"Health and Wealth" Teachers Claim Direct Counsel from God

Many of the leaders in this movement claim that God, Jesus, or angels appeared to them and taught them these ideas.  But we must ask, "Are these revelations biblical if they condone actions that are unbiblical or foolhardy?"  In fact, the supposedly divine visions, revelations, prophesies, and interpretations are often so false or unbiblical that one wonders if these visions are from their own mind or worse, from the devil.  Time and again in almost all of the writings of the faith teachers we find superficial or false interpretations of the Bible, misapplication, or serious errors of logic.  This means that the "health and wealth" or "faith" teachers are in serious trouble.  To start with, the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion or error (1 Corinthians 14:33; John 3:33; 17:17).

For example, "Jesus" told Charles Kapps, "I have told my people they can have what they say and they are saying what they have."  Does that make sense?  Does it even sound like Jesus?  Kapps also states, "The Spirit of God spoke to me concerning confessing the Word of God aloud: where you can hear yourself saying it.  He said 'It is a scientific application of the wisdom of God to the psychological make-up of man.'"  Again, does this sound like something the Spirit of God would say?

Another example is Kenneth Copeland's "Jesus," who supposedly told him one must "believe that your words have power, and the things you say will come to pass.  The result is that you can have whatever you say when you believe."  Does any Christian really believe Jesus said that in light of the Bible?  

Still another example of one of these faith teachers claiming God spoke directly to him is Robert Tilton.  He states, "The Spirit of the Lord has given me this prosperity message to share with you."  

Or Kenneth Hagin, who said, "the Lord spoke to me and said, 'don't pray for money anymore.  You have authority through my name to claim prosperity.'"  Kenneth Hagin promotes E.W. Kenyon's unbiblical and sometimes illogical text, The Wonderful Name of Jesus, by saying, "it is revelation knowledge.  It is the Word of God."

In Jerry Savelle's prosperity series we are told, "The revelation knowledge in this set was given to Brother Savelle supernaturally by God."    Savelle himself tells us "I was just sitting there, minding my own business . . . when suddenly the Lord appeared unto me.  When He appeared, He said these words to me: 'Son, my people are in financial famine in America and I am giving you the assignment to tell them how to get out.'  Then He began to reveal to me the keys to deliverance."

In summary you can see all these men claim direct counsel from God.  But is this really true?  The appearances of Jesus and angels, the words they spoke to these men -- these do not sound like the biblical Jesus or the angels that speak for God and the Bible.  God or Jesus would never encourage teachings that are unbiblical, unbalance or illogical, or which could bring spiritual confusion or ruin into the lives of those who live by them.

If these visions and appearances are real and not inflated self-delusions, then they can only result from Satan appearing as an "angel of light" (2 Corinthians 11:14).  It is the devil (and certainly not the above teachers) who desires to distort the Word, encourages spiritual excesses and illogical thinking, and brings difficulties or spiritual destruction into the lives of Christian people.


For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com. 

What is the "Health & Wealth" Gospel?

The "health and wealth" gospel teaches that the human mind and tongue contain a "power."  When a person speaks expressing his faith in supposedly divine laws, his positive thoughts and his positive verbal expression (such as, "I am healed of my heart attack") are supposed to produce "divine force" that will health, produce wealth, and influence the environment.  According to the "health and wealth" teachers, God automatically responds and accomplishes what we command when we positively confess our needs and desires.  The non-biblical part of this teaching is that God is obligated to do what we decide.  We are in charge, not God.  Charles Capps and other "faith" teacher clearly state "Words are the most powerful things in the universe."

The teachings and emphases in this movement vary but in general there are at least five major tenets of the "health and wealth" or "faith" gospel.

1.  Perfect divine healing was made available to all believers through the death of Christ.  A person's healing is limited only because of his insufficient faith to receive it.

