Does WOF teach henotheism???

[WileyCoyote]

Here is an excerpt from the book Christianity in Crisis where HH is charging faith teachers with teaching henotheism:

Finally, I should clarify that most Faith teachers, like most Mormons, hold to a distinct brand of polytheism. While teaching the unbiblical concept of many gods, as we will see later, they reserve worship for only three (God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit). Thus it is more accurate to classify Faith teachers as henotheistic rather than polytheistic.

Christianity in Crisis, pg. 135

This charge is made because of the "little gods" doctrine. Here is a definition of henotheism:

Henotheism (Greek εἷς θεός heis theos "one god") is a term coined by Max Müller, to mean worshiping a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.

Source: Henotheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Wikipedia article also says this:

Henotheism is based on the belief that god may take any form at any time and still have the same essential nature. The central idea is to understand that one name for god may be used in a circumstance where a particular aspect of god is being represented or worshiped while a different name may be given to or used to describe or worship a different aspect of god in a different circumstance. This example does not have to infer the idea of superiority of one over another, but simply that god can exist in many forms at once and offering worship or praise using different names does not have to imply polytheism. Henotheism should be considered a sophisticated version of monotheism in that it allows the worshiper to believe in essentially one Supreme Being and still appreciate and not limit the names, expressions, or manifestations used to describe it.

So, does WOF teach that there are many gods but we worship only one true God? Does it teach that there is one Supreme Being, but there are many different names, expressions and manifestations of this Supreme Being? Are we, as a people, diety who are different manifestations of God and accept worship? That doesn't seem to be what we believe. In fact, WOF ministers stress that there is only ONE God.

Here is Creflo Dollar explaining this view:

Here is the understanding you should receive concerning this chapter. It's understood that you and I are not God. There is only one God. However, as His children, we are like Him. He is the big "G," and we are the little "g." In Him we have been given the authority to rule and reign in this earth just as Jesus did. We have the mind of Christ. Even Jesus said that we would do the works He did and greater works as well. (John 14:12)

The Image of Righteousness, pg. 91

This is a far cry from henotheism, if I'm understanding the definition correctly. Henotheism embraces the possiblility of many gods, but one of them is worshipped. However, Creflo says that there is ONE God and explains that we are not God, but we are His children and we are like Him.

Here is WOF minister Tom Brown's explanation of the "little gods" doctrine:

Someone might wonder if there is a danger in using this term. Well, there is a danger in using any term if it is not understood. I use this term to speak of two important facts about mankind: first that we are made in God’s image; we have God’s character and spiritually we have God’s genetic makeup—which is what re-gene-ration means. Second, I use this term to speak of man’s dominion over the earth. God gave dominion to man in order for him to rule. The term god is often used in connection with dominion. Even Satan is called "god of this age" (2 Cor 4:4), which means that he rules.

I am not aware of any true Christian using the term god to mean that we are the Creator as Dave Hunt implies. We are simply creatures made in God's image endowed with dominion; thus we are "gods" in that sense. Nothing else should be inferred.

Source: Are we little gods

This doesn't sound like henotheism either. Unless I'm missing something.

Is there any evidence that WOF ministers teach henotheism or that WOF accepts this particular view of God? Or was Hank Hanegraff wrong in saying this?

 

[franky67]

Is there any evidence that WOF ministers teach henotheism or that WOF accepts this particular view of God? Or was Hank Hanegraff wrong in saying this?[/quote]

NO

 

[Tobias]

I don't think so either.

Here's some more from the same wikipedia article, explaining how Christianity relates to henotheism:

Many Christians believe in a pantheon of angels, demons, and/or Saints that are inferior to the Trinity. Christians do not label these beings as gods per se, although they are sometimes the object of prayer and some signs of honor. Mainline Christian churches which permit prayer to saints, however, insist that such prayer is only proper when limited to asking for the angel or saint's intercession to God.[9] They are adamant that saints possess no powers of their own, and any miracle able to be attributed to their intercession is the product of the power of God and not any supernatural power of the saint. Were there to be any aspect of worship toward these angelic or saintly figures, then the matter would reflect polytheism, rather than henotheism, monolatry, or monotheism. This stance and use of the acknowledgment of other heavenly beings (Saints, most often) during prayer is primarily practiced in traditional Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, whereas the majority of Protestant denominations hold God as being the only appropriate object of veneration.

Such practices could be construed, however, as acts reflecting monolatrism rather than henotheism, and it is thus important to note that, within a religious belief system, the acknowledgement of angels, saints, or any other spiritual entities does not immediately imply their worship nor their worthiness of receiving worship

 

[MinJeremiah]

Another point to note is that henotheism excepts "other deites." We are gods, but not deity.

 

[~RENEE~]

No!!!!!!!!!

 

[Yekcidmij]

I wouldn't say, in general, that WoF teaching is henotheistic. Perhaps I'm wrong but I haven't run across any WoF who say they are a divine being vice a human one.

 

[pinetree]

I am most honored ,to have met so many god's on this forum.

 

[lismore]

I am most honored ,to have met so many god's on this forum.

:o

Yes me too!

Is this a joke thread? Does anyone here actually think they're a god? If so read the story of King Canute.

 

[MinJeremiah]

:o

Yes me too!

Is this a joke thread? Does anyone here actually think they're a god? If so read the story of King Canute.

I do. I am made in God's image. I have his spiritual DNA. I am his son. spiritual and natural law says that everything produces after it's own kind. I am the Kings son. The bible says that I was born of His Seed. That greek word translated seed when refering to this is spermos. It is where we get our english word sperm. I am born of God's sperm. That makes me a god. The only differences is that he is the Creator, I am the creature. Now don't lie and say I said I am diety or can operate outside of God. I am simply saying that I am His child both legally and vitally. I was adopted and born of Him. Wow!

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

I do. I am made in God's image. I have his spiritual DNA. I am his son. spiritual and natural law says that everything produces after it's own kind. I am the Kings son. The bible says that I was born of His Seed. That greek word translated seed when refering to this is spermos. It is where we get our english word sperm. I am born of God's sperm. That makes me a god. The only differences is that he is the Creator, I am the creature. Now don't lie and say I said I am diety or can operate outside of God. I am simply saying that I am His child both legally and vitally. I was adopted and born of Him. Wow!

Keyword, grafted in.

 

[MinJeremiah]

Keyword, grafted in.

Yes grafted in, but not only grafted. Salvation involves two sides. There is the vital and legal. The legal part is that yes we were grafted in or adopted. The vital side is what happed after you accept the legal side; your human spirit is recreated and born from above with the life and nature of God in it.

 

[victoryword]

Welcome to Pin The heresy on the Donkey​

This is the game in which you dig up a heresy (make sure it is a scholastic sounding word so that you can awe your audience), and then find a group that you dislike, dig up one of their teaching and then PIN ON THAT HERESY.

On a serious note, I wonder if Mr. Hanegraaff would accuse the church fathers of drinking Henessy Beer (Isn't that what Henotheism is? ):

"we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods...." [Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4:38:4, in ANF 1:522.]

Do we cast blame on him because we were not made gods from the beginning, but were at first created merely as men, and then later as gods? Although God has adopted this course out of his pure benevolence, that no one may charge him with discrimination or stinginess, he declares, "I have said, ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the Most High." ... For it was necessary at first that nature be exhibited, then after that what was mortal would be conquered and swallowed up in immortality."(Irenaeus, Against Heresies,4.38. Cp. 4.11)

Origen claimed that God "will be 'all' in each individual in this way: when all which any rational understanding, cleansed from the dregs of every sort of vice, and with every cloud of wickedness completely swept away, can either feel, or understand, or think, will be wholly God...." [Origen, De Principiis 3:6:3, in ANF 4:345.]

"Yea, I say, the Word of God became a man so that you might learn from a man how to become a GOD". (Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks, 1)

"if one knows himself, he will know God, and knowing God will become like God.... His is beauty, true beauty, for it is God, and that man becomes a god, since God wills it. So Heraclitus was right when he said, 'Men are gods, and GODS are men.'"(Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 3.1 See also Clement, Stromateis, 23).

"made like God, free from suffering and death," and that they are thus deemed worthy of becoming GODS and of having power to become sons of the highest." (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 124)

But he himself that justifies also deifies, for by justifying he makes sons of God. 'For he has given them power to become the sons of God' [John 1:12] If then we have been made sons of God, we have also been made GODS."(Augustine, On the Psalms, 50.2).
​

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Welcome to Pin The heresy on the Donkey​

This is the game in which you dig up a heresy (make sure it is a scholastic sounding word so that you can awe your audience), and then find a group that you dislike, dig up one of their teaching and then PIN ON THAT HERESY.

On a serious note, I wonder if Mr. Hanegraaff would accuse the church fathers of drinking Henessy Beer (Isn't that what Henotheism is? ):

"we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods...." [Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4:38:4, in ANF 1:522.]

Do we cast blame on him because we were not made gods from the beginning, but were at first created merely as men, and then later as gods? Although God has adopted this course out of his pure benevolence, that no one may charge him with discrimination or stinginess, he declares, "I have said, ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the Most High." ... For it was necessary at first that nature be exhibited, then after that what was mortal would be conquered and swallowed up in immortality."(Irenaeus, Against Heresies,4.38. Cp. 4.11)

Origen claimed that God "will be 'all' in each individual in this way: when all which any rational understanding, cleansed from the dregs of every sort of vice, and with every cloud of wickedness completely swept away, can either feel, or understand, or think, will be wholly God...." [Origen, De Principiis 3:6:3, in ANF 4:345.]

