False Teachings From Kenneth Hagin.

A local Village Missions church in our area just had a church split. One faction was hyper Calvinistic and tried to take over the church. After a vote, they weren't able to succeed so they all left. A great relief to their Pastor but very damaging to ALL involved.

So sad to see so many hurting people!

swifteagle

TreeOfLife said:

Convenient. Weak and fleshy, but convenient.

Click to expand...

Faint praise with an underlying criticising statement is a sign of the carnal nature in a person assuming dominance over the New Creation Spiritual Man who is always positive and non-critical in his approach to the opinions of others he might disagree with.

Oscarr said:

Faint praise with an underlying criticising statement is a sign of the carnal nature in a person assuming dominance over the New Creation Spiritual Man who is always positive and non-critical in his approach to the opinions of others he might disagree with.

Click to expand...

Say that twelve times real fast

Written twice so one must go.

habeas said:

Well, Hagin teaches that a manifestation of the holy spirit is acting "drunk," in the manner in which he and his followers are engaging. I would be embarrassed to invite my unsaved friend/family member to witness this "manifestation." This is what opens us up to scorn and ridicule.

Click to expand...

Are those unsaved friends and family members going to your church? If so, why aren't they saved yet? If not, then why do they not find YOUR prefered religious setting acceptable?

The problem I am finding on this forum is that no one is able to refute Hagin's teachings from Scripture so that they have to reach hard by looking for stuff that does not fit within their own religious paradigm and then use the "My unsaved friends would not like that" tactic. I didn't know that the Holy Spirit had to do things in a way that would appease the unsaved.

Most unbelievers think Christians are wierd whether they go to an "acceptable" church or a church with all types of manifestations. Therefore, the embarrassment of taking one's unsaved friends and family members to a Hagin meeting is NOT a solid argument against Hagin because if they are still unsaved then obviously your own particular brand of church has done them no good.

jiminpa said:

Sort of of topic, but sort of not. Anyone ever actually met a true Calvinist? Every one I've ever met who calls himself a Calvinist doesn't actually believe Calvinism. The ones who claim to be Calvinists would call a true Calvinist a "Hyper-Calvinist," even though it's the most hyper of them who come the closest the the TULIP model. You can't remove even one point of TULIP without refuting them all, and you can't believe them all and believe in the smallest inkling of choice in any matter.

If you believe in TULIP you must believe that God preordained every last little detail from before creation and that there is no choice in anything, and that God's determination of who would go to Hell had no form or reason, that it was completely random, but God loves us all and wishes we all will be with Him, but He Himself ordained it not so. I don't know anyone who actually believes that.

Or they believe that the scriptures that say that God wishes us all to be with Him in eternity are false.

Click to expand...

The Hyper-Calvinist is consistent while the moderate Calvinist is inconsistent.

victoryword said:

Written twice so one must go.

Click to expand...

I was going to say that it was just as good the second time around!

habeas said:

Well, Hagin teaches that a manifestation of the holy spirit is acting "drunk," in the manner in which he and his followers are engaging. I would be embarrassed to invite my unsaved friend/family member to witness this "manifestation." This is what opens us up to scorn and ridicule.

Click to expand...

Acts 2:5 Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout R58 men from every nation under heaven. 6 And when this R59 sound occurred, the crowd came together, and were bewildered because each one of them was hearing them speak in his own language. F30 7 They R60 were amazed and astonished, saying, "Why, F31 are not all these who are speaking Galileans? R61 8 "And how is it that we each hear them in our own language F32 to F33 which we were born? 9 "Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, R62 Pontus R63 and Asia, R64 F34 10 Phrygia R65 and Pamphylia, R66 Egypt and the districts of Libya around Cyrene, R67 and visitors R68 F35 from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, R69 F36 11 Cretans and Arabs--we hear them in our own tongues speaking of the mighty deeds of God." 12 And they R70 all continued in amazement and great perplexity, saying to one another, "What does this mean?" 13 But others were mocking and saying, "They R71 are full of sweet F37 wine."
14 But Peter, taking F38 his stand with the R72 eleven, raised his voice and declared to them: "Men of Judea and all you who live in Jerusalem, let this be known to you and give heed to my words. 15 "For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, for R73 it is only the third F39 hour of the day; 16 but this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel: ...
41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls

Click to expand...