2.  It is God's desire that all believers prosper -- financially, physically, and spiritually.

3.  A person must "claim" his health and wealth.  He can do this immediately by believing he already has it and by positively confessing these conditions, even though all outward appearances seem to be different.  When sense perceptions do seem to contradict health and wealth beliefs (such as when a person is not healed of his heart attack), our senses must be rejected and a person must live by "faith."  The reason given is as follows:  The mind is so powerful that "negative confession" is just as potent a force as positive confession and therefore can become a destructive force.

4. "Health and wealth" teachers often insist one must experience the "baptism in the Holy Spirit" which is usually evidenced by speaking in tongues.

5.  Many "health and wealth" teachers rely on "angelic" contact.  They receive guidance and in turn, command angels to do their will!  "Angels" appear to be responsible for directing the ministries of several of the leading "health and wealth" teachers.

"Health and wealth" or "faith" teachers often claim divine visions, divine inspiration, or divine interpretations of Scripture passages which give their teachings absolute authority.  This is an especially serious claim and Christians need to examine it carefully.

Is the "Seed-Faith" Principle Biblical?

To answer this we must first explain the "seed-faith" principle.  It is a combination of elements of Positive Thinking psychology, "positive confession" based on divine "laws," and a "gospel" stressing "prosperity" or health and wealth.  Oral Roberts believes that his "seed-faith" principle is something that Jesus Himself revealed to him.  Roberts calls it a "blessing-pact covenant."  He claims this is "God's way of doing things through His Son Jesus Christ. . . and then through His followers, for the meeting of all our needs. . ."

 Roberts teaches that the first principle of  "seed-faith" is that God is our Source of total supply.  His second principle is giving money.  Giving money is "the seed of faith itself" and this "seed" can then be directed by the giver to perform miracles.  His third principle is to expect a miracle.  Why?  Roberts says it is because this is "God's way of doing things . . . [and it is] based on eternal laws . . . laws so exact and perfect they always work for you."

Here is one of Roberts' illustrations of how giving money is the seed that produces miracles.  In January of 1985 Oral Roberts sent out a letter informing his supporters that they could send for his "33 Predictions for You in 1985."  These predictions were allegedly based on Roberts' exercising his "gift of prophesy" for them.  The many recipients of this letter were instructed to expect "creative miracles" and money.  The reader was urged to send a "seed-faith gift" which would help him get a "hundredfold return" but there was a catch.  Roberts said, "If you neglect to pay attention to what He [God] is especially saying to you, then Satan will take advantage and hit you with bad things and you will wish that 1985 had never come."  What could you have concluded from these statements if you didn't want to send any seed-faith money?

Even Roberts' former daughter-in-law, Patti Roberts, now questions her involvement in Roberts' ministry.  Besides guilt over the excessive wealth the Roberts enjoyed, she noted "the seed-faith" theology that Roberts had developed "bothered me a great deal because I saw that, when taken to extremes, it reduced God to a sugardaddy.  If you wanted His blessings and His love, you paid Him off.  Over and over again we heard Oral say, 'Give out of your need.'  I began to question the motivation that kind of giving implied.  Were we giving to God out of our love and gratitude to Him or were we bartering with Him? . . . I believed we were appealing to their sense of greed or desperation. . . . I had a very difficult time distinguishing between the [Roman Catholic] selling of indulgences and the concept of seed-faith. . . . "  Patti Roberts felt Oral Roberts was a manipulative fund-raiser and she also had a problem with his priorities -- the principles of seed-faith were given on every T.V. show, yet the gospel itself was rarely given.

Our problems with Roberts' seed-faith principles are:  First, the conversations Roberts had with Jesus are suspect.  If Jesus actually intended these principles for all believers, then why didn't He put them in the Bible instead of waiting until Oral Roberts arrived on the scene in the 20th century?  Has the Christian church from the time of Christ and the apostles to the present been left without these divine principles?  If so, how did the church manage?

