI.

31. Joyce Meyer, interview by Todd Wilken, Issues, Etc., KFUO radio, May 23, 2005.

32. Martin Luther, Luther’s Works on CD-Rom, vol. 25: Lectures on Romans (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999).

33. Tara Dooley, “Spreading Its Word,” Houston Chronicle, Section A, September 26, 2004, 1.

34. Dan Weikel and William Lobdell, “Younger Schuller Plans a ‘Next Level’ for Ministry,” Los Angeles Times, Part A, January 2, 2006, 15.

35. Edward Wyatt, “Religious Broadcaster Gets Rich Contract for Next Book,” New York Times, Section C, Business/Financial Desk, March 15, 2006, 3, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/15/business/media/15book.html?ex=1300078800&en=7abfe15a0d87d592&ei=5090&partner= rssuserland&emc=rss. See also my review of Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential: Bob Hunter, “A Summary Critique: Promoting the Gospel of Self-Esteem,” Christian Research Journal, 28, 2 (2005): 44-46, http://www.equip.org.

36. Joel Osteen, Your Best Life Now: 7 Steps to Living at Your Full Potential, CD-Rom (New York: Hachette Audio, 2004).

37. Joel Osteen, Discover the Champion in You, TBN, June 7, 2004.

38. Ibid., May 3, 2004.

39. Ibid.

40. Ibid., February 2, 2004.

41. Ibid., April 26, 2004.

42. Joel Osteen, “The Truth of Resurrection,” April 23, 2000, Lakewood Church, Sermons, http://web.archive.org/web/20050323022921/http://www.lakewood.cc/sermons/cs_002.htm.

43. Ted Wendling, “Ohio Pastor Illustrates Christian Right’s Political Push,” Religion News Service, June 20, 2005.

44. Robert C. Withers, “Powerful Preaching,” The (Huntington, WV) Herald-Dispatch, October 2, 1999, 4C.

45. Sumrall was the founder of the Christian Center Cathedral of Praise in South Bend, Indiana, and proclaimed in his book I Predict 2000 A.D. that Jesus would return by the year 2000 (Bill Tammeus, “Anxiety Grows as 2000 Draws Near,” The Kansas City Star, August 31, 1997, K1).

46. “About Us,” Breakthrough, http://www.breakthrough.net/about-us.asp.

47. Robert C. Withers, “Anxiety Grows As 2000 Draws Near,” The (Hintington, WV) Herald-Dispatch, October 2, 1999, 4C.

48. Rod Parsley, Praise the Lord Spring Praise-a-thon, TBN, August 7, 2003.

49. Ibid., April 3, 2003.

50. Ibid.

51. Rod Parsley, Breakthrough, TBN, May 24, 2006.

52. Rod Parsley, September 4, 2001, source unknown, audio clip on file at CRI.

53. Rod Parsley, Breakthrough, TBN, February 28, 2006.

54. Ted Wendling, “Ohio Pastor Illustrates Christian Right’s Political Push,” The (Cleveland, OH) Plain Dealer, June 5, 2005, A1.

55. Rod Parsley, Breakthrough, TBN, March 27, 2002.

56. Ibid., September 12, 2003.

The Christian apologist is accustomed to answering for the historical “sins of the church,” such as the Spanish Inquisition and the Salem witch trials. Our technological world has brought us another category of sins that are trivial by comparison, but they continue to gain public exposure: the excesses of “televangelists.” During the 1980s, almost every week the news media reported on some new immoderation, such as Oral Roberts’s promise that he would be “taken home” if his ministry did not receive sufficient funding and Jim and Tammy Bakker’s purchases of luxuries like air-conditioned doghouses. Televangelist scandals reached their pinnacle in that decade. Today, while the secular media is no longer as interested in televangelists and both Roberts and the Bakkers have retreated into relative obscurity, other personalities have emerged to take their place, and less spectacular excesses and abuses continue.

Be Prepared. The best approach to answering those who are bewildered or angered by the activities of televangelists is to be proactive. Become familiar with the activities of prominent televangelists. The Christian who cannot offer at least a perfunctory response to the latest “scandal” may leave the impression of being apathetic toward abuses in the church. It is, of course, impossible to predict when the media will expose a televangelist or when a televangelist will raise eyebrows with his or her ostentatious behavior. If we familiarize ourselves with some of the major televangelists’ names and their activities, however, we will at least have some ground on which to answer questions. Apologetics organizations such as the Christian Research Institute provide information on specific televangelists and their activities.