"Yea, I say, the Word of God became a man so that you might learn from a man how to become a GOD". (Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks, 1)

"if one knows himself, he will know God, and knowing God will become like God.... His is beauty, true beauty, for it is God, and that man becomes a god, since God wills it. So Heraclitus was right when he said, 'Men are gods, and GODS are men.'"(Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 3.1 See also Clement, Stromateis, 23).

"made like God, free from suffering and death," and that they are thus deemed worthy of becoming GODS and of having power to become sons of the highest." (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 124)

But he himself that justifies also deifies, for by justifying he makes sons of God. 'For he has given them power to become the sons of God' [John 1:12] If then we have been made sons of God, we have also been made GODS."(Augustine, On the Psalms, 50.2).
​

Or to put it another way, the millinium kingdom will consist of human/divine gvmnt. resulting from the marraige between the Divine King and earthly inhabitant(s) Progressing from the human/divine all things are handed over to the Divine and making all in eternity divine, fulfledged children of God.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Keyword, grafted in.

The funny thing about Paul saying that Gentiles were "grafted in" is that he is basically insulting gentiles when he says that and shows he doesn't think much of them.

"we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods...." [Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4:38:4, in ANF 1:522.]

Do we cast blame on him because we were not made gods from the beginning, but were at first created merely as men, and then later as gods? Although God has adopted this course out of his pure benevolence, that no one may charge him with discrimination or stinginess, he declares, "I have said, ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the Most High." ... For it was necessary at first that nature be exhibited, then after that what was mortal would be conquered and swallowed up in immortality."(Irenaeus, Against Heresies,4.38. Cp. 4.11)

I have a lot of respect for Irenaeus, but we should realize (1) that he isn't scripture, which is a good thing because (2) he misused Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34 in his quote here. Besides that (3) it's important to realize that in this quote, even though he misused those 2 verses, he is still only saying that man is being remade in the image of God as Irenaeus makes clear at the end of the passage:


" He shall overcome the substance of created nature. For it was necessary, at first, that nature should be exhibited; then, after that, that what was mortal should be conquered and swallowed up by immortality, and the corruptible by incorruptibility, and that man should be made after the image and likeness of God, having received the knowledge of good and evil." (Against Heresies, 4.38.4)

Origen claimed that God "will be 'all' in each individual in this way: when all which any rational understanding, cleansed from the dregs of every sort of vice, and with every cloud of wickedness completely swept away, can either feel, or understand, or think, will be wholly God...." [Origen, De Principiis 3:6:3, in ANF 4:345.]

Origen was also declared a heretic. Probably not the best example to use. You might as well appeal to the authority of Marcion, Arius, Valentinus, or Pelagius.

 

[Tobias]

Welcome to Pin The heresy on the Donkey​

This is the game in which you dig up a heresy (make sure it is a scholastic sounding word so that you can awe your audience), and then find a group that you dislike, dig up one of their teaching and then PIN ON THAT HERESY.

On a serious note, I wonder if Mr. Hanegraaff would accuse the church fathers of drinking Henessy Beer (Isn't that what Henotheism is? ):

"we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods...." [Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4:38:4, in ANF 1:522.]

Do we cast blame on him because we were not made gods from the beginning, but were at first created merely as men, and then later as gods? Although God has adopted this course out of his pure benevolence, that no one may charge him with discrimination or stinginess, he declares, "I have said, ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the Most High." ... For it was necessary at first that nature be exhibited, then after that what was mortal would be conquered and swallowed up in immortality."(Irenaeus, Against Heresies,4.38. Cp. 4.11)

Origen claimed that God "will be 'all' in each individual in this way: when all which any rational understanding, cleansed from the dregs of every sort of vice, and with every cloud of wickedness completely swept away, can either feel, or understand, or think, will be wholly God...." [Origen, De Principiis 3:6:3, in ANF 4:345.]

"Yea, I say, the Word of God became a man so that you might learn from a man how to become a GOD". (Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks, 1)

"if one knows himself, he will know God, and knowing God will become like God.... His is beauty, true beauty, for it is God, and that man becomes a god, since God wills it. So Heraclitus was right when he said, 'Men are gods, and GODS are men.'"(Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 3.1 See also Clement, Stromateis, 23).

"made like God, free from suffering and death," and that they are thus deemed worthy of becoming GODS and of having power to become sons of the highest." (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 124)

But he himself that justifies also deifies, for by justifying he makes sons of God. 'For he has given them power to become the sons of God' [John 1:12] If then we have been made sons of God, we have also been made GODS."(Augustine, On the Psalms, 50.2).
​

Then perhaps WOF is henotheistic. I don't see that as a bad thing; I've considered myself to be a henotheist at times for other reasons.