Remember, Jesus supposedly told Roberts the following four things.  First, "I have come to remind men of this eternal law of sowing and reaping, or of giving and receiving?"  Second, Roberts claimed "Jesus" told him that his principle of seed-faith was the deeper meaning of Matthew 17:20 ("If you have faith as a mustard seed. . .").  Third, Jesus included Galatians 6:7 ("Whatever a man sows, this he will also reap") as part of these principles.  Fourth, he explained that "St. Paul stated the New Testament or New Covenant is based on seed-faith."

But lets stop for a moment.  Could Jesus have said these things?  Is this what Paul meant?  Paul did not even mention seed-faith, let alone say the New Testament is based on it.  And according to the writer of Hebrews, the New Covenant is based on the Person and Work of Christ (Hebrews 9:15), not the principles of seed-faith giving, which will produce miracles for any giver.

Also, the Jesus that spoke to Roberts was mistaken about his "deeper meanings" in Scripture.  This is serious, because often known cultists use "deeper meanings" to prove their unbiblical teachings or heresy in the same way.  The meaning of New Testament words can always be determined by checking a dictionary and by reading them in context.  Before one applies Scripture, one must first determine its true meaning.  And the one true meaning of Matthew 17:20 and Galatians 6:7 is not Oral Robert's "seed-faith" interpretation, as any good commentary will show.  The same can be said of the false interpretation of Galatians 6:9 stated by Roberts' "Jesus" ("let us not become weary in doing good" NIV).  This is simply not a reference to seed-faith.

If we accept Roberts' claim of Jesus' additions or corrections to Scripture here, where do we draw the line?  One may accept this teaching as a teaching of Oral Roberts.  However, if one accepts the Bible as an authority, one cannot accept Roberts' statements as the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Who, then, is really speaking to Oral Roberts?  It is such a crucial question to determine who is speaking to Roberts that we present another illustration.

Jesus supposedly told Roberts that when the Bible records His statement, "It is more blessed to give than to receive," (found in Acts 20:35), that His actual words do not convey His true meaning.  Jesus revealed to Roberts that, "I meant it is more productive to give than to receive."  Here we must ask, would the Jesus Christ of the Scriptures who is the same yesterday, today and forever and who "never changes" (Hebrews 1:12;13:8; Malachi 3:6), be someone who would shift the meaning away from what Scripture actually records?  Would the Jesus Christ of Scripture change His mind?  If so, how many other verses require Jesus to give new interpretations to make them accurate?  What does this do to the verbal inspiration of the Bible?  The fact is that the Greek word for "blessed" (makarion) means "blessed," "fortunate," or "happy" -- it does not mean "productive."  Does Roberts expect us to believe that Jesus Himself has completely changed the emphasis of His original meaning from the joy of giving to the utility of giving?  The biblical Jesus said, "Freely you received, freely give" (Matthew 10:8).  To lead men to expect an automatic financial return of a hundredfold simply because they gave their money is to corrupt the very purpose and nature of giving.  To our way of thinking, this leads to old-fashioned selfishness; moreover, one wonders how many people have "given to get" and ended up in financial difficulty or ruin.  If God does not work this way, and these seed-faith principles are really not biblical, then those who trust in them will find constant disappointment and question God's truth and loyalty.


For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com. 

Why Are Christian Positive Thinkers Wrong?

What Is Possibility Thinking?

Possibility thinking is Robert Schuller's Christian form of Positive Thinking.  He says, "I call it possibility thinking. Others call it faith."  In essence, he stresses never verbalizing negative emotions.  He also stresses conditioning the subconscious mind by programming positive thoughts into the conscious mind.  To Schuller, faith in oneself and self-esteem is vital to success.  He believes that in each one of us there resides an inner reservoir of divinely implanted creative potential which we can draw upon.  "Fill your life with the God Spirit and all kinds of power will break forth."

