Hillsong - A Case For Change
There has been much talk, in the threads about documenting a “Case For Change” for Hillsong.
And very soon, Tanya Levin’s new book “Glass Houses” will hit both the boookstores, and the words contained within will be discussed and debated across the Blogosphere.
Recently, the Bulletin published a positive article on Hillsong, and to be more specific, the closing sermon:
“Skinner addressed the crowd with a blunt message: “You can’t separate God in his awesome power in heaven from the snotty, bloated kid with the fly in his eye in the ditch. God is not impressed by the size of our church. God is not impressed by how many times we go to church but by how much we become like Jesus. The world is on an accumulation binge - give me more and more and more - but God is a giver.”
We have all discussed the ‘what needs to change’ - but I am now left thinking.
1) Is real Change possible within Hillsong and other contemporary Churches?
2) What will be the real driver for change in the Contemporary Church (that includes Hillsong) - Critique or the Gospel?
3) Is reconcilliation without compromise really possible between the Contemporary Church and those overwhelmingly disenfranchised by it?
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:20 pm
I agree wholeheartedly Janet every other ‘profession’ requires at least a batchelor degree in a REVELANT field e.g. a batchelor of education (early childhood) does not a pastor make…
Other helping professions require a supervisor, most require a supervisor external to the organisation who will not shy away from asking the really tough questions.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 pm
Thanks for the welcome emblazoned..
Reading Janet’s comments has made me wonder about those who do pastor (shepherd) the Body of Christ.
Ephesians 4:11 identifies ‘ministry giftings’ that have been given to the church, by God, to prepare God’s people for the works of service. It goes on to say that God provides these gifts so that the Body of Christ may also be built up….and made mature.
In Matthew 23 Jesus warns us about the pride of position. If you want to be great in God’s kingdom you need to be the servant of all.
Jesus also said that He came to serve not to be served. Matthew 20:28.
My wife and I waited until we were in our late 40’s before we took up the call of God for full-time ministry. We knew that if we were going to walk alongside someone or were given permission to help someone then head knowledge alone, wouldn’t cut it. Even now, we still feel we are quite young, being placed in a position of responsibility of serving God’s family as Pastors.
From my reading and understanding the church of God is supposed to be very different to the world. The world is supposed to look at us as ‘being different.’ Matthew 5:14 “You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden.”
I am detailing a little of my story in support of some of the following comments and questions.
Before going into full-time ministry I was a Sales Trainer. I also trained as a Counselling Psychologist in the early 90’s after experiencing a crisis of faith during a turbulent episode in the ‘Church System’. As mentioned in an earlier blog, without having to use windscreen filler, as suggested by Lance, I made the ‘gutsy step’ and walked out. Like so many stories I have read, I felt the pain of ex-communication. This is where I became one of the ‘walking wounded’. I tried Psychology to fix my problems. I then found out the meaning of the Scripture, “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, mind…..and do not lean on your own understanding.” Psychology wasn’t the answer for me. Yes, it brought my issues to the surface, put a nice bandaid on them, but it didn’t fix the damage. I finally called out to God in prayer, repented of my wilfulness and God came through for me and healed me.
Why am I sharing this?
I wonder as I look at Christendom today, how much business acumen and philosophy, including the Hierarchy Triangle with its corporate ladder, has woven itself into church life? I also wonder how much humanism and psychology is now being used to communicate the Gospel? We had to de-tox from the ways of the world to clearly hear the ways of God.
Our experience has shown us that the upside down triangle of leadership works so much better. The Leadership serves from the bottom so when the people look up they see Jesus, not us.
Jesus walks alongside us…I believe God would have His Leaders follow suit.
Food for thought.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:04 pm
How to refute the Touch not the Lord’s Anointed statement.
Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed
Have you ever heard an “apostle,” “prophet” or Christian teacher warn someone: “Touch not the Lord’s anointed”?
Many church leaders — not just in the apostolic-prophetic movement — quote this verse from Psalm 105:15 when anyone criticizes or challenges their teachings or actions. Sometimes, they may quote the entire verse: “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm.”
When quoting this verse, they usually imply or directly state that God will judge a person who criticizes them and perhaps strike the person dead.
Yet, they are quoting this verse out of context. The verse is contained within a psalm, Psalm 105, which is about God’s protection of the people of Israel and His deliverance from their oppressors. Just a few verses before verse 15, we can see that the “anointed ones” weren’t just the leaders of Israel, but all the people of Israel. The verse showed that God would not allow the people of Israel to be physically harmed by their enemies because He was divinely protecting them.