The nature of this subject brings up a relevant point: those who inquire about televangelist behavior often are only trying to provoke an emotional reaction from the defending Christian. Our reaction should always be the same, however, whether we are presented with an honest question or a harassing query about a televangelist: provide an evenhanded and sensible response that is rooted in fact. Falling prey to the bait of a harassing inquirer will serve only to justify in their minds the judgment that Christians are irrational sheep who are unwilling to criticize their leaders’ errors. Our model, rather, should be the apostle Paul, who stood up to Peter when he was in the wrong and publicly charged him with error (Gal.2).

Money Matters. Televangelist scandals may be roughly divided into three types. The first, and probably most frequent, issue that arises in these contexts is financial scandal. Questions about televangelist finances fall into the categories of general objections against fundraising (“Televangelists are always begging for money”) and specific objections against their use of funds (“Televangelists use donations to purchase frivolous luxuries”). General objections against fundraising present little difficulty for the Christian. It is enough to reply that there is no offense in merely asking for funding; all types of organizations fundraise, including those that are antireligious in nature (e.g., the Freedom from Religion Foundation), those that pursue political or social advocacy (e.g., People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), those that provide educational and entertainment services (e.g., public television and radio), and those that provide health and emergency services (e.g., the American Red Cross). If someone objects to the mere act of fundraising, ask whether he or she also believes that fundraising is objectionable when other organizations do it. Point out that every legal organization has a legitimate right to seek financing and that thousands of nonprofit organizations engage in fundraising activity. If the critic is reasonably consistent, this will be sufficient to answer his or her objection. If, however, someone argues that a particular televangelist seems to ask for funds too often or in a way that is objectionable, then this is a matter of personal judgment and must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis; there are those who even find public television’s periodic and low-key requests for funds to be objectionable!

On the other hand, when a televangelist actually does misuse funds for personal gain, it is indefensible. Our response should be to point to Jesus and the apostles as examples of leaders who were blameless in their ministries. Jesus was an itinerant preacher (Matt.9:20; Luke9:58) and Paul often worked at his tentmaking trade to support himself (Acts18:3).¹ It may also be helpful to point out that Christians have founded “watchdog” organizations, such as the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, to keep tabs on ministries and call them to account. It is important to show that many Christian organizations make a serious effort to keep their financial house in order.

Moral Misdeeds. When we are questioned about a televangelist involved in a moral scandal, our answers should be straightforward and to the point. When possible, respond by turning to Scriptures that prohibit immoral behavior (e.g., Exod.20:14 and Matt.5:27 denounce adultery). This is an obvious first step, but it certainly will not be the crux of the matter, since the questioner is probably already aware that the Bible forbids certain behaviors. The objection will more likely be to the evident hypocrisy of the televangelist who proclaims Jesus but does not do what Jesus commanded. The Bible, of course, clearly condemns hypocrisy (Matt.23:28) and it admonishes us to be hearers and doers of God’s Word (James1:23). The question posed to us will often be, “How can someone who professes to follow Jesus do things like this?” Our answer will depend on the televangelist in question and the nature of his or her misdeeds. Some moral misdeeds are simply the result of human weakness. Televangelists, like prominent athletes and celebrities, are often held to a higher standard by viewers and fans, but they are no less susceptible to temptation and sin than anyone else (Rom.3:23; James3:2). Other immoral actions may be a sign of a more serious spiritual problem or of a “wolf in the fold” (Acts20:29). We need to be cautious in our judgments lest we become hypocrites ourselves (Matt.7:1); nevertheless, we should remind inquirers that the Bible promises that every person will reap what he or she sows (Gal.6:7). An immoral televangelist will by no means escape God’s judgment.

