HIGHER-FIRE digest 382 (WoF)--I'm not playing

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

From:	BSUVC::00MCSHAW     29-JAN-1997 10:42:00.60
To:	00MCSHAW
CC:	
Subj:	

Dave et. al,

We've watched the volley back and forth between antiWoFers and Dave (our on-
line specimen of WoF).  It seems to me that Dave is attempting to disguise
WoF (to which he claims to subscribe) as orthodoxy.  I do not wish in this post
to be found unkind.  Dave, none of the following is directed toward you per-
sonally but hurled against the WoF movement which is filled with infernal
corruptions of Biblical and godly principles.  We are instructed to 'earnestly
contend for the faith . . .', and I am in earnest in writing this post.  The
movement is superficially deceiving, professing FAITH--a principle all
Christians believe.

I will be including several extrapolations from the writings of the WoF
theologians compiled by Clete Hux and available at the following address:

www.polaris.net/~mccaskey/wf-10.txt

Firstly, I would like to address a private post I received from Dave (he did
not wish to belabour the list with redundancy).  Dave has asked me what is
wrong with believing that God will do whatever we ask in faith.  I would like
to make it clear that I am not opposed to having faith in God for healing,
blessings, deliverance, etc.  Dave's superificial treatments of WoF has left
an impression of the movement's simple faith in God, but the writings of its
adherents damn the movement as a powerful and dangerous heresy!  No matter what
Dave's posts have sounded like (I will, I think, address the Job post in a
separate message later), the WoF movement clings to several tenets that are
nothing short of Scriptural perversions.

I cite the following writings, again, compiled by Mr Hux:

Kenneth Hagin, the 'theologian' who began this H-F discussion, has made several
outlandish and heretical claims concerning the spoken word and the status of
the born-again believer.

He writes in his _Word_of_Faith_ magazine:

		Often, you create your own negative situations your-
		self with wrong thinking, wrong believing, and wrong
		speaking.  So start believing according to God's word.
		Then, begin making positive confessions of faith and
		victory over your life . . . You will never receive
		anything from God beyond the words you speak . . .
		Friends, you will have what you say in life.  That
		is a spiritual law God put into motion, and it
		will work in your life for the good or the bad.
		It's up to you . . . If you don't like what you have
		in life, then begin to change the way you are thinking,
		believing, speaking.  Instead of speaking according to
		natural circumstances out of your _head_, learn to
		speak God's word from your _spirit_.  Begin to con-
		fess God's promises of life and health and victory
		into your situation.  Then you can begin to en-
		joy abundant life as you have what you say. . .

This doctrine, to which Dave has referred, is nothing but motivational
hogwash.  Our words are indeterminate concerning creative initiative.

Charles Capps, WoF author, in _The_Tongue,_A_Creative_Force_ further
articulates this idea into sure error:

		Spirit words can control both the spirit world
		and the physical world.  Because the words
		themselves have power, they will work for
		either God or man in the same manner . . .
		the spirit of man is not of this world, it
		is of the spirit world . . . He [man]
		breathes spirit life into God's word and
		it becomes a living substance, working
		for him as it worked for God in the be-
		ginning.  These spirit words dominate
		the natural world.  (117-8)

Now, we can clearly identify, from one of their own, the WoF's clear mes-
sage concerning the creative power of our words.  They have placed faith in
the spoken word of man rather than the Providence of God.  In this sense,
their faith-filled speeches can change the course of their lives, alter
God's determination, etc.  Furthermore, this is metaphysics (not in the
theosophical sense) and is occult.

So, Dave, how are we to answer these men?  You seem to suggest that they be-
lieve in simple principles of faith if we speak in faith believing, but
clearly their writings indicate that we are as capable as God of creating
situations, spiritual and natural.  To suggest that we have the same
creative power as the Almighty God usurups His sovereignty and equates the
believer with God.

This idea of born-again equation with God is furthered in several passages where
WoFers define man as God's equal or incarnation.

Again, I cite Kenneth Hagin's _Word_of_Faith_ Magazine (Dec. 1990, pg. 14):

		You are as much the incarnation of God as Jesus Christ
		was.  Every man who has been born again is an incar-
		nation and Christianity is a miracle.  The believer
		is as muchan an incarnation as was Jesus Christ of
		Nazareth.

This, Dave, is sheer blasphemy.  Jesus Christ was the only begotten Son, the
only incarnation of God.  We may share in the benefits of Christ's glorious,
overcoming power, but we are not incarnated gods!

Kenneth Copeland, in his sermon tape, "Following the Faith of Abraham," stated:

		. . . Adam is as much like God as you can get, just
		as Jesus when He came into the earth . . . and I
		want you to know something--Adam, in the garden of
		Eden, was God manifested in the flesh'

This is, again Dave, BLASPHEMY.  Adam was a fallible creature that fell into
sin.  Jesus Christ, God manifested in the flesh, was the only infallible man
that ever walked the earth!  Our grandsire was not God manifested in the flesh
but a simple man that was tempted and transgressed.  To suggest that He was
the immutable God wrecks the sovereignty, monadity, and primacy of the eternal
Godhead.

Of course, these are not exhausted examples of the WoFers fallacies.  I'm sure
you will probably argue concerning the decontextualisation of each passage, but
before you do, let me say that these notions are BLASPHEMY and HERESY in ANY
context!  There is never a situation where any of these doctrines are acceptable
or Christian.  WoF does suggest that we are gods of sorts, a doctrine that is
confounding in extreme.

Dave, you say that you participate on this list to establish common ground.  Let
me be CLEAR in saying that we have no common ground.  As Bible-believing, One-
God Apostolics, we emphatically  reject these heretical teachings and their
accompianying correlaries.  Again, I do not mean any of this personally.  I
write not against you, but the doctrine which you now publish.  I pray that God
would open your eyes to the fallacy of these false teachings and restore you
again to the fullness of the truth.  That is meant in sincerity, and this is
written without malice toward you.  But, I do not think we can stand by and
haply debate this topic without being very candid and exposing lies for what
they are.

All Honour to Christ Jesus.
		  



Matthew Shaw
00mcshaw@bsu.edu