Yet, church leaders today who quote this verse don’t mention that it was referring to all the people of Israel. They act like the verse was speaking only about leaders — and that it applies only to them.
This verse has nothing to do with criticizing or questioning church leaders. In fact, many Bible passages warn us to carefully evaluate church leaders’ teachings and actions by Scripture. For example, the apostle Paul urged Titus — a church leader in Crete — to appoint overseers who would oppose teachers who were contradicting Scripture (Titus 1:9).
No church leader is above such scrutiny, according to the Bible. Even the apostle Paul’s teachings were tested according to Scripture by the people who lived in Berea (Acts 17:11). And notice that the Bereans were praised for doing this — they weren’t told to just accept Paul’s teachings because he claimed to be an apostle. If the apostle Paul’s teachings needed to be tested by Scripture, then certainly no teacher today is above scrutiny.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t respect our leaders. The Bible teaches us to respect them. But showing them respect doesn’t mean that we don’t test their teachings and actions by Scripture. Our first loyalty is to the Bible, not them.
Also — this is a crucial point — the New Testament teaches that all Christians are the Lord’s anointed, not just special “apostles,” “prophets” or teachers. The apostle Paul told the Corinthians believers: “Now it is God who makes both us and you stand firm in Christ. He anointed us, set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come” (2 Corinthians 1:21-22).
In case Paul wasn’t clear enough, the apostle John also taught that all Christians have God’s anointing when he said: “But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth … As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him” (1 John 2:20, 27). The reason John said this was because certain teachers were falsely claiming they had a special anointing that set them apart from other Christians — the same thing some leaders are claiming today.
So, according to the Bible, all Christians have an anointing. This is a beautiful truth. Let it sink in.
We all, if we belong to Christ, have God’s anointing — not just Christian leaders. Yet, often, “apostles,” “prophets” and teachers try to act like they have a higher status with God than other Christians. This reveals pride on their part. Yet, one of the most important qualities that a church leader is supposed to possess, according to the Bible, is humility. It is a characteristic of our Lord who told his disciples that their lives — like His — were to be marked by humility and loving service (Mark 10:42-45).
I get concerned when I see church leaders act like only they have God’s anointing and that people who want the anointing must get it from them. All Christians have special status with God because of their relationship with Christ. All Christians have the Holy Spirit living inside them. Please don’t ever let anyone rob you of that.
And be careful if you hear a church leader quote “Touch not the Lord’s anointed” when someone criticizes or challenges them. They are using a common and unbiblical scare tactic to silence their critics.
Source: http://spiritoferror.wordpress.com/2007/04/02/touch-not-the-lord%E2%80%99s-anointed/
August 4th, 2007 at 12:02 am
Neil007 - I totally agree.
In my view… good theology gives us precisely the understanding you have described… that EVERYONE in the body of Christ is called to serve according to the gifts they have been given… that those who have leadership gifts (pastor teacher etc.) are particularly called to serve and build up and empower other members of the body of Christ.
I do not promote theological training for the sake of producing recognised and qualified “experts” who can exert power over others because of their specialist expertise (one of the greatest errors of Christendom)… I promote it because it is one kind of safeguard against error if those in a teaching position in a “traditional” style of church (ie paid ministers who preach on Sundays to a congregation) know some basics about exegesis, doctrine, and church history… and it’s a safeguard against abuse of power if such ministers are in accountable supervision, and have been put through a significant discernment process involving others, and have developed some fairly good self-awareness skills through pastoral care training.
None of this always works perfectly… and as the Rev often states, the “purest” form of church isn’t the traditional congregation as we imagine it… but it’s what we have, it’s what we’ll probably have for a while, and if we’re going to style church this way we may as well do it well.
I believe competence is far more important than qualifications. Still… if you are going to work as a paid professional in a church as a minister it’s not unreasonable to work within professional guidelines and to have some professional qualifications. If you’re going to be a volunteer leader of a house church network that’s a different story, with very different power and leadership dynamics at work.
Would some of the madder ideas that circulate around some churches get much traction if the pastors involved had better training in how to interpret the scriptures? I doubt it.
August 4th, 2007 at 11:11 am
Some important info about the word “anointed”.
The word is used quite a lot in the Old Testament. The word is mashiach (anointed) or maschach (to anoint).