Schuller encourages Christians to use deep relaxation and meditation to enter the "alpha state."  He is wrong in teaching that Transcendental Meditation, for example, is not religious or anti-Christian.  It is both.  He is also wrong in teaching that the mantras with the "M" sound will help clear your mind from the distractions in the world.  Maharishi Yogi himself has said TM mantras are spiritual vehicles involving or invoking Hindu spirits or deities, which the Bible would identify as evil spirits or "demons."  Robert Schuller is also wrong in stating "it is important to remember that meditation in any form is the harnessing, by human beings, of God's divine laws."  They are clearly eastern or occultic.  They are used for occultic purposes, such a developing psychic powers or helping one realize one is God.  Schuller's form of meditation should be rejected by the church -- not accepted by it or practiced as a means of spiritual growth.

Robert Schuller's Religious Views

He believes what is needed is a "reformation of theology" along psychological lines.  He states that (1) "Christian theology has failed to accommodate" modern psychology; and (2) that Christian theology has failed to "apply the proven insights" of psychology to human behaviour.

Sin is Redefined

Schuller teaches "sin is any act or thought that robs myself or another human being of his or her self-esteem."  Thus, "the core of sin is a lack of self-esteem."  The Bible teaches something altogether different.  Sin is transgression against God and His law, not against oneself. (I John 3:4).  David said, "Against Thee, Thee only, I have sinned" (Psalm 51:4).  Robert Schuller teaches:  "Do not fear pride.  The easiest job God has is to humble us.  God's almost impossible task is to keep us believing every hour of every day how great we are as His sons and daughters. . . "  The Bible teaches "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble" and "pride goes before destruction" (James 4:6, Proverbs 16:18).

Salvation is Redefined

Schuller teaches "to be born again means that we must be changed from a negative to a positive self-image. . . "  He teaches "pursuing possibility thinking is the way of the cross. . . the cross sanctifies the ego trip."  He means that the hardships we experience will keep our self-esteem in check just like the cross Jesus died upon was God's method to keep Jesus' self-esteem in check.  Does Schuller mean to say that Jesus didn't have a perfect humanity and required the humility of the cross to keep His self-esteem in check?  The proper answer to that question is no.  Jesus was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.

The Bible teaches that salvation is repentance from sin (and self) and faith in Christ for forgiveness of sins (Acts 26:18).  As a result of being "born again," a true Christian will surrender his life to God and deny his own way.  Thus, the Bible teaches that the way of the cross is self-denial, not Possibility Thinking (Matthew 16:24, 25).

Unbelief is Redefined

Schuller teaches unbelief  "is really a profoundly deep sense of unworthiness."  Unbelief in the Bible is mainly referring to man's rejection of God's gift of salvation, that is, belief in His Son Jesus Christ (John 3:36).  This is what Schuller does not mention.  In fact, where in the Bible does God ever mention that unbelief is man not thinking he has value?  Where does the Bible say unbelief is a profoundly deep sense of unworthiness?

Hell is Redefined

Schuller teaches, "and what is 'hell'?  It is the loss of pride that naturally follows separation from God. . . the person is in hell when he has lost his self-esteem."  The Bible, however, teaches that hell is a real place of eternal torment, black darkness, and weeping and gnashing of teeth, not a state of mind. (Matthew 25:46; Revelation 20:10-15; Matthew 13:42).

Evangelism is Redefined

Schuller teaches, "I do not think anything has been done in the name of Christ and under the banner of Christianity that has proven more destructive to human personality, and hence counter productive to the evangelism enterprise than the often crude, uncouth and un-Christian strategy of attempting to make people aware of their lost and sinful condition."  He also teaches "for the church to address the unchurched with a theocentric [God centered] attitude is to invite failure in mission."  The Bible, however, teaches that unless people are aware of their "lost and sinful condition" before a Holy God (a "theocentric attitude"), they will never be saved (Romans 10:13-15).  Schuller is wrong.  Jesus said, "and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in His name to all nations" (Luke 24:47).