Doctrinal Deviations. A final area that may draw criticism is when a televangelist teaches an incorrect or even heretical theological doctrine. Doctrinal scandals may not attract media attention and unbelievers generally are unlikely to be concerned with unbiblical teachings; nevertheless, it is to our benefit to become familiar with any wayward doctrines taught by televangelists since these may explain (but not justify) their financial or moral excesses. Teachers of the “health and wealth gospel,” for example, have misinterpreted the Bible in order to support their accumulation of wealth and justify surrounding themselves with luxuries. By pointing out their misinterpretations, we will demonstrate to nonbelievers that the roots of scandal often lie in theological error and that we do not blindly follow those who misinterpret the Bible’s teachings.²

The Real Issue. At the heart of objections to televangelist behavior, there is a premise that the misdeeds of one who claims to be a Christian somehow are an effective argument against the truth of Christianity. That is simply illogical. Those misdeeds indicate the irrelevance of Christianity in the life of the wrongdoer, but they say nothing about the truth of the Christian faith itself. Christianity is founded on the historical fact of the resurrection of Jesus (1Cor.15:3–4,14), and a televangelist scandal, as lamentable as that may be, will not change that fact. The misdeeds of a televangelist, moreover, do not disprove Christianity any more than the misdeeds of Stalin disprove atheism or the evil activities of Osama bin Laden disprove Islam. Only a religious system that claims that its followers are perfect could be disproven by the misdeeds of its followers. Christianity, however, claims only that its founder, Jesus Christ, is perfect, not its followers.

If the objector persists in arguing that the misdeeds of Christians disprove Christianity, then you may reply: “If you think that bad deeds invalidate Christianity, then will you accept that good deeds serve to validate it?” Faced with this dilemma, the person will have to either abandon the argument or concede that good deeds validate Christianity. If the person concedes, use the open door as an opportunity to point to persons who have lived exemplary lives in the name of Christ. Well-known, respected figures such as Billy Graham may be effective examples, but too distant. Someone with whom you are personally acquainted who can, perhaps, share his or her experiences with the objector and answer questions might be more helpful. Someone in my fellowship, for example, recently served for a week as a missionary in Central America. He gave of his own time, having used vacation hours from his job, and paid his own expenses. His experience inspired nonbelievers at his workplace to ask why someone would engage in such significant self-sacrifice. Finally, it may be helpful to point out the overall positive effect that Christians have had throughout history.³ Remember, however, that even though this line of reasoning may convince the person that Christianity is true, it is built on the faulty premise that the religion of anyone who does good deeds is valid.

Televangelist scandals seem to be better suited as topics for the pages of tabloid newspapers rather than for serious discussion. American society constantly monitors the behavior of prominent figures, and unfortunately it (illogically) uses the behavior of televangelists as a guide to determine if Christianity is true. It is inevitable that this challenge will enter into our daily discussions; therefore, Christians should be no less ready to answer this challenge to the Christian faith than to answer any other challenge.

— James Patrick Holding

NOTES

1. It is not possible to draw an exact parallel between ancient and modern fundraising activity. An itinerant teacher like Jesus or Paul would normally secure the support of a few wealthy patrons (cf. Luke 8:2–3) who would be more than willing to distribute from their wealth as a matter of personal honor.

2. For an overview of these teachings, see Hank Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1993).

3. See Vincent Carroll and David Schiflett, Christianity on Trial (San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2001) and Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003).

“Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth” (3John2 KJV).¹

In an article entitled “How to Prosper from the Inside Out,” Kenneth Copeland asks, “How does God prosper His people?” The answer, he says, is in 3John2: God “blesses you materially as your soul prospers on His Word.” Copeland asserts that most Christians believe that God will make them prosper “as the economy prospers or even as [their] employers decide to promote [them].” This is wrong, he says; instead, “as the seeds of prosperity are planted in your mind, in your will and in your emotions…they eventually produce a great financial harvest.”²

Gloria Copeland interprets the verse in a similar way. She writes, “God’s plan is for us to grow financially as we grow spiritually.” The reason: God “knows it is dangerous to put great wealth into the hands of someone who is too spiritually immature to handle it.” She, too, interprets John’s wish as a divine promise: “God wants us to increase financially at the same rate we increase spiritually.”³

We can note two things in this interpretation of 3John2. One is that it construes the statement “even as” in a cause and effect way: spiritual prosperity will produce financial prosperity. The other is that this interpretation implies that the wish that the writer of the epistle expresses has the force of a promise from God.