It is used to describe Levitical Priests (Exodus 28.41, Leviticus 4.4-5,16)
It is used to describe Kings (1 Samuel 2.10, 15.1)
It is used to describe Prophets (Psalm 105.15)
It is used to describe Israel (Hab 3.13)
I’m reasonably certain that the Greek translation of the OT (the Septuagint) uses the Greek word christos for mashiach. The word is also the root word for “Messiah.”
So, who is the anointed one? He is the Christ. He is the Messiah. Jesus, who is a Priest in the order of Melchizedek; who is the King; whose words are prophecy; and in whose body his people are a part of.
So when the bible says that we shouldn’t speak against “God’s anointed”, it means, and can only mean, Jesus. We don’t speak against Christ.
It’s got nothing to do with preachers or leaders who think that God is using them in a special way.
August 4th, 2007 at 11:26 am
And as for speaking out against pastors who need to be corrected, the Bible says this:
Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear. In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality. (1 Timothy 5.19-21, ESV)
So what do we learn from this?
1. Make certain that any charges against the pastor can be proven (its says here by witnesses but that means provability.
2. When the pastor has been found guilty and persists in sin, their rebuke must be public.
3. When it comes to investigating and confronting a pastor’s sin - do so objectively, dispassionately and without partiality.
I’d say that the “sin” mentioned here is not driving 5 kph over the speed limit or saying the occasional swear word, but rather something more serious like persistent uncontrolled rage, sexual impropriety, financial fraud or teaching/believing that which is unbiblical (amongst others).
Where do the Houstons and the rest of the Hillsong leadership stand?
* Some leaders have been exposed for sexual impropriety - my belief is that any pastor or leader who is guilty of this should have their eldership permanently removed and no longer be in the pastorate any more (I’m talking about Pat here).
* There seems to be evidence of dodgy finances… but so far the evidence has not led to any charges being laid. There may be financial issues that have been hidden - in which case those who know about it should be bold and courageous and expose it with evidence. At the moment, though, nothing has been fully proven (as far as I know).
* There is clear and abundant evidence of false and improper teaching. The Bible is misrepresented and the Gospel is absent. In its place is a teaching about health, wealth and prosperity that is unbiblical, dangerous and, ultimately, damaging. This is evidence enough to call for Brian Houston’s permanent removal from leadership.
August 4th, 2007 at 11:39 am
OSO - good points you make. As for ousting Houston - not much chance regrettably - there are too many suckers in HS that like to hear all that crap of health, wealth, prosperity, overcomers, kingdom-men, warrior princesses - and the rest of the piffle - good grief!
August 4th, 2007 at 11:44 am
Just rember too, there is differences between rebuking Pastors and speaking out about Cult Leaders.
August 4th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Veritas - if the pressure can’t come from within the church, it must come from outside of it.
Do we love those who attend week by week at Hillsong? If we do we will warn them in a way that will do the most good.
Lionfish - I’m happy to call Houston a false teacher or an antichrist if there was evidence to support it. Benny Hinn, who taught that the godhead was made up of nine persons, is an unbeliever, a false teacher and an antichrist. TD Jakes, who will be speaking at some Hillsong event coming up, denies the biblical teaching of the Trinity so he is an antichrist as well. Is there any clear evidence you have that shows that Houston is actually, at best, an unbeliever or, at worst, an antichrist like Jakes or Hinn?
(BTW I’m using the 1 John 2.18 understanding of antichrist as plural, rather than the popular premillenial understanding of a singular antichrist).
And, above all things, we must pray that God works His mighty hand at Hillsong to remove false teaching and confusion and replace it with true biblical faith and obedience.
August 4th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
30
emblazoned Says:
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:16 am
Hi avb,
Yeah it was comment 9 only, I havent really told my full story in narrative here. I’m certainly not the world’s most suffering victim of Hillsong, I’d attribute that to some of the ex-pastors, in fact overall my time at Hillsong I’d say was ‘not too bad’.
It was more the after shocks when I prodded with a few questions that affected me more.
thanks for that emblazoned……..its tough i know……i feel very blessed with the place i’m at today. There are several miracles i feel i have received through all my experience.