Sanctification is Redefined

Schuller states, "God's ultimate objective is to turn you and me into self-confident persons."  The Bible teaches God's ultimate purpose is to conform us to the image of Christ (Romans 8:29).  In conclusion, the above views of Robert Schuller are not biblical and should not be accepted by the Christian church.



For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com. 

The Multiplication of Error

Since the early 1970s, the same people who today espouse the "little gods" teaching have forged a virtually unbroken chain of serious doctrinal deviation.  We were first told that the church had forgotten the "proper" concept of authority, so it was necessary for us all to have "shepherds" to disciple us.  Thus, the "shepherding movement" spread and divided many churches across North America.  When this failed, the so-called "faith teaching" or "positive confession" was resurrected from the writings of Kenyon.  The Christian church was then informed (and still is) that God can be "commanded" to respond to our prayers of faith and that we can create with our tongue both good and evil, prosperity or poverty, health or sickness.  Such a position presupposed, in effect, that our faith (not God's sovereignty) was seated on the throne of heaven.

With great speed, these teachings expanded to the dictum that Christians are "little gods."  As the faith movement is embraced by leaders within the Christian Reconstruction movement, the "little gods" are given a "dominion theology."  One key reconstructionist leader, Gary North, boasts, "It has already begun:  bringing together the post millennial Christian reconstructionists and the 'positive confession' charismatics. . . . A new fundamentalism is appearing."  Dominion theology, as it is called, states that until we do indeed subdue the creation, the return of the Lord Himself will be delayed.

The multiplication of erroneous doctrine is now complete.  Unlimited faith, unlimited health, unlimited wealth, unlimited power, unlimited divinity, and now unlimited dominion.

The study of the kingdom of the cults has taught me many profitable lessons, and this is one of them -- error begets error; heresy begets heresy and always in the name of truth, always in the name of the gospel.  Those who propagate these erroneous views (the "little gods," the "born again Jesus," and so on) have sadly crossed over into the kingdom of the cults and stand in need of genuine repentance, lest they come under the inevitability of divine judgment. [The unrepentant will be going to hell.]

It is dangerous, in the presence of God, to affirm oneself as a deity -- even with a small "g."  It is blasphemous to speak in the name of God and utter false prophesies.  It is the height of theological folly to reduce God the Son, second Person of the holy Trinity, to a lost sinner with the nature of Satan and then send Him to hell with the requirement of regeneration before He can complete the work of redemption.

The words of the apostle ring true, "From such turn away" (2 Timothy 3:5, KJV).  "Keep away from them.  For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites.  By smooth talk and flattery [what could be more flattering than being told you are a god?] they deceive the minds of naive people" (Romans 16:17-18).

Don't Take the Bait!

One of the great paradoxes of Holy Scripture is Satan's desire to be "like the Most High" (Isaiah 14:14).  He was hurled from the pinnacle of glory to eternal judgment as a result.  When God created man in His own image, jealous Lucifer tempted Adam and Eve with the luscious bait, "You shall be as gods."  Even after they had fallen, humanity was promised a Redeemer.  Through faith in Him, believers could have the relationship with God that Lucifer so desperately craved.  It is no wonder Satan hates the church, the bride of Christ, the building of God, because within it God has been pleased to dwell (I Corinthians 3:16).  Remarkably, He has described that relationship as "the body of Christ" built upon an unshakable, enduring foundation (Ephesians 2:20).

We are then, as believers, in a union of fellowship with the Trinity.  We are joint-heirs with Christ (John 17:11-26; Romans 8:17), eternally subject as He is Himself to the Father of spirits (I Corinthians 15:28) in love and by choice.  The church is not her own; she has been purchased by the sacrifice of Calvary. [not by Paul Mcullough]  Our identity is greater than any human concept of "godhood."  We are the heirs of eternity, recipients of an indescribable gift.

Let us not cheapen that inheritance or dilute it with perverted theology.  The cost is far too great.

