Well, it's that time of year again. Time when I am seeing many posts in the Christian blogosphere on the prosperity teachers and their "false" teachings. And as usual, none of the posts I read really have a grasp of the teaching and what it's based on. Of course there are many problems with this teaching, especially the extremities of some of it. But it might be of interest what the foundation is.
There are two groups of Faith teachers today. The first group is the original (real) group of Hagin, Copeland, Price, Savelle, etc. Hagin never really taught the excess of it and in fact wrote an excellent book a few years before he died, The Midas Touch in which he refuted much of his disciples' extreme teachings on the subject. The second group is the newer group of basically self-esteem people like Joel Osteen and Paula White who really don't seem to have any foundation for their teaching.
Soo what IS the foundation? Like healing, the Copelanites, as I will call the first group, base the prosperity on the cross. In other words, similar to healing in the atonement, they also believe in prosperity in the atonement. They base this on the New Covenant containing as much if not more than the Old one (they like to cite Deuteronomy 28 a lot). They also go into II Cor. chapters 8 and 9 for their basis. They do a pretty good job in these chapters, except IMO, they tend to individualize it too much. Perhaps Paul was writing the church as a group when promising God would make them rich, rather than each member of the church? Oh, and if you think verse 9 of chapter 8 means spiritual wealth as is often preached, you might wish to look at the whole context of that chapter which talks about money. Also, the Greek word used here for the word rich is plutos. Plutos was the Greek god of material wealth and whenever the Greeks/Romans needed money, they would pray to him. He was the son of Demeter, the goddess of the harvest. So, that whole god family was in the wealth "business." Since this letter was written to the Gentile Corinthians, they would understand this and wouldn't think it meant "spiritual" wealth, especially not as used in the chapter context.
So, I just thought you would like to know. Now you can figure out this whole prosperity thing for yourself. I think that is what each of us needs to do before taking one position or the other one. And in fact, you might find another viable position that no one has thought of yet after your study
A Prayer Request & Thanks
6 days ago
7 comments:
Hi Diane,
Glad to read this post regarding the Word of Faith movement. I don't agree with everything they teach. However, like you, I feel we ought not to throw the baby out with the bathwater as I think they can teach us some/many things.
Would you be able to let us know what Hagin mentioned in his book? And has it been well received by others within the movement?
Recently, I've listened a bit to Andrew Wommack who is probably within the movement, yet also seems a bit less flakey and more thoughtful in his teachings.
Cheers!
I attended a WoF from late 1980's to 1994. Actually it was more charismatic but the pastor taught alot from Copeland. I grew up listeninbg to Derek Prince non stop on the radio and still have many of his tapes. He also distanced himself from the movement towards his death.
What began to trouble me most was the undertones of not having enough faith for physical healing, and everybody has a evil "spirit" of some kind they need deliverance from. It was pretty screwed up and I am convinced now in retrospect there really were false signs going on there... a type of witchcraft if you will. I want nothing to do with it again. There was a huge shepherding influence which was abusive.
What I did appreciate from it was the emphasis on the actual word of God reminding Him of what He says in His word and the praise and worship was good.
But we were isolated,never mixed with any other churches locally and thought we had more revelation than anyone else.
I have to say that sounds like pretty shaky ground on which to make the claims they make. As is so common in evangelical circles, these people find a few verses to hold on to and don't deal with the ones that might question their interpretation of those few.
The Midas Touch was well balanced and unfortunately largely ignored by many WOFers. Our former pastors actually said it wasn't written by Brother Hagin, but a ghost writer. But we heard from others that he taught the content of the book in a large gathering of ministers before it came out. He wanted to bring balance to the message that had gotten extreme and gave the ministers a chance to hear it first.
I'm here by way of the Christian Carnival.
Over two decades ago, we attended a WOF megachurch for about two years. It attracted suburban people who were broad of heart, but not well-grounded in Scripture. Eventually, we moved on for various reasons. IMO, the prosperity Gospel is not the dominant message of the NT.
stillhaven't,
Hagin talked about how some of the prosperity message had misinterpreted scriptures that were supposed to be talking about winning soils, not about getting money. He specifically refuted the 100-fold return and the seed-faith teaching put forth by Copeland and Oral Roberts. He doesn't, however, mention names, just teachings. The last 1/4 of the book is about financial integrity in the ministry. The thing that bothers me is Hagin (as well as all the rest fo the WOF'ers) never joined the EFCA.
Robert,
I think you are talking more about the Charismatics than the Word of Faith teachers as your description doesn't really fit them.
Chris,
What I would like to see, and never, never have, is some debate from the Reformationists (like you I think..aren't you?) on the validity of healing in the atonement and also prosperity in the atonement. I tried to present their case for it and I think it is a valid case. I don't feel they are taking a few scriptures out at all. Let's tackle the atonement thing.....Feel free to email me.
d,
Thanks for the info. It sounds as if you might attend a WOF church?
Post a Comment