1. I’m still alive and haven’t killed myself
2. I’m not bitter and twisted or have any mental health issues
3. I still have a faith.
From all the email i’ve recieved from readers of my story its pretty clear how traumatic it can be to loose or be rejected by your church family or leadership. One thing that is also very clear is that this is not an experience that can be attributed to a particular church or denomination. if fact if you talk to someone who has been retrenched from a major corporation there are similarites to thier experience and ours.
what i have found is that if we focus on the source of the trauma we can miss the healing………the trick is to know what to focus on…….but jsut to reassure you there is resolution. I never thought it was possible but my experience and the experience of others testifies to that. there are of course others who are still locked in….stuck in the past….unable to forgive and move on it seems.
personally it happened for my just in my own journey. For some professional help has been the catalyst. others get healing by connecting with people from the same background………but not going over and over the painful experiences……but just having someone to talk to who understands and assure them they are not alone. Freedom 2 b(e) is helping GLBT people that way.
http://www.freedom2b.org/phpBB2/index.php
if I can be of any help then let me know
August 4th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Anthony thanks heaps mate. I really appreciate that.
I’ve just been talking with my girl about ‘healing’ strategies. We’re trying to plan a way to get through it all and be happily healed. Your post here is very encouraging because you can happily say that you are not bitter and that you still have faith.
I’ve been following your story for some time now and hearing you happily state those things is very encouraging.
At the minute my biggest issue is I cannot sleep…some may notice the crazy times I’m posting here…I haven’t slept at all since yesterday morning….and that happens every now and then. i know it’s emotional and it’s all connected to this stuff.
I read Tanya’s book today….or read two thirds of it and skimmed the remaining third. It was a surreal experience, reading in a book about the people I knew and meetings that I was at. I was at those meetings where Brian told the congregation about Pat Mesiti and his father. I remember distinctly the message of assurance Robert Ferguson preached that Tanya mentions. There was much in that book I found gripping and I identified very strongly with it…making it too hard to read at times.
Inside I have all these mixed feelings…and they are very strong…and very unprocessed…
August 4th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Hi fellow fellowsignposters
I was brought up in the AOG and left in my 20’s - I was never mistreated by the church but I did want to explore new ways of living out my faith and I really wanted to understand what had happened in the life so far . And I was a pretty naive person who knew very little of life outside the church .
For those who are on the journey - it takes time . I did eventually seek professional help . And I tried to set some professional and personal goals . I knew I was never going back to the Assemblies of God so I tried out different churches and sometimes I stopped going to church altogether for a long time - this was very healthy .
Ultimately I did lose some things - I lost almost the entire community that I grew up with but I gained much more - just the freedom to not have to conform to other people’s expectations is really liberating .
So there is light at the end of the tunnel .
August 4th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Praying for you Emblazoned.
Love, Deb
August 4th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Thanks Deb i muchly appreciate it :’)
August 4th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Emby,
The depression, the panic attacks, your heart beating so fast it feels like it will pop out of your chest when you’re trying to go to sleep - the fear of reprisals for what your saying from people you used to identify with….the isolation borne out of fear…
Been there…
This is the storm before your calm. This is your rebirth. This is your chaos soon to be followed by order. You’ll see.
Trust us.
Many of us will be a physical reality in your life next Sunday hopefully & you will know even more that you’re not alone.
Know this, great truths are always preceded by darkness. Your boone is coming & you will regret nothing in retrospect.
I’m claiming that for you & believe it.
August 4th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
There are two many portals of attack on your life at the moment since you’ve gone public with that site…..too much psychic struggle with the brainwashed - at least next Sunday you can immerse yourself with people who “get it” for a couple of hours….
August 4th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Just remember this, dear Emblazoned, to complicate things even more for you, that Lance and Lionfish and a couple of others here do not understand or believe in Pentecostalism, or being Spirit-filled with the evidence of speaking in tongues, or many things which are excellent about Pentecostalism, which, in truth, they know nothing about. They hate, yes, hate, EVERYTHING Hillsong stands for. They make it, in their writings here, an antichrist institution. You know that is not the case.
In my dealings with them, on this site, they have shown themselves to be uncaring and relentless in their desire to stumble people who have your kind of background. The people who are offended by your site make up a small percentage of the congregation members at Hillsong, yet Lionfish would have you think that they are the norm, and that all Pentecostals, and particularly Hillsongers, are like this. Again, you know this is not true.
I have attempted to get them to say one thing, just one thing good or nice thing, about Hillsong or Pentecostalism, but they can’t. They are as negative about the place you are considering leaving as the people are who have been upset by your site, which was always going to be a problem, since it engenders strife amongst brethren, and where there is envying and strife there is confusion and every evil work.