-- by Walter Martin

Ezekiel 28:2 -- In the pride of your heart you say "I am a god; I sit on the 

throne of a god in the heart of the seas."  But you are man and not a god,

 though you think you are as wise as a god.

Also see Genesis 3:4-5 and Isaiah 2:6, 11

False Prophesies and a "Born-Again" Jesus

Those who teach the "little gods" heresy have also embraced other serious errors.  Among them are (1) the teaching that Jesus never claimed to be God when on earth and (2) the belief that Jesus died on the cross spiritually as well as physically, assuming the nature of Satan, going to hell, suffering punishment at Satan's hand, and being "born again" in the resurrection.  All of this had to happen, it is said, for our Lord to be our complete Saviour.  Deriving such blasphemies from E.W. Kenyon, Kenneth Copeland offered his followers and alleged prophesy from Jesus Christ Himself:  "Don't be disturbed when people accuse you of thinking you are God. . . .  They crucified me  for claiming that I was God.  But I didn't claim that I was God;  I just claimed I walked with Him and that He was in me.  Hallelujah, that's what you're doing."

Elaborating on this later, Copeland declared, "I didn't say Jesus wasn't God.  I said He didn't claim to be God when He lived on earth."  In response to his many critics, Copeland said, "Search the Gospels for yourself.  If you do, you will find what I say is true."  Having done just that, we find that what he says is not true and that Jesus contradicted him in the Gospel of John by affirming He was the great I AM of Exodus 3, for which the Jews sought to stone Him, claiming blasphemy as their ground.  They understood what apparently escaped Kenneth Copeland (i.e., that Jesus claimed deity).  Prophesies such as Copeland's do not originate with Christ or the Holy Spirit, and Scripture flatly rejects them as false.  We are, therefore, warned not to fear false prophets (Deut. 18:22).

In his Phillipians epistle, Paul confirms Christ's own self-understanding:  "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:  Who, [existing or never ceasing to be in the form of God] nevertheless: took upon Him the form of a servant." (2:5-7, KJV).

The "born-again" Jesus concept perverts, on the other hand, the doctrine of Christ's finished work on the cross, as demonstrated in the following quotations:

It was not sufficient for Christ to offer up only His physical life on the cross.  His human spirit had to  "descend into hell" . . . .  While Christ was identified with sin, Satan and the hosts of hell ruled over Him as over any lost sinner.  During that seemingly endless age in the nether abyss of death, Satan did with Him what he would, and all hell was "in carnival." (Billheimer, Destined for the Throne, pp. 83-84.)

Jesus is the first person ever to be born again.  Why did His spirit need to be born again?  Because it was estranged from God . . . .  What is spiritual death?  The opposite of spiritual life . . . .  Spiritual death means something more than separation from God.  Spiritual death also means HAVING SATAN'S NATURE . . . .  When one is born again, he takes upon himself the nature of God.  Sin is more than a physical act; it is a spiritual act.  He became what we were, that we might become what He is . . . .  His spirit was separated from God.  And He went down into hell in our place.  (Kenneth E. Hagin, The Name of Jesus, pp. 29-32)

If Jesus paid the full penalty of sin on the cross only, that is, by His physical death alone, then sin is wholly a physical act . . . .  Jesus' work was not finished when He yielded up His physical life on the cross.   (Billheimer, Destined for the Throne, p. 94.)

It is unnecessary to analyze this error further.  It proclaims itself.  When Scripture speaks of Christ's being made sin for us (II Cor. 5:21), both the context and grammar indicate that He became a "sin offering,"  of which Isaiah spoke (Isaiah 53:4-7, 10) and which is duly recognized by a footnote on the passage in the New International Version.


For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com. 

More Misapplied Texts

2 Peter 1:4

Another passage often seized upon by "little god" proponents, 2 Peter 1:4, reads:

Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises:  that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust (KJV).