On the day of Pentecost, the observers thought that the 120 from the upper room were drunk. Why? Because they heard them speaking in tongues? Well, there were people in the city at that time from all over the world speaking all kinds of different languages-- so hearing someone speak a foreign language wouldn't make you think they were drunk, especially since many of them understood the languages being spoken. So obviously there was something else going on that made the observers think the 120 were drunk. And there were those there that mocked and ridiculed.

And in the middle of whatever that was that caused the observers to think they were drunk and mock them, 3000 came to Christ.

Maybe being mocked a little isn't always such a bad thing?

Father Rick said:

On the day of Pentecost, the observers thought that the 120 from the upper room were drunk. Why? Because they heard them speaking in tongues? Well, there were people in the city at that time from all over the world speaking all kinds of different languages-- so hearing someone speak a foreign language wouldn't make you think they were drunk, especially since many of them understood the languages being spoken. So obviously there was something else going on that made the observers think the 120 were drunk. And there were those there that mocked and ridiculed.

And in the middle of whatever that was that caused the observers to think they were drunk and mock them, 3000 came to Christ.

Maybe being mocked a little isn't always such a bad thing?

Click to expand...

Excellent post Father Rick

didaskalos said:

I was going to say that it was just as good the second time around!

Click to expand...

It was a tough decision my friend

victoryword said:

The problem I am finding on this forum is that no one is able to refute Hagin's teachings from Scripture

Click to expand...

I'll have to think about that one for a day or two. Hagin has said some stuff that's just plain crazy, and I know people have taken it and run with it, but I'm not sure that there are scriptures that specifically counter those insane statements. I'm thinking of his unscriptural claim that God lost His authority when He imparted it to us. There is no scripture to support Hagin's insane position either. But I want to throw this disclaimer, it's the doctrine that I believe to be insane. I don't want to take the position that there is no value in anything either of the Hagin's have taught. I have no doubt that they have taught some valuable things, but I also believe that their teachings must be viewed with a skeptical eye against the scripture, like all teachings from any man, and if any part passes the test of scripture it can be useful.

Father Rick said:

On the day of Pentecost, the observers thought that the 120 from the upper room were drunk. Why? Because they heard them speaking in tongues? Well, there were people in the city at that time from all over the world speaking all kinds of different languages-- so hearing someone speak a foreign language wouldn't make you think they were drunk, especially since many of them understood the languages being spoken. So obviously there was something else going on that made the observers think the 120 were drunk. And there were those there that mocked and ridiculed.

And in the middle of whatever that was that caused the observers to think they were drunk and mock them, 3000 came to Christ.

Maybe being mocked a little isn't always such a bad thing?

Click to expand...

I wonder if such behaviour would prevent people from going to:
A rock concert
A Pro Football Game

jiminpa said:

I'll have to think about that one for a day or two. Hagin has said some stuff that's just plain crazy, and I know people have taken it and run with it, but I'm not sure that there are scriptures that specifically counter those insane statements. I'm thinking of his unscriptural claim that God lost His authority when He imparted it to us. There is no scripture to support Hagin's insane position either. But I want to throw this disclaimer, it's the doctrine that I believe to be insane. I don't want to take the position that there is no value in anything either of the Hagin's have taught. I have no doubt that they have taught some valuable things, but I also believe that their teachings must be viewed with a skeptical eye against the scripture, like all teachings from any man, and if any part passes the test of scripture it can be useful.

Click to expand...

What I find crazy is the constant MISINFORMATION put forth by heresy hunters like your claims above. How many times can somebody lie on one man and then call what he said (though he never said it) crazy?

Hagin did NOT say that God lost His authority when He imparted it to us. I have read several of Hagin's books and I have never read THAT. Here is what Hagin REALLY said:


There are numerous passages of Scripture to back Hagin on the above statements. So numerous that I have to wonder why I am wasting time arguing this point. The Bible is plain that God gave man dominion (Genesis 1:26, 27; Psalm 8:3-6) and the Bible is plain and clear that Satan later took dominon over the world (Luke 4:6; John 12:31 14:30; 16:11; 1 John 5:19 and many others). Part of the redemptive work of Christ was to redeem men from the devil's dominion and restore them to God (Acts 26:16-18; Col. 1:12-14; and many others).