So your confusion may not just be as a result of the insufficiencies of Hillsong. It could be the power of the assault on your reasoning by some of the people on this site. Not, I stress, by any means all, since there are many genuinely empathetic, caring and rational people on here, and I have certainly learned much from them since starting to comment here,and enjoy most of the discussions I been able to have which are rational, kind and considered.
I am a Pentecostal, considering my options with the movement I’m in, and looking at what is right and wrong, and how I might be able to work with other believers to get things right which need to be changed. But I don’t want to come away from my Pentecostal roots, or the family of believers I have been involved with for years, because I see much which is enjoyable and correct about it, morally, scripturally and foundationally.
I have seen some of the wrong things which have taken place, but also am impressed by the many, many good things which are in my movement. I am also aware that there is no perfect denomination or church or congregation, or even small group of disenfranchised believers who are searching for answers. I am interested in this site because there are other people who are looking for answers.
However, and this is a big however, the behaviour of some of the chief contributors here have been so hostile to the Pentecostal movement, and to WoF and Contemporary churches, to the leadership of ALL of these works, and summarily, since I have commented on things, to my involvement, that I can only surmise that their actual salvation is in doubt, because it has nothing to do with Christ, His Word, or even rational thinking. It is more of an intense vendetta.
I have been called dishonest, a liar, a few foul names using words I don’t use, had the credibility of my church, leadership and even doctrinal maturity questioned, and all in all had a torrid time from a couple of people here, who claim to be trying to help you (I’m not offended by this. I came here of my own volition, and knew the stakes before I started commenting. I’m just letting you know what you’re dealing with).
Which just about sounds like the complaints levelled at the church you’re considering moving on from, doesn’t it. Uncaring, proud, doctrinally amiss.
Again I stress, this revolves around three or four contributors here, and by no means all, who I find mostly civil, helpful and caring.
So you’re best to take this to Jesus Christ, emblazoned. A season of prayer away from the counsellors. Maybe with the woman in your life who seems to be very sympathetic to your needs. Never underestimate the power of a woman’s God-given ‘intuition’, especially a woman of God, and someone who loves you, and believes in you.
You’re a person with a call on your life to help rescue the hurting, and offended and troubled, which is a noble call. Don’t let the bitterness of a few here, corrupt the tenderness of you heart toward anyone, including Hillsong, or Pentecost.
August 4th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Facelift, I really appreciate your input here. I identify with you in quite a few areas. I read a lot of the threads before signing on here and noted the thins you have commented about the chief “personalities” here. I am not wanting to leave my Pente roots either, but at the moment I am taking a break from most things officially “church”, in order to re-charge myself. But anyway, thanks again for your input. You debate in a fair, rational and intelligent manner.
One thing that amuses me though, is that judging by some older posts, Lionfish actually used to belong to the CCC monevement, so he does have some understanding of the pente vibe, albeit the insulated western australian branch.
August 4th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Facelift:
Wrong again my dear friend.
1) I have experienced those elements of Pentecostalism (Baptism in Spirit, Tongues etc). I know many good penty’s. I believe many penty’s to be orthodox in their thoelogy. I actually believe that WoF is heretical, having its roots in the metaphysical cults and has infiltrated much of the Christian body today - especially Hillsong & Riverview is a next generation ‘word-faith’ church. Refer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_of_faith
2) My temperament is not Choleric.Like Emblazoned and Luther I am Melancholy - yet I have a fiery temper. My trust has been broken
3) I would like nothing more than to be proven incorrect. I started out as a strong advocate of these networked WoF Churches, until I did not get answers to the ‘hard questions’ that I have asked after the BRW published the “God’s Millionaires” article. In fact this was my first post and reaction to that article before I started looking into the facts: http://underneathejetty.blogspot.com/2005/05/above-reproach.html
I have come much the same journey as Emblazoned and others. My approach may be hard nosed and clinical, but I will always base my statements on fact and Truth. Where I am wrong I stand corrected and apologise. I have learned that there is much emotion and manipulation within these groups … people who are ‘brainwashed’ / seduced by WoF doctrines do not think clearly or logically - this is evidenced by the comments on Emblazoned’s blog.
My thesis is simple:
“How can you trust Spiritual Leaders to teach you truthfully about spiritual and eternal matters - when you cannot trust them to teach you truthfully about eartly and temporal matters such as money”.
