• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

False Teachings From Kenneth Hagin.

Status
Not open for further replies.

jiminpa

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
4,171
786
✟378,396.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I want to add that I did not get my quote from anyone else. I got it by reading Hagin's booklet. I wasn't influenced by anyone to see it that way, in fact, a very dear friend gave it to me because he thought it would help me in the struggles I has having.

I don't listen to any of your heresy hunters very often and the one I have subjected myself to on occasions I am usually passionately opposed to because he attacks the person, as well as the doctrine, and obviously yanks quotes out of context.
 
Upvote 0
S

SuperDuperMan

Guest
victoryword said:
Been reading those posts by Superduperman. SDM, you are a NUT!!! You have me cracking up man :D

I enjoyed reading your posts though I don't think that I will be joining your church. Nonetheless, I hope the council approves of my posts ;)

We will fully support your posts if they contain matter that shows Oneness and Agreeability. We fully agree with agreeable debating and pointing out important aspects of scripture to others who might have missed something in their opinions of things. Teaching and informing others is very agreeable. This is dealt with in The Great Fred as Agreeabidebatabitationality. It is like football - play the ball and not the man.
 
Upvote 0
S

SuperDuperMan

Guest
didaskalos said:
I got to the word "visualization" and realized the author has no idea what he is talking about...

plus he spelled it wrong.

It is no surprise that the author has no idea what he is talking about because he has never read The Great Fred in which all things pertaining to seeing beyond the horizon are made completely clear. I think that it is because the atmosphere is much clearer in Antarctica and people can see much further than other places in the world.

The term Visualisationabilitation is defined in our founding and doctrinal document as the ability to see things in the Spirit in a way that promotes Oneness and Agreeability. A person with the attribute of Visualisