It is a comfortable and happy religion to get a little book of God’s promises and read them all the time. There’s usually several hundred, and apparently we are supposed to “claim” them for ourselves.
God makes many, many promises in the Bible. But the fact that is disappointing for many people is that almost all of those promises were made to other people. To claim those promises for ourselves is a type of spiritual theft.
When it is all boiled down, God has really made only three promises to those of us who surrender our lives to Him:
1) I will be with you.
2) I will fulfill My perfect plan for your life, which includes being conformed to the likeness of My Son.
3) I will not hold your sin against you, so that when you die, you will live with Me forever.
Is that enough for you?
enough for me. You’d have a hard time winning a debate on that one with any well versed word of faither though
enough for me. You’d have a hard time winning a debate on that one with any well versed word of faither though
In my experience, Word-of-Faithers tend to be well-versed only in the verses they <>like.<>
In my experience, Word-of-Faithers tend to be well-versed only in the verses they <>like.<>
There is actually much of scripture that has to be explained if you don’t think certain promises are “valid” for us as believers today. I haven’t found anyone yet who has done a good job. I’m more of a “balance is the key” kind of gal.
There is actually much of scripture that has to be explained if you don’t think certain promises are “valid” for us as believers today. I haven’t found anyone yet who has done a good job. I’m more of a “balance is the key” kind of gal.
I want to be careful here… because I don’t want to give the impression that God’s promises would ever <>expire.<>What I’m saying is, there are many, many promises He makes to Israel, and it’s obvious that He is speaking directly to them, not to the future church. Now that could lead us down a whole other path about the church being the new Israel, yada, yada.But all that aside, I’ve known people to believe that if God promises anyone <>anything,<> and it’s right there in the Bible, then we can claim it for ourselves. But we’re not so quick when the promise is one of destruction, are we?
I want to be careful here… because I don’t want to give the impression that God’s promises would ever <>expire.<>What I’m saying is, there are many, many promises He makes to Israel, and it’s obvious that He is speaking directly to them, not to the future church. Now that could lead us down a whole other path about the church being the new Israel, yada, yada.But all that aside, I’ve known people to believe that if God promises anyone <>anything,<> and it’s right there in the Bible, then we can claim it for ourselves. But we’re not so quick when the promise is one of destruction, are we?
I agree with you…to a point…but remember, I grew up in and currently worship in a “word of faith” environment. It’s all well and good to say it simply as you have here but there are still issues that have to be addressed when you take the stand you have.I’m only cautioning because you will likely face, if you haven’t, faithers on your pastoring journey and you have to be careful not to be dismissive.
I agree with you…to a point…but remember, I grew up in and currently worship in a “word of faith” environment. It’s all well and good to say it simply as you have here but there are still issues that have to be addressed when you take the stand you have.I’m only cautioning because you will likely face, if you haven’t, faithers on your pastoring journey and you have to be careful not to be dismissive.
Oh, there’s no doubt that we’ll come across a good plenty of Christians with foolish notions and dangerously narrow minds. In fact, we do almost on a daily basis. There are hundreds of “faiths” and “denominations” full of them. I don’t think we have to have a good grasp on what each of them believe, so as to be prepared to debate theology with them. All we have to do is know why we believe what we believe and constantly keep in step with what God’s spirit is revealing to us through and apart from the Scriptures. Everything Ryan has said in this blog and all of his commentary afterward i agree with 100%.If you (Makeesha) are saying that constantly being critical of God’s promises is like walking on thin ice, i’m agreed with you. But if you’re anywhere close to saying that every promise (or command for that matter) written in the Bible is meant for our strict possession or obedience in this day and age, it won’t take long to debunk that ridiculous notion.So where do you draw the line? What’s intended directly for us and what’s not? Ahh, that’s why we have 1) the Spirit and 2) our brothers and sisters in Christ, living in community. And this is where denominations are dangerous. They force us often times to subscribe to one community’s interpretation of God’s story at the expense of another, equally probable interpretation. And throughout it, God commands us to maintain unity. Wow.
Oh, there’s no doubt that we’ll come across a good plenty of Christians with foolish notions and dangerously narrow minds. In fact, we do almost on a daily basis. There are hundreds of “faiths” and “denominations” full of them. I don’t think we have to have a good grasp on what each of them believe, so as to be prepared to debate theology with them. All we have to do is know why we believe what we believe and constantly keep in step with what God’s spirit is revealing to us through and apart from the Scriptures. Everything Ryan has said in this blog and all of his commentary afterward i agree with 100%.If you (Makeesha) are saying that constantly being critical of God’s promises is like walking on thin ice, i’m agreed with you. But if you’re anywhere close to saying that every promise (or command for that matter) written in the Bible is meant for our strict possession or obedience in this day and age, it won’t take long to debunk that ridiculous notion.So where do you draw the line? What’s intended directly for us and what’s not? Ahh, that’s why we have 1) the Spirit and 2) our brothers and sisters in Christ, living in community. And this is where denominations are dangerous. They force us often times to subscribe to one community’s interpretation of God’s story at the expense of another, equally probable interpretation. And throughout it, God commands us to maintain unity. Wow.
Makeesha-I want to join Beloved in his curiosity of your “word of faith” experience.How does being WOF distinguish you from those who would fall outside that label?
Makeesha-I want to join Beloved in his curiosity of your “word of faith” experience.How does being WOF distinguish you from those who would fall outside that label?
I was simply saying that it’s not wise to be dismissive. I wasn’t looking for a WOF debate or even to suggest that you have to be well versed in order to dialogue or debate some of what WOF teaches.And Ryan, I don’t understand your question.
I was simply saying that it’s not wise to be dismissive. I wasn’t looking for a WOF debate or even to suggest that you have to be well versed in order to dialogue or debate some of what WOF teaches.And Ryan, I don’t understand your question.
Correct me if i’m wrong, Coreman, but i think he’s wondering what distinctives set the WOF denomination apart from others. For instance, Baptists have 5 specific distinctives that they maintain “set them apart” from the other denominations.In regards to dismissiveness, i’m not really certain i understand what you’re getting at. As far as i can comprehend, any time a person holds one belief that is opposed, or even different, than another, it stands to reason that he/she must “dismiss” the opposing or differing belief. You can’t (honestly) hold two opposite positions simultaneously.But we do certainly appreciate your warning to be prepared to deal with people who hold that every promise written in the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, was written to us to be taken literally as well. We’ll watch out.
Correct me if i’m wrong, Coreman, but i think he’s wondering what distinctives set the WOF denomination apart from others. For instance, Baptists have 5 specific distinctives that they maintain “set them apart” from the other denominations.In regards to dismissiveness, i’m not really certain i understand what you’re getting at. As far as i can comprehend, any time a person holds one belief that is opposed, or even different, than another, it stands to reason that he/she must “dismiss” the opposing or differing belief. You can’t (honestly) hold two opposite positions simultaneously.But we do certainly appreciate your warning to be prepared to deal with people who hold that every promise written in the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, was written to us to be taken literally as well. We’ll watch out.
Beloved was right about my question, Makeesha. I just wanted to know why you characterize yourself or your fellowship as “word of faith” and how you would describe the distinctiveness of that theology.But I believe Beloved is wrong about the definition of “dismissiveness.” I think you can disagree with something without dismissing it. I disagree with most Calvinist theology, but because I respect many of those who ascribe to it, and for the most part I respect the way these ideas were arrived at, I do not dismiss them. I think to dismiss an idea is to regard it as silly, not just as incorrect.