Understanding the New Testament Epistles. We need to approach this verse and the common “prosperity” interpretation that the Copelands offer in light of the literary form (or genre) of 3John, which is epistle. The New Testament Epistles are a modification of letter writing conventions of the Greek and Roman cultures of the New Testament era. The letters in these cultures typically included three elements: an opening salutation, which included the sender’s name, the addressee, and a greeting; the body of the letter in which the main topics were stated and elaborated; and the closing, which included additional greetings and final wishes.

The New Testament Epistles have these same ingredients. They, too, have an opening greeting: “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace” (1Thess.1:1). Likewise, they have what we would call the body of the letter, and they end with a conventional closing: “All who are with me send greetings to you. Greet those who love us in the faith. Grace be with you all” (Titus3:15).

The Epistles, however, contain two sections that Greco-Roman letters lack. First, in most of the Epistles, the opening salutation is followed by a thanksgiving. It consists of a prayer for spiritual welfare, as well as a remembrance or commendation of the spiritual riches of the recipient. Paul’s thanksgiving in Colossians, for example, begins, “We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you” (Col.1:3). Second, following the body or doctrinal section of a New Testament Epistle, we typically find a section of moral commands that goes by the Greek word paraenesis, which means “exhortations.” This section might contain groupings of proverbs, lists of vices and virtues, catalogs of commands about what to avoid and what to practice, or exhortations about a single moral topic. A specimen passage of paraenesis is this: “Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience” (Col.3:12).

Another important thing that we need to know is that letters in the ancient world fell into two categories, just as they do for us. Personal letters existed to convey information that was personal to the writer, and those letters were filled with specific references that applied to the writer and the recipient. Official letters were public in content and tone. They were intended to be taken seriously as directives that applied generally to a number of people.

Finally, the New Testament Epistles are what literary people call occasional pieces. This means that they were written in response to specific occasions in the life and times of the writer and his recipients. The result is that, except for the epistle to the Romans (which is really a theological treatise), the New Testament Epistles are generally not systematic discussions of a theological or moral topic. The writer is instead responding to the questions or topics that have been directed to him.

Interpreting the Various Sections of the New Testament Epistles. It is easy to see that we need to pay attention to the place where a given statement appears in an epistle. A statement in the doctrinal body of an epistle has the status of authoritative truth. Here we find ideas that are universally applicable, not limited to the local conditions of a given church or the personal relationships between author and recipient.

The moral behavior that is prescribed in the paraenesis is also binding on all people at all times. These lists of virtues and vices, and of commands regarding what to do and avoid, are straightforward directives: “Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good” (Rom.12:9).

The salutation, thanksgiving, and closing, however, are phrased in a different kind of rhetoric. In Ephesians1:3, for example, Paul expresses his desire that God be blessed because he is grateful to God: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing.” Paul, as the writer, states what we, too, are thankful for as readers. These words of thanksgiving remind us of what we possess in Christ, but they are not a command to behave in a certain way, nor do they state a promise. The salutations and closings of epistles are similar to this. They express the author’s wishes for the recipients: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit” (Gal.6:18).

Epistolary Salutations. Let us think about the salutations in the letters and e-mail messages that we ourselves send and receive. I often begin an e-mail with the statement, “I hope that this communiqué finds you doing well.” If I find that too understated for a given recipient, I might write, “I hope that this finds you and yours flourishing in every way.” Are these promises? No: they are wishes. The person who receives my expression of good wishes does not claim it as something assured. In fact, sometimes the recipients of my letters share with me the difficulties through which they are currently passing.

Verse2 of the epistle of 3John appears as part of the salutation. In the beginning of the salutation (v.1), John calls the recipient “beloved Gaius.” The first thing we might note from this is that John is writing to a personal friend. Second, we might note that John is claiming to be expressing a wish or prayer (nearly all English translations read “I pray,” although a handful, such as the King James Version, read “I wish”). John is expressing a wish for the complete well-being of his friend. He is not stating a general promise for all Christians.

Furthermore, the exact form in which John casts his prayer or wish was thoroughly conventional even in the surrounding pagan culture. Greeks and Romans, too, wished prosperity and good health to the recipients of their letters. For John, a Christian who believed in the primacy of the spiritual, no picture of welfare was complete unless it included a person’s soul as well as body.