It is true that faith teachers teach that God has placed voluntary limitations on Himself in regards to man and the exercise of His sovereignty. When God gave man a free-will and the power to choose, God in that sense limited how His sovereignty could be exercised. Therefore in that sense man can choose to obey or disobey God with no coercing on God's part. However, this is a common ARMINIAN/WESLEYAN teaching and not by any means unique to the faith teachers.

Nevertheless, Hagin and other faith teachers have acknowledged time and again God's rightful ownership and authority over the earth and the universe. They have simply placed more emphasis upon God's COVENANTAL "give and take" reciprocal relationship with man and the fact that God limits Himself in this manner. Their is no denial of God's ability to act otherwise if He had chosen to do so.

However, the faith teachers, disputing with Calvinistic teaching that neglected man's part in exercising authority and placing all emphasis on some distorted view of God's sovereignty brought us back to the place where we walked in the restored dominion that Christ wrought for us.

I would appreciate from here on in that if anyone wants to make accusations against the faith teachers that they would please present the FACTS rather than the DISTORTION OF THE FACTS!!! Thanks.

victoryword said:

What I find crazy is the constant MISINFORMATION put forth by heresy hunters like your claims above. How many times can somebody lie on one man and then call what he said (though he never said it) crazy?

Hagin did NOT say that God lost His authority when He imparted it to us. I have read several of Hagin's books and I have never read THAT. Here is what Hagin REALLY said:

“God created everything; then He made man, Adam, and gave him dominion over all of it. God made it all for His man Adam. He gave Adam dominion over the cattle on a thousand hills, over the silver and gold, over the world and the fullness thereof. In other words, Adam was the god of this world. But Adam committed high treason and sold out to Satan. Thus, Satan became the god of this world. Jesus, however, came to redeem us from Satan’s power and dominion over us.” (Pg. 56—New Thresholds…)


In the beginning, Adam had the dominion over this world, and in that sense, Adam was made the “god” of this world. But when Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, their eyes were opened and they knew good and evil (Gen. 3:6, 7). God told Adam and Eve that in the day they ate of the fruit, they would die. Adam and Eve didn’t die physically; they died spiritually. When they died spiritually, they were cut off or separated from God. By that act of disobedience, Adam forfeited his dominion over the earth to the devil. (The Triumphant Church, p. 8)

​

There are numerous passages of Scripture to back Hagin on the above statements. So numerous that I have to wonder why I am wasting time arguing this point. The Bible is plain that God gave man dominion (Genesis 1:26, 27; Psalm 8:3-6) and the Bible is plain and clear that Satan later took dominon over the world (Luke 4:6; John 12:31 14:30; 16:11; 1 John 5:19 and many others). Part of the redemptive work of Christ was to redeem men from the devil's dominion and restore them to God (Acts 26:16-18; Col. 1:12-14; and many others).


It is true that faith teachers teach that God has placed voluntary limitations on Himself in regards to man and the exercise of His sovereignty. When God gave man a free-will and the power to choose, God in that sense limited how His sovereignty could be exercised. Therefore in that sense man can choose to obey or disobey God with no coercing on God's part. However, this is a common ARMINIAN/WESLEYAN teaching and not by any means unique to the faith teachers.

Nevertheless, Hagin and other faith teachers have acknowledged time and again God's rightful ownership and authority over the earth and the universe. They have simply placed more emphasis upon God's COVENANTAL "give and take" reciprocal relationship with man and the fact that God limits Himself in this manner. Their is no denial of God's ability to act otherwise if He had chosen to do so.

However, the faith teachers, disputing with Calvinistic teaching that neglected man's part in exercising authority and placing all emphasis on some distorted view of God's sovereignty brought us back to the place where we walked in the restored dominion that Christ wrought for us.

I would appreciate from here on in that if anyone wants to make accusations against the faith teachers that they would please present the FACTS rather than the DISTORTION OF THE FACTS!!! Thanks.

Click to expand...