Beloved was right about my question, Makeesha. I just wanted to know why you characterize yourself or your fellowship as “word of faith” and how you would describe the distinctiveness of that theology.But I believe Beloved is wrong about the definition of “dismissiveness.” I think you can disagree with something without dismissing it. I disagree with most Calvinist theology, but because I respect many of those who ascribe to it, and for the most part I respect the way these ideas were arrived at, I do not dismiss them. I think to dismiss an idea is to regard it as silly, not just as incorrect.
word of faith was a movement, not a denomination and is not currently a denomination. It’s more of an approach to Scripture and lifestyle and worship I think…probably similar in that regard to “emergent”let me see if I can clarify my comment about being dismissive.it’s easy to, in our tone and with our words, act like the “right thinking” about something is so obvious that “how on earth could anyone think otherwise!” Eastern Orthodox people tend to do that a lot “if you would just go to services and study, the truth would be obvious to you”. Well, it’s not, so what does that say about me? I’m stupid, I’m spiritual dull..what?By saying this is this and that’s that, you’re being dismissive of people who think it’s just not that easy. And I guarantee you, if you were to sit down with Kenneth Hagin Jr. and talk to him for a couple of hours, you wouldn’t be so flippant about the WOF beliefs.I think it’s the height of hubris to act like an issue is so easy to dismiss as wrong when there are many many scriptures that have to be explained if you’re going to dismiss the WOF ideas. As I said, I don’t subscribe to most of what are considered “classical WOF” beliefs but I’ve been part of the movement long enough to tell you that you shouldn’t dismiss it so quickly.And I think this is the case with any fringe beliefs within Christianity. Every major movement of our history was fringe and considered rebellious, heretical and aberant at the time…and guess what? we are the product of those movements.
word of faith was a movement, not a denomination and is not currently a denomination. It’s more of an approach to Scripture and lifestyle and worship I think…probably similar in that regard to “emergent”let me see if I can clarify my comment about being dismissive.it’s easy to, in our tone and with our words, act like the “right thinking” about something is so obvious that “how on earth could anyone think otherwise!” Eastern Orthodox people tend to do that a lot “if you would just go to services and study, the truth would be obvious to you”. Well, it’s not, so what does that say about me? I’m stupid, I’m spiritual dull..what?By saying this is this and that’s that, you’re being dismissive of people who think it’s just not that easy. And I guarantee you, if you were to sit down with Kenneth Hagin Jr. and talk to him for a couple of hours, you wouldn’t be so flippant about the WOF beliefs.I think it’s the height of hubris to act like an issue is so easy to dismiss as wrong when there are many many scriptures that have to be explained if you’re going to dismiss the WOF ideas. As I said, I don’t subscribe to most of what are considered “classical WOF” beliefs but I’ve been part of the movement long enough to tell you that you shouldn’t dismiss it so quickly.And I think this is the case with any fringe beliefs within Christianity. Every major movement of our history was fringe and considered rebellious, heretical and aberant at the time…and guess what? we are the product of those movements.
So that begs the question… what is it about the WOF that you do agree with?
So that begs the question… what is it about the WOF that you do agree with?
that depends on how you define word of faith
that depends on how you define word of faith
Can you answer the question based on your <>own<> definition of Word of Faith?
Can you answer the question based on your <>own<> definition of Word of Faith?
We still have no clue what in the world “Word of Faith” is. It seems rather absurd that we’re talking so much about it. Currently, it’s kind of like we’re talking about the Lochness Monster. LOL!
We still have no clue what in the world “Word of Faith” is. It seems rather absurd that we’re talking so much about it. Currently, it’s kind of like we’re talking about the Lochness Monster. LOL!
Though I do not understand what this word of faith movement is, I do agree with makeesha in that you would have a hard time proving to me that those promises you listed are the only ones applicable to believers. I would like you to give some examples of promises we claim in error. Though we might disagree, I believe this would be a good exercise in why we believe what we believe.
Though I do not understand what this word of faith movement is, I do agree with makeesha in that you would have a hard time proving to me that those promises you listed are the only ones applicable to believers. I would like you to give some examples of promises we claim in error. Though we might disagree, I believe this would be a good exercise in why we believe what we believe.