You have acknowledged that Tithing is an erroneus doctrine. Prosperity theology is an erroneous and seductive doctrine. false teaching comes from false teachers. Hinn, Houston, Baker, Pringle, Duplantis, Crouch, TD Jakes, Oral Roberts, Joyce Meyer, Kenneth Hagin - they are all the same.
The teaching surrounding the sacred cow doctrine of Tithing is dodgy. There is a clear lack of financial transparency in Churches like Riverview and Hillsong (Emblazoned and I have both been declined financial statements). The Leaders are enriching themselves via the speaking circuit from the tables of their scripturally naieve congregations.
However, I make no apoligies for my hard-line approach. More damage is done by the srcipture twisting and abuse of people by the Leaders of these Groups - and the damage is enormous - as evidenced by Tanya, Emblazoned, Geoff, Reve, Lance,myself and others. The damage and the depression cuts very deeply - we have all experienced it. It is a consequence of Spiritual abuse- at the hands of the WoF.
I am not bitter. I just want people to know the facts.
If this is a Spiritual war, there will be casualties in the process. I do not want people to stumble - but to be set free from manipualtion, false teaching and lies.
August 4th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Facelift:
“have attempted to get them to say one thing, just one thing good or nice thing, about Hillsong or Pentecostalism”.
Good things:
1) I lke the music - especially Geoff’s.
2) People in kids ministries are great.
3) Use of technology / resourcefulness.
4) Application of better Business Principle (except where it contravenes scripture eg. targeting/giving honour to Rich people).
5) People in the cell group I usedto attend were great and genuine people - I could not fellowship in a Church anymore though as a matter of conviction - and had to leave.
August 4th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
By the way …
I could also find good things to say about the Mormons, SDA’s, JW’s and other erroneous groups that I have met!
August 4th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Lionfish,
Not to be too distracted from the point of what I’m saying, I know that I have written about the connection between WoF and ‘metaphysical cults’, which no one here so far has refuted, possibly because it is convenient to blame E. W. Kenyon, who was a product of the holiness movement, not Christian science, as claimed. He spent a few weeks when he was 19 with a group which taught, what he later termed, erroneous doctrine about the spirit and mind, before completely renouncing it as a cult and returning to the church, before he was 20, which he had left because of holiness teaching on a secondary sanctification, which had left him wondering if was actually saved even though he had received Christ as His Saviour.
His supposed connection with ‘metaphysical’ doctrinal stance was an assumption which was shown to be a fallacy put out some years ago, and has since been well and truly disproved, especially with the recent release of E. W. Kenyon articles and sermons which clearly refute the accusations levelled against his ministry (after he was dead, of course). Unfortunatley the people who have this connection still on their web-sites have omitted to remove them out of respect for decency and truth, and so the lie is perpetuated.
That was the main argument for the so called ‘metaphysical’ association or ‘roots’ as is claimed. I wouldn’t use Wickipedia as an accurate reference for anything much, especially to do with Christian beliefs. Besides this, as I have said several times, Word of Faith had its roots in much earlier movements, particularly the ‘Faith Cure’ movement of the mid 19th century, which was rooted in even earlier healing movements.
The work of the Boswell brothers predates Kenyon by years, and is still used as foundational teaching on faith and healing. Kenyon’s teaching on the Holy Spirit is quite different to orthodox Pentecostal pneumatology, and he is not famed for teaching much on speaking in tongues, which is a major part of WoF theology, although he was baptised in the Spirit, and involved for some time with the AOG before moving out to begin a non-denominational Bible School. His work on the New Creation, the New Covenant, Love walk, and Faith have been influential, but basically reflected thought of the day, or from earlier teaching which influenced him. His contribution was that he articulated it quite well.
His idea of prosperity would be to trust God for and in everything, but to not have great wealth as a goal. He was heavily influenced by George Mueller in this, and modelled his life after Mueller as far as finances go. I would have to ask you how much Kenyon you have read, especially since his books are all quite small and can be read quickly.
Of course, I’m assuming that you are claiming this as the basis for your assertion that WoF has its roots in the metaphysical, since that is the general claim.
I don’t hold with all these teachers say, by the way, but as Hagin says, chew on the meat and spit out the grizzle. Anyone who doesn’t turn up at a meeting without a Bible and a note book, and doesn’t examine every word preached, no matter who the preacher is, is in danger of being misled in some way, since none of us has it all right, not even you, old buddy!