If we put the components of John’s well-wishes together, they add up to a picture of complete or total well-being. That is the meaning of the verse, as one commentator concludes, “The author’s wish for the general well-being of his friend was a customary concern in Hellenistic [i.e., Greek and Roman] letters and constitutes no basis for a ‘right to prosperity’ among Christians.”⁴

To say that first-century pagans used the same formula in their epistolary salutations does not mean that the sentiment that John expresses is not inspired or is anything less than Christian; but some Bible interpreters have a way of implying that they have unlocked a secret and very special message that ordinary Christians have overlooked. There are no hidden or esoteric spiritual truths embodied in a conventional epistolary salutation.

We should note in this regard that “prosperity” teachers attach an undue weight to the syntax that happens to appear in the English translation of 3John2. They believe that the phrase “even as” means “as a result of,” or “as an inevitable accompaniment to.” The gist of the passage, however, is that John already knows that Gaius is flourishing spiritually (as several English translations and numerous commentaries make clear). John hopes that his friend’s external circumstances might match his spiritual health, which according to the very next verse is good, and something that others had reported to John earlier: “For I rejoiced greatly when the brothers came and testified to your truth, as indeed you are walking in the truth” (3John3). The phrase “just as” or “even as,” then, has the force of a coordinate link, not a cause and effect link.

When we pray for ourselves and others, we pray in confidence, but we do not presume to claim that God promises to send everything for which we pray. When a friend sends good wishes to us in a letter, we know very well that our actual circumstances might be far from what our friend has wished for us. In short, an epistolary salutation is just that—a salutation in which one of the conventional niceties is for the sender to express a desire for the well-being of the recipient. Interpreting the wish or prayer of 3John2 as a promise of “health and wealth” is not in line with what we know about salutations in epistles or, for that matter, with the general tenor of New Testament teaching that a mark of true spirituality is suffering (e.g., Rom.8:17; Phil.1:29; 1Pet.4:1).

— Leland Ryken

NOTES

1. Unless otherwise noted, all Bible quotations are from the English Standard Version.

2. Kenneth Copeland, “How to Prosper from the Inside Out,” Kenneth Copeland Ministries, http://www.kcm.org/studycenter/finances/pdf/prosper_inside_out.pdf.

3. Gloria Copeland, “Build Your Financial Foundation,” Kenneth Copeland Ministries, http://www.kcm.org/studycenter/finances/pdf/foundation.pdf.

4. Thomas F. Johnson, 1, 2, and 3 John (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993), 167.

Tilton’s Success-N-Life TV show ranked twelfth in the national Arbitron ratings for syndicated religious television programs, viewed by an esti­mated 199,000 households — and his cable audience was larger still. Televangelist watcher Ole Anthony calls him “the biggest TV preacher ever.” At his peak Tilton reportedly bought more than 5,000 hours of air time per month in all 235 U.S. markets and maintained a staff of over 800, many just to answer phones and take names and addresses 24 hours a day.

Most impressive of all was the way “Pastor Bob” made the cash roll in. Using prepos­terous scriptural pretexts, Tilton bullied and cajoled his followers into making “vows of faith” (typically $1,000) to get their miracle — even if they didn’t have the money. “Oh, I know you probably don’t have a thousand dollars, but vow it.” (In a 1990 inter­view he admitted drawing inspiration for his approach from TV real-estate pitchman Dave Del Dotto’s “infomer­cials.”) In the process Tilton built a mailing list of several million current and potential donors, pulling in around 10,000 letters each business day and between $65-$l00 million a year, tax-free.

According to ABC’s Prime Time Live, “Although the ministry is a corporation, Tilton personally has access to all its wealth, almost as if it were a sole proprietorship.” The min­ister and his wife, Marte, reportedly earn over $1 mil­lion per year.

But Tilton’s downfall may have been set in motion last year when members of Ole Anthony’s Trinity Foundation, a nonprofit watchdog group in Dallas, began sifting through trash from the dumpsters at Tilton’s Tulsa bank, data pro­cessing firm, and lawyer’s offices. Together with investi­gators from ABC, they made 14 garbage runs between August and October 1991, unearthing mounds of sensi­tive and compromising docu­ments about the evangelist’s finances and methods.

Pastor Bob mails vast quan­tities of gimmicky miracle doodads (e.g., coins, cloths, cardboard angels, rocks, vials of sand, tubes of oil, water from the River Jordan) to the people on his mailing list, urg­ing them to send the items back for his personal attention. But, according to Anthony, Tilton almost never touches the stuff; in fact, the majority of the prayer requests that Tilton promises followers he’ll personally and individually touch and pray over are rout­ed first to a bank, then to a mail processing facility, and finally to a recycling center —without the evangelist ever seeing them — to be turned into toilet paper.

And that, says Anthony, is basis for mail fraud. All told, four federal agen­cies and two state agencies are actively investigating Tilton. The Texas state attorney general has been hot on Tilton’s trail since December, seeking incriminating docu­ments and jousting with the evangelist in the courts. To make matters worse, by mid-July Tilton was facing at least nine civil suits with claims totaling roughly $500 million. One was filed by the widow of Tilton supporter Tom Crow­ley, who was still receiving the minister’s fundraising appeals five months after her hus­band’s death. One such letter said: “God spoke to me this morning specifically about you, Tom, and He’s going to heal you.” Crowley had paid Tilton a$100 “vow of faith” in the hopes of recovering. His wife is seeking $40 million in damages. According to Antho­ny, Tilton’s lawyers especially fear the filing of a racketeering suit under civil RICO statutes.

The media are still hot on Tilton’s trail. On July 9, PrimeTime Live broadcast a damag­ing update on the minister, and the show’s producers plan at least one new program on Tilton and televangelism in coming months. (Another net­work has an investigation in the works.) On July 12, in the first in what promises to be a punishing series of investiga­tive articles the Dallas Morn­ing News disclosed irregulari­ties in Tilton’s attempts to acquire or control a television station, raising serious ques­tions about the “lease agree­ment” under which Tilton & Co. purchased virtually all available air time on Dallas’s Channel 55, dubbed the “Power Channel.” According to FCC officials, “The arrange­ment. . .raises the question of whether Mr. Tilton has, in effect, acquired control of the Dallas broadcast property without having undergone the proper licensing scrutiny.”

Since the initial Prime Time report in November 1991, Tilton’s church has lost at least 1,000 members. Ministry income has dropped by a third. And much of Tilton’s audience is tuning him out: Ratings for February 1992 showed Suc­cess-N-Life finishing last in Arbitron’s list of the nation’s top 20 syndicated religious TV broadcasts (a plunge of nearly 39 percent) and falling to 25th place in Nielsen’s list of top devotional programs.

According to Roberts, the money will be used to provide full scholarships for medical missionaries who will later be sent to Third World nations. Roberts said that in March of 1986 God ordered him to raise $8 million for scholarships, and if he failed in his mission “God would take him home in one year.” The televangelist said that $3.5 million has already been raised, but urged his supporters to extend his life by providing the remaining $4.5 million be­fore March.

This dramatic fund raising technique is just the latest of many peculiar revelations that have proceeded from the mouth of Oral Roberts, including a vision of a 900-foot Jesus stand­ing next to his 60-story medical complex, the revelation that the Lord would not give us a cure for cancer unless each one of us sends Oral $240, and his statement to a group of local businessmen in Tulsa that he was in danger of losing his soul if he did not finish his $250 mil­lion City of Faith Medical and Research Center located in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Roberts, 68, has been a tele­vision evangelist for more than thirty years, and his present weekly program is carried on more than 200 stations across the country.

Following the controversial do-or-die statements by Rob­erts, ten of the stations that carry the program threatened to edit any additional comments about giving money in order to preserve Roberts’ life. The vice-president for programming of KHJ-TV Los Angeles stated: “If he repeats his claim, it will be edited out.” The director of broadcast operations for WUSA-TV in Washington, D.C., affirmed that they would not carry the broadcast because it was “noth­ing but 30 minutes of fund raising.”