It seems to me that this thread has fizzled. With all due respect to Makeesha, I’m not sure I understand why she seems so reluctant to talk about the Word of Faith movement.To answer anonymous’s question, I was not trying to establish a theological dogma with this blog. If you can find a promise in the Bible that’s not directed to a specific group of people other than “Christians”, and cannot be boiled down into my 3 stated promises, please let me know. I’m malleable.But since you asked, here’s an example of a promise that gets wrongly claimed by Christians: Jeremiah 29:11 says, “For I know the plans I have for you, plans to prosper you and not to harm you…” Now, depending on your definitions of the words “prosper” and “harm” then there is no damage in claiming this promise, because it fits into God’s intentions toward us as believers today. But the fact is, this promise is spoken directly to Israel, for the time when they return from Babylonian exile. It is a beautiful verse, but like every other Bible verse, we should be careful to take it like it is. If nothing similar to this were found anywhere else in the Bible, we couldn’t honestly conclude that it is directed toward Gentile believers. And if it is found elsewhere, in a context that is clearly spoken to us, then <>that<> is where we will find our own hope. This may sound like splitting hairs, but that’s only because I can’t think of a more drastic example right now.
It seems to me that this thread has fizzled. With all due respect to Makeesha, I’m not sure I understand why she seems so reluctant to talk about the Word of Faith movement.To answer anonymous’s question, I was not trying to establish a theological dogma with this blog. If you can find a promise in the Bible that’s not directed to a specific group of people other than “Christians”, and cannot be boiled down into my 3 stated promises, please let me know. I’m malleable.But since you asked, here’s an example of a promise that gets wrongly claimed by Christians: Jeremiah 29:11 says, “For I know the plans I have for you, plans to prosper you and not to harm you…” Now, depending on your definitions of the words “prosper” and “harm” then there is no damage in claiming this promise, because it fits into God’s intentions toward us as believers today. But the fact is, this promise is spoken directly to Israel, for the time when they return from Babylonian exile. It is a beautiful verse, but like every other Bible verse, we should be careful to take it like it is. If nothing similar to this were found anywhere else in the Bible, we couldn’t honestly conclude that it is directed toward Gentile believers. And if it is found elsewhere, in a context that is clearly spoken to us, then <>that<> is where we will find our own hope. This may sound like splitting hairs, but that’s only because I can’t think of a more drastic example right now.
Coreman. You are so tactful at “saying” something without actually saying it.
Coreman. You are so tactful at “saying” something without actually saying it.
who’s reluctant? I already said I’m not a word of faither so i’m not sure why you’re asking me what I agree with.I believe that much of the church, prior to the word of faith movement, was becoming dangerously fatalistic. I believe that there were many elements of truth within WOF that spoke against that and sought to bring some “above the line” thinking (to use a McLaren phrase). lots of what folks see and classify as wof is the very extreme poles of the movement and can’t even be called wof as far as I’m concerned.I was making a point regarding your approach to a position you disagree with – I thought it was a bit disrespectful and flippant not to mention a little arrogant to think that wof teachings don’t have any solid biblical basis (kind of like how each side of the “perpetual virginity of Mary” issue thinks his side is solid as steel…arrogance)I wasn’t looking for a “name it and claim it” debate since I’m not of that persuasion anyway
who’s reluctant? I already said I’m not a word of faither so i’m not sure why you’re asking me what I agree with.I believe that much of the church, prior to the word of faith movement, was becoming dangerously fatalistic. I believe that there were many elements of truth within WOF that spoke against that and sought to bring some “above the line” thinking (to use a McLaren phrase). lots of what folks see and classify as wof is the very extreme poles of the movement and can’t even be called wof as far as I’m concerned.I was making a point regarding your approach to a position you disagree with – I thought it was a bit disrespectful and flippant not to mention a little arrogant to think that wof teachings don’t have any solid biblical basis (kind of like how each side of the “perpetual virginity of Mary” issue thinks his side is solid as steel…arrogance)I wasn’t looking for a “name it and claim it” debate since I’m not of that persuasion anyway
using verses out of context is an issue not specific to any one group and on that, as I originally mentioned, we are in agreement.
using verses out of context is an issue not specific to any one group and on that, as I originally mentioned, we are in agreement.