The simple definition of henotheism is:
Henotheism (Greek εἷς θεός heis theos "one god") is a term coined by Max Müller, to mean worshiping a single god while accepting the existence or possible existence of other deities.


I believe that other deities do exist; that not all the idols worshiped by other people in the Bible were just demons, but that actual entities called gods were sometimes behind them. The Bible often called them gods, so why shouldn't we?

One isolated definition of henotheism is:
Henotheism is based on the belief that god may take any form at any time and still have the same essential nature. The central idea is to understand that one name for god may be used in a circumstance where a particular aspect of god is being represented or worshiped while a different name may be given to or used to describe or worship a different aspect of god in a different circumstance. This example does not have to infer the idea of superiority of one over another, but simply that god can exist in many forms at once and offering worship or praise using different names does not have to imply polytheism. Henotheism should be considered a sophisticated version of monotheism in that it allows the worshiper to believe in essentially one Supreme Being and still appreciate and not limit the names, expressions, or manifestations used to describe it.

This is the theology of many in Wicca, who believe that there is one Deity manifested in the god and the goddess, and subsequently in each of the pagan deities throughout the world. Hence the goddess Athena for example, is simply one aspect of the "Goddess", who then is really just the female aspect of Deity in general. WOF has nothing, absolutely nothing in common with this theology!!! (Once again, Hank Hanagraaf must have been smoking crack when he put the two of these together!)

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

The funny thing about Paul saying that Gentiles were "grafted in" is that he is basically insulting gentiles when he says that and shows he doesn't think much of them.

Really? Well, that wasn't very nice.

 

[map4]

The funny thing about Paul saying that Gentiles were "grafted in" is that he is basically insulting gentiles when he says that and shows he doesn't think much of them.

How did you come to that conclusion?

 

[victoryword]

The funny thing about Paul saying that Gentiles were "grafted in" is that he is basically insulting gentiles when he says that and shows he doesn't think much of them.

Are we reading the same Bible? I just finished reading Romans 11 and I did not come anywhere close to that conclusion. ON the contrary it appears that Paul was letting the Jews know that the Gentiles were grafted in in spite of their disapproval and that Israel lost many of their privileges due to their unbelief. Yet, he tells Israel that they still have a chance if they do not persist in unbelief (Rom. 11:23).

I have a lot of respect for Irenaeus, but we should realize (1) that he isn't scripture, which is a good thing because (2) he misused Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34 in his quote here. Besides that (3) it's important to realize that in this quote, even though he misused those 2 verses, he is still only saying that man is being remade in the image of God as Irenaeus makes clear at the end of the passage:


" He shall overcome the substance of created nature. For it was necessary, at first, that nature should be exhibited; then, after that, that what was mortal should be conquered and swallowed up by immortality, and the corruptible by incorruptibility, and that man should be made after the image and likeness of God, having received the knowledge of good and evil." (Against Heresies, 4.38.4)



Origen was also declared a heretic. Probably not the best example to use. You might as well appeal to the authority of Marcion, Arius, Valentinus, or Pelagius.

You know, I did quote Augustine as well, who is the "father" of the theological perspective you hold to (Calvinism). But just for laughs, here is a quote by Martin Luther:

This is what I have often said, that faith makes of us lords, and love makes of us servants. Indeed, by faith we become gods and partakers of the divine nature and name, as is said in Psalms 82,6: "I said, Ye are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High." But through love we become equal to the poorest. According to faith we are in need of nothing, and have an abundance; according to love we are servants of all. By faith we receive blessings from above, from God; through love we give them out below, to our neighbor. Even as Christ in his divinity stood in need of nothing, but in his humanity served everybody who had need of him. Of this we have spoken often enough, namely, that we also must by faith be born God's sons and gods, lords and kings, even as Christ is born true God of the Father in eternity; and again, come out of ourselves by love and help our neighbors with kind deeds, even as Christ became man to help us all.[Luther, Martin The Sermons of Martin Luther Vol. II (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House), pp. 73, 74]
​

Augustine nor Luther are Scripture. Both actually taught numerous things that I strongly disagree with. However, many statements made by Luther are closer to Word-Faith thought than many of the WoF critics are willing to admit. This is one of them. If the WoF critics would like to keep beating on the WoF for statements they make then why not just say that Luther was a heretic as well? If they could at least be consistent then we might have a little more respect for them. On the contrary people like Hanegraaff claim that WoF teachings are not derived from history but from cultic sources such as New Thought and Mormonism. This is why I present the church fathers and Luther to rebut such false accusations.

 

[Always in His Presence]

 

[lismore]

I was adopted and born of Him. Wow!

Why would God adopt someone he had already begotten?

God has only one begotten son. And there is only one God, god or whatever!