In the midst of controversy concerning his claim and the dramatic plea for funds, Roberts withdrew the television program that started the controversy. A spokesperson for Oral Roberts Ministries said that the televan­gelist literally believed he would die if the money was not raised by March of this year. The Oral Roberts organization also re­vealed that they received about $1.6 million in donations and pledges in the two weeks fol­lowing his plea for funds.

Roberts has been unavailable for comments concerning his claim on national television, but his son and fellow evangelist, Richard Roberts, has appeared on several television shows in defense of his father’s claim. In response to a criticism of his father, Richard Roberts said, “These people think we’re out of our minds. Well, we are out of our minds—and into our spirits.”

Individuals who attended a morning chapel service in April of 1986 stated that Roberts in­formed those in attendance that God told him he would die if he did not succeed in sending out missionaries by the end of 1986.

In the midst of controversy concerning his claim and the variation in dates, Roberts re­cently stated that the devil ap­peared in his home and began choking him, and that he was rescued only when his wife entered the room and rebuked the devil. Christian criticisms of Roberts’s revelation were succinctly summarized in a Tulsa Tribune editorial which stated that Roberts’s depiction of a “petty, vengeful or idiotic God” is “close to sacrilege.” — Ken Samples

LATE NEWS

A recent development would make it appear that Roberts reached his goal of $8 million by the end of March. A Florida racetrack owner, Jerry Collins, donated $1.3 million to Oral Roberts University (received March 23) in support of the medical missionaries. Collins, a former state senator, said he was unconcerned with Roberts’s do-or-die plea, but donated the money in support of education. “I think he needs psychiatric treatment,” said Collins about Roberts, but “to be sure, he doesn’t have to commit hari-kari now.” Upon receiving the check for $1.3 million, Richard Roberts commented: “This is a landmark day in the history of Oral Roberts University.”

LKL

(1) Where did Jesus pay the price of atonement for our sins on the cross or in hades as the “faith teachers” contend?

John 19:30 tells us that it was on the cross that Christ paid in full or finished His redeeming and atoning work for humankind. The phrase, “it is finished” (which Jesus uttered just before His death on the cross), is a translation of the Greek word tetelestai. This word was stamped on receipts in first-century Greece when an individual had paid in full the price of a given article. The word was also stamped on any list of charges that had been brought against a convicted criminal after they had served or paid in full the debt and/or prison sentence.

In Colossians 2:13-15, Paul uses this imagery as he expounds upon the great truth of Christ’s finished work on the cross. In verse 14 he says that Christ on the cross “cancelled the written code, with its regula­tions, that was against us,” for He “took it away, nailing it to the cross.” From this passage, we see that it was on the cross and not in hades that Christ completed His redemptive and atoning sacrifice and tri­umphed over the hordes of hell.

(2) What about the contention of the “faith teachers” that Christ died spiritually and took upon Himself the sinful nature of Satan and had to be born-again in hell?

First, we must stress that if Christ died spiritually He would have ceased being God. This is an impossibility, as one of God’s attributes is eternality — that is, He has always existed and will never cease to exist (Isa. 9:6; Micah 5:2: John 1:1; 8:58; Heb. 13:5).

Second, when Paul said that God made Christ “who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf” (2 Cor. 5:21), he clearly did not mean literal sin, but rather that Christ became identified with our sins in order to pay the penalty for them (cf. Rom. 8:3; 2; Cor. 5:2; Heb. 4:15). To illustrate this, suppose that you were arrested and con­victed for speeding on the freeway. If your father agreed to pay the penalty (the price of your speeding ticket), this would not mean that He was actually guilty of speed­ing as you were. It simply means that He paid the penalty for your transgression. This is analogous to what Christ did for us on the cross.

Third, it is utter blasphemy to say that Christ took upon Himself the nature of Satan and had to be born again in hell. Christ’s nature — His eternal nature — is deity (Col. 2:9; Phil. 2:6-8; Heb. 1:3). The only thing born in hell was this pernicious doctrine of the “faith teachers” — for Christ never died spiritually, never took upon Himself Satan’s nature (or a sin nature), and never had to be born again since He never sinned.

Even after Wesley’s death, the Parkers — undaunted in their “faith” — conducted a resurrection service instead of a funeral. For more than one year following their son’s death, they refused to abandon the “revelation knowledge” they had received through the “word-faith” movement. Eventually, they were tried and convicted of manslaughter and child abuse.