I wish I were just a heresy hunter. Have you read his booklet, "Demons, and How to Deal with Them?" I have. I don't have the quote in front of me, but I assure you, that while I paraphrased, I did not change the meaning. I know for a fact that Hagin actually taught that we have to take authority over demons, because God can't. He may have moderated that stance in later years, I don't know about that, but at one time he taught that repeatedly.

I'm not rabidly anti-word-of-faith, as with all of us, they have it wrong in some ways, and I was going to stay out of it until you said that there is no scripture to refute Kenneth Hagin. I pointed out an area where Kenneth Hagin Sr. twists scripture really hard to make it fit into what he thought God showed him. You know, I have missed it when I thought God had led me to something before too, but I, at least admit my fallibility. Some teachers make doctrine of theirs, and not just Kenneth Hagin.

jiminpa said:

I wish I were just a heresy hunter. Have you read his booklet, "Demons, and How to Deal with Them?" I have. I don't have the quote in front of me, but I assure you, that while I paraphrased, I did not change the meaning. I know for a fact that Hagin actually taught that we have to take authority over demons, because God can't. He may have moderated that stance in later years, I don't know about that, but at one time he taught that repeatedly.

I'm not rabidly anti-word-of-faith, as with all of us, they have it wrong in some ways, and I was going to stay out of it until you said that there is no scripture to refute Kenneth Hagin. I pointed out an area where Kenneth Hagin Sr. twists scripture really hard to make it fit into what he thought God showed him. You know, I have missed it when I thought God had led me to something before too, but I, at least admit my fallibility. Some teachers make doctrine of theirs, and not just Kenneth Hagin.

Click to expand...

First, I was not calling YOU a heresy hunter. I was saying that such misinformation comes from them.

Second, I already know the quote that you are referring to. Hagin was having a vision in which he was talking to Jesus. Jesus is talking to him when all of a sudden a demon gets in between him and Jesus and starts making a lot of noise and a smokescreen. After some minutes, Hagin rebuked the demon and then asks the Lord whe HE did not deal with it. Jesus then told Hagin that He COULDN'T do it.

Those who have a certain view of God's sovereignty certainly have a difficult time with such a statement (the Lord COULD NOT deal with that demon). I personally do not think that such is crazy nor do I fnd it unbiblical. For example, there was a time when Jesus couldn't work in mighty miracles:


TheIt does not say that He was unwilling to do it nor does it say that He refused to do it or that He simply would not do it. It says that He was unable to do it. If language means anything then the language above says that the Lord had something that hindered Him from performing a task that He was otherwise willing to do.


I am a firm believer that because God gave man free-will, He voluntarily limited Himself to such an extent that many things depnds upon man. For example, Jesus Christ provided salvation through His shed blood, but in spite of what universalists (and Calvinists) teach, God is unable to save any person apart from His voluntary acknowledgment of the work of Jesus Christ on his or her behalf. It not a matter of His unwillingness or refusal because He is certainly willing (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9) but He is unable to apart from man's volitional submission to the redemptive work of Christ.

The same is true without exercising authority over devils. Jesus has told us that WE (not He) is to resist the devil (James 4:7; 1 Pet. 5:8, 9), WE (not He) are to stand against his wiles (Eph. 6:10-12), WE (not Jesus) are to exercise authority and cast out devils (Luke 10:18-20; Mark 6:15-20). So if Jesus has delgated the task to us, and since He must abide by His own Word, then of course He CAN'T do it. We are supposed to do it.

We are His body. The body does the work, not the head. We are the body of Christ on the earth. The head can't work alone. Jesus has voluntarily made many things dependent upon His body.

So in essence, I must say that I once agin agree with Hagin. Religion may not back him but Scripture does. So in essence, you have NOT proven that Hagin twisted any Scripture. You should have stuck with your first notion and stayed out of it.

victoryword said:

I am a firm believer that because God gave man free-will, He voluntarily limited Himself to such an extent that many things depend upon man.

Click to expand...

Why is this so hard to understand???

Christina M said:

Why is this so hard to understand???

Click to expand...

I think too much religious teaching (with a distorted emphasis on the Calvinistic view of God's sovereignty).