The first word, "partaker," is interpreted by faith teachers to mean that man actually takes the divine nature for himself, that he actually participates in the divine nature or essence.  It could be pointed out that on my last birthday, I partook of my birthday cake but I did not become part of the cake.  Similarly, Peter is certainly not teaching, in violation of all divine revelation, that man -- a finite being -- actually becomes one with the substance of deity.  Let us find out what he was saying.

Hebrews 1:3 in the original Greek reminds us that Jesus Christ is the incarnate "character" of God, and herein lies the answer.  Because of Christ's death in our place, we have figuratively "died" to sin (Romans 6:2) and are to live in the glory and power of His resurrection (Romans 6:5).  We are to seek those things that are above where Christ dwells at the right hand of God, since we are "seated. . . in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus" (Ephesians. 2:6).  We, like Jesus before us, are to reflect the character of God in our lives.  We have been redeemed.  God has recorded to our account the righteousness of His Son and has charged His Son with our guilt (Romans 4:4-8).  The Christian, therefore, is justified by faith in Jesus Christ because he has become a partaker of the divine nature and character of God.

The image of God in man, which was shattered, marred, and defaced by sin, due to the first Adam, is restored in the last Adam, the Lord from heaven.  We have become recipients of a new set of attributes patterned after the last Adam, motives and affections that are constantly at war with our fallen nature (Rom. 7; Gal. 5:17).

We partake of the divine nature in the sense that we imitate, not duplicate, His character in our own lives.  We were "predestined to be conformed to the likeness of [God's] Son" (Rom.8:29).  As we were partakers of the fallen, Adamic nature, so now we are partakers of the resurrected Christ's character -- not partakers of His divinity but of His sanctifying grace.  We are being conformed to Christ's moral image (likeness), not to His essential deity.  We are called to resemble Him in our lifestyle, but we cannot become Him (deity) in any way, shape, or form.

John 1:12-13

"Yet to all who received Him" says the gospel, "to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God -- children not born of natural descent nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God."

This text is usually offered, along with other passages referring to man as "begotten" by God, to erroneously prove that the believer, through a direct creative act of the Holy Spirit, becomes a god-bearing person, as Christ Himself was. (This is known in church history as the Apollinarian heresy.)  But do such texts really teach that, as "born again" children of God we ourselves share God's divinity?

In the same text cited by the faith teachers (John 1:12-13), John is urging for the uniqueness of Christ's relationship to the Trinity as "the only begotten Son of God."  As believers, we are adopted children (Romans 8:15, 23; 2 Corinthians 5:20; Ephesians 1:5).  When, for instance, Kenneth Copeland states "God begets gods,"  He is ignoring the meaning of the term begotten and therefore falsely concludes, "You are all little gods."

Jesus Christ is the unique, one-of-a-kind, incarnate Son of God and is, therefore, different from believers.  "In the beginning was the Word," says John.  "And the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).  John the Baptist, our Lord's elder in age, nevertheless said of Christ, "He who comes after me has surpassed me because He was before me." (v. 15).  The Baptist recognized that Jesus' origin was eternal. "No-one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side has made him known" (v. 18).  We are adopted in time; Jesus is God's eternally-begotten Son, whose origin and deity never began but have always been.

Kenneth Hagin, therefore, is gravely mistaken when he asserts that the Christian "is as much an incarnation [of God] as is Jesus of Nazareth."  And Kenneth Copeland is wrong when he insists "Jesus is no longer the only begotten Son of God."  When the Word became flesh, God the Son remained what He always was -- the second Person of the Trinity.  Man is not an incarnation.  He is never spoken of as such in scripture -- limited as he is to finite humanity.

None of these texts in any way suggest that redeemed men are or ever will be gods.  As we have noted, Scripture forbids this as idolatry and blasphemy, in both testaments.  We can see, then, that from their very language those who maintain the "little gods" doctrine are affirming a type of pagan polytheism over against classic monotheism.  This constitutes, by any measurement, heretical doctrine.


For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library.  Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book.  All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.