Many other similarly tragic stories could be recounted. And yet, the carnage unleashed by this movement is not limited to physical death. Literally thousands are swallowing the spiritual cyanide dispensed by the word-faith teachers, leading to the shipwreck of their faith in God.

Much has been written over the past few years about the New Age movement and the threat it poses to historic Christianity. As real as this threat is, I have become equally concerned about the ominous threat that the word-faith movement poses to the body of Christ. If the New Age movement is the greatest threat to evangelical Christianity from without, I believe the word-faith or positive confession movement may well be considered its greatest threat from within.

No doubt many believers will contend that in writing about this subject, I am doing nothing more than splitting theological hairs. Yet the extent of the controversy is not merely an honest doctrinal difference among orthodox believers; it rather entails a confrontation between the gospel preached by the Lord Jesus Christ and another gospel.

Jesus said, “In this world you will have trouble, but take heart! I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). In sharp contrast, the word-faith teachers promise unlimited health and wealth to believers who can conjure up their brand of faith.

Jesus exhorted His followers not to “labor for that which perishes” but to “labor for that which is eternal” (John 6:27). The prosperity gospel, by contrast, encourages Christians to focus on what they can receive from Christ in the here and now.

Much so-called Christian TV and radio programming today panders to what peoples’ “itching ears” want to hear: the promise of earthly gain. Over and over again we hear the testimonies of businessmen who “turned on to” Jesus and saw their businesses double, or atheletes whose statistics improved as a result of their faith formulas and Christ. Sacrifice and service have been traded in for self-fulfillment and self-aggrandizement. And while there is an element of reality in the message (e.g., faith is essential to effective prayer; Christ does meet our needs), sadly, the emphasis renders it merely the skin of the truth stuffed with a lie. Christ has become merely a means to an end, and believers are induced through slick Madison Avenue manipulation to come to the Master’s table, not to experience fellowship and intimacy with the Master, but to enjoy what is on the Master’s table. In sharp distinction to this message, the Jesus of the Scriptures is not a means to an end, He is the end (e.g., Phil. 3:7-8).

Jesus predicted for His followers poverty, rejection, and persecution. His disciples were willing to face the tyrant’s brandished steel, the lion’s gory mane, and the fires of a thousand deaths because they knew that they were not of this world. They were merely pilgrims and sojourners in a foreign land. Perhaps Charles Haddon Spurgeon said it best: “The Old Covenant was a covenant of prosperity, the New Covenant is a Covenant of Adversity whereby we are weaned from the present world and made meet [i.e., fit] for the world to come.”

In Hebrews 11, often referred to as the “Faith Hall of Fame,” we read of those who were commended for their faith, yet were

destitute, persecuted, imprisoned, and suffered torturous deaths. These men and women set examples for us, and yet their lives were characterized more by perseverance than by prosperity.

Certainly, this message will not sell well in a self-indulgent age. Nonetheless, we had better be glad that our heavenly Father decides what is best for us and not we ourselves, because only He truly understands what we need and what we can handle. One shudders to think of what would happen if God gave us everything we clamored for.

I do not wish to be misunderstood: I believe in divine healing and in God’s provision for every detail of our lives. In addition, I do not associate piety with poverty. I thank God for those He has prospered who are dedicated to using their resources for the extension of His Kingdom.

But for the word-faith teachers, healing and prosperity became so important that they had to find some way to guarantee them, and they did this by exalting man’s faith at the expense of God’s sovereignty. Thus, they developed the doctrine that God created the world out of nothing by faith, and that He created men as “little gods” to exercise the same kind of faith. Faith therefore becomes a powerful force that gets results, whether in the hands of a believer or a nonbeliever.

On the basis of this virtual deification of human faith, the purveyors of the word-faith message promise health and wealth to those who exercise faith in their faith rather than faith in their God. As has been well said elsewhere, faith is only as good as the object on which it is placed.

Walter Martin used to say, “All faith is subsumed under the overarching biblical doctrine of the sovereignty of God.” The Creator is the Lord of the universe, not a cosmic “gofer” at the beck and call of His creation. It is not our faith that sits on the throne, but our sovereign God (I Chron. 29:10-12).