Father Rick said:

On the day of Pentecost, the observers thought that the 120 from the upper room were drunk. Why? Because they heard them speaking in tongues? Well, there were people in the city at that time from all over the world speaking all kinds of different languages-- so hearing someone speak a foreign language wouldn't make you think they were drunk, especially since many of them understood the languages being spoken. So obviously there was something else going on that made the observers think the 120 were drunk. And there were those there that mocked and ridiculed.

And in the middle of whatever that was that caused the observers to think they were drunk and mock them, 3000 came to Christ.

Maybe being mocked a little isn't always such a bad thing?

Click to expand...

Umm...have you actually viewed the video clips? The 120 were speaking one language which everyone heard in his own tongue, there were not several languages simultaneously (which would have caused confusion). What Hagin et al. are doing bears no similarity to that. They are not speaking in any understandable language whatsoever. Instead they are cackling demonically, rolling around on the floor, slithering off their chairs, "mooing" like a cows or "cooing" like mourning doves (I'm not sure which). Where is the edification in that?

The observers who accused the 120 of drunkenness probably did so because they had no logical explanation for the miracle of the jews hearing the same words in their own individual languages. Some unbelievers, when faced with a supernatural miracle of such magnitude, will say anything to avoid conceding the divine. So, they scoffed and mocked.

It is quite a leap to assume that on the Day of Pentecost, the men who spoke in the heavenly language were laughing, mooing, cooing, slithering around on the floor, and cackling like madmen. If they had, no one would have understood them. Everywhere else in Acts, when the holy ghost indwelled, the recipient was baptized and spoke in tongues (not necessarily in that order). There is no mention ever of any phenomenon like what we see in so-called third-wave "laughing" revivals.

While I could be convinced that the holy spirit, when it manifests, might drive out or disturb such spirits, causing them to manifest by laughing/barking, etc. while others are weeping and repenting (in spirit and in truth), there is no precedent for the holy spirit to appear in the form of mooing, barking, laughing maniacallly, rolling around on the floor, etc.

In Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964), Justice Potter Stewart conceded in his opinion that he (despite his intellectualism and learnedness) was unable to define pornography. He said, "I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it." Obscenity has been similarly described. What is happening in the Hagin (and other) videos clips is obscene, and if you can't see that or discern it, we can agree to disagree and let God judge between us. I have nothing further to say.

didaskalos said:

I wonder if such behaviour would prevent people from going to:
A rock concert
A Pro Football Game

Click to expand...

The ungodly can become quite frenzied at "rock concerts," but the spirit is unholy. I've heard they chant from satanic bibles, bite of the head of small animals, mosh, take drugs and do all manner of things which disgrace themselves. I certainly don't go to 'rock' concerts, and I stay away from football games where people get out of control, e.g. at Ohio State, where the revelers have annual riots on campus and commit arson and assaults. Sports "fanatics" treat the whole thing like it is their religion, and it is not exactly a holy worship.

My pastor graduated from Rhema Bible College and studied under Pastor Hagin in the early 80's. He has quite a few stories, but I'm reminded of the one he always uses when people get indignant about holy spirit manifestations.

Kenneth Hagin told them that wild fire is better than no fire, and besides, there are enough of you wet blankets that will put it out anyway.

I would tend to agree. I've been in some pretty wild meetings in my 26 years of Charismatic WOF services. There have been times when I just started lauging uncotrollably and I couldn't stop. One time, I laughed for 3 hours straight. Religion will tell you that's not edifying and it's a waste of time. The bible tells me that the joy of the Lord is my strength. When that did happen to me, I felt such a supernatural peace, and the next day, immediately things began to happen in my life.

Sure, some are in the flesh when these things happen and some things may be completely off the wall to our natural eyes, but I will leave you with a thought from one person that came to our church about 7 years ago and witnessed one of these services. People were laughing very LOUDLY, people couldn't stand up, they were falling down. You know what this person who wasn't even a christian told us at the end of the service? They said, "This was the most peaceful service I've ever attended." In the natural, that service was anything but peaceful, but it was just what this person needed. Oh, and the religious people that invited them were worried and embarassed and left the church shortly after. But the other guy got saved and started coming to church. Makes you go, Hmmmm.....