Forgive me, Makeesha. Looking back, apparently you said you worship in a “Word of Faith” environment. I didn’t mean to suggest that you consider yourself WOF, but if you worship with them, I figured you agreed with them on some level, and that’s what I was trying to get you to explain.Although I am certainly no expert, my less-than-objective definition of “Word of Faith” is: a theological construct that presumes that God will give us practically anything we want, if we exhibit enough faith that we will actually receive it, the result being that, the more faith you have, the more pleasant and gratifying your life becomes. If that is not correct, please offer your own definition. This is what I’ve been trying to get you to do all along.And for the record, I did not state that WOF teachings have no solid biblical basis. I only said that “<>in my experience,<> WOFers tend to be well-versed only in the verses they like.”
Forgive me, Makeesha. Looking back, apparently you said you worship in a “Word of Faith” environment. I didn’t mean to suggest that you consider yourself WOF, but if you worship with them, I figured you agreed with them on some level, and that’s what I was trying to get you to explain.Although I am certainly no expert, my less-than-objective definition of “Word of Faith” is: a theological construct that presumes that God will give us practically anything we want, if we exhibit enough faith that we will actually receive it, the result being that, the more faith you have, the more pleasant and gratifying your life becomes. If that is not correct, please offer your own definition. This is what I’ve been trying to get you to do all along.And for the record, I did not state that WOF teachings have no solid biblical basis. I only said that “<>in my experience,<> WOFers tend to be well-versed only in the verses they like.”
Kind of like the “Prayer of Jabez movement”, or most charismatic faiths who see extraordinary numbers of “healings”.
Kind of like the “Prayer of Jabez movement”, or most charismatic faiths who see extraordinary numbers of “healings”.
My definition of word of faith is a little nebulous because I don’t think there is one concrete thing across the board.as for my involvement with “wof types” – there is no perfect church. I love my church and its people. I find the whole wof thing to be a minor inconvenience at its worst.wof to me is defined well by my denomination I think – the Word of God is true, everything else is subject to change. I believe we are to believe that God can and does change our circumstances and that we should have an open heart for faith to enter in. I do think our words are important and that reciprocity is an actual principle that is in effect on the earth.
My definition of word of faith is a little nebulous because I don’t think there is one concrete thing across the board.as for my involvement with “wof types” – there is no perfect church. I love my church and its people. I find the whole wof thing to be a minor inconvenience at its worst.wof to me is defined well by my denomination I think – the Word of God is true, everything else is subject to change. I believe we are to believe that God can and does change our circumstances and that we should have an open heart for faith to enter in. I do think our words are important and that reciprocity is an actual principle that is in effect on the earth.
Definitely… I think the whole book of Proverbs is basically a lesson on earthly reciprocity.But (and I know you would agree with this, Makeesha) it’s when we begin to think we’ve earned God’s blessings that we’re clearly outside the Truth.
Definitely… I think the whole book of Proverbs is basically a lesson on earthly reciprocity.But (and I know you would agree with this, Makeesha) it’s when we begin to think we’ve earned God’s blessings that we’re clearly outside the Truth.
no doubt. and most non extreme wof teaching agrees with you too.
no doubt. and most non extreme wof teaching agrees with you too.
I think you’d be hard-pressed to find a mainline or evangelical denomination that wouldn’t agree with that definition. What Christian denomination doesn’t believe that God blesses faith with real-life answers?I understand the concept of reciprocity, although i’m not sure i completely understand it in the context in which you all are referring. Could you explain an instance that illustrates this concept in action?
I think you’d be hard-pressed to find a mainline or evangelical denomination that wouldn’t agree with that definition. What Christian denomination doesn’t believe that God blesses faith with real-life answers?I understand the concept of reciprocity, although i’m not sure i completely understand it in the context in which you all are referring. Could you explain an instance that illustrates this concept in action?
I don’t understand your confusion
I don’t understand your confusion
I don’t understand why you don’t understand my confusion.
I don’t understand why you don’t understand my confusion.
I’m about to write a new post any day here.I’m going to request that this be the last comment on this blog. I don’t think it’s going anywhere anymore.Please honor this request.But thanks for the vigorous participation!
I’m about to write a new post any day here.I’m going to request that this be the last comment on this blog. I don’t think it’s going anywhere anymore.Please honor this request.But thanks for the vigorous participation!
Naa Naa Na Naaaa Naa
Naa Naa Na Naaaa Naa