You misquote me on tithing. I have never used the word ‘erroneous’ to describe tithing practices. I have said that we teach giving by faith, not by law, and that tithing is an acceptable practice for those who see it as a good principle, and purpose to do so for themselves and not by compulsion, or of necessity. Since we who are born again are all free in Christ, whether we tithe or not is entirely our choice. This liberty thing works both ways, so that you can’t judge me for tithing any more than I can judge you for not tithing.
I have never said that prosperity teaching is either erroneous or seductive. There is such a thing as balanced prosperity teaching. I think there is some teaching which is excessive and incorrect, but prosperity in itself is clearly taught throughout the Word of God, and should not be eliminated because of those who teach it incorrectly.
I think the same about poverty teaching. There is massive error in this area, and to an extent some teachers have incorrectly overcompensated for this erroneous teaching. Again, as Hagin would say, ‘They’ve jumped out of the ditch on one side of the road and crossed the road to fall in another.
I will continue to refute your assumption that Leaders are lining their pockets with tithers’ cash, just remuneration aside, unless you come up with the real evidence. In all these years you haven’t. You don’t have any. Until then you remain wrong.
Being abrasive is one thing, I can do that too, but critics like you and Lance are as guilty of scripture and fact twisting as those you accuse.
August 4th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Sorry, that should read, ‘Anyone who does turn up at a meeting without a Bible and a note book, and doesn’t examine every word preached, no matter who the preacher is, is in danger of being misled in some way.’
August 4th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
By the way, back. I meant to tell you that you and Lance remind me of JW’s - the way you irrationally and without warning change subjects just as we’re getting somewhere with an argument.
August 4th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Oh don’t worry Lionfish. FaceLift doesn’t understand that in Australian pentecostalism, every church is independent and even the AOG has no real way of dealing with nutcases in other churches. Which means, he takes every criticism of Hinn, Hillsong etc as a personal criticism of himself or his church somewhere on the other side of Australia.
As to whether Hillsong is redeemable. No. Not while the Houstons are it. And especially not while Houston is national superintendent of the AOG and has the power base shored up. Because they founded the church and it’s their baby. It’s like trying to oust someone from their family business. Short of an outrageous scandal, not gonna happen. (And we all know most likely scenario is that it will get passed down to a kid and will continue in the same vein)
August 4th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Incidentally, Lionfish, when are you going to respond to my comment at 216 on ‘Hat-Trick’ thread? You levelled some pretty heavy accusations against me.
August 4th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
I wasn’t aware of Benny Hinn being an Australian pastor, saint.
I suppose you understand Australian Pentecostalism better than anyone, though, don’t you? Have you ever seen the ministerial criteria for any Pentecostal denomination in Australia? Just a yes or no will do.
August 4th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Facelift.
I’ll be honest. I’m not a pentecostal but a Presbyterian. I spent over ten years in a Sydney Anglican church as well.
Of course I disagree with the whole tongues/Spirit Baptism thing but to me that is actually no longer an important issue. The growth of prosperity teaching within Pentecostal churches is far more alarming and dangerous.
I have a respect for those who adhere to “classic” Pentecostalism and who take a stand against word/faith stuff. I see these people as my friends, my allies and my brothers and sisters in Christ.
That is why I have decided to come here and comment on this thread and others. I believe that I can be of some benefit to my brethren.
Jesus is my Saviour and he is my Lord. I accept anyone as a Christian who states this. But when people begin to preach messages that contradict this (as people like Hinn, Jakes and Houston do) then their salvation is questionable.
August 4th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
I don’t believe in “poverty” teaching either - but I actually think that is a “Straw man” argument created by prosperity teachers.
The problem is that when you’re trying to get people from one extreme into the middle, those in the extreme think you’re trying to get them to go to the other extreme.
August 4th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
OSO, I don’t think you really have to take one stance or another, or fall into either ditch, if you simply read, believe and act on the Word of God. By ‘you’, I mean ‘we’, of course.
One of the problems arises when, say (because I am one), Pentecostals refuse to mix with, hear or be influenced by none Pentecostals, and vice versa. No denomination has an exclusive handle of Bible doctrine. Most add something which isn’t there, or leave something out, or teach it incorrectly. Without dialogue and discussion about what is true we’ll stay that way.
Clearly poverty teaching is a problem, because most none Christians seem to think churches should have no money for their activities, and that church leaders should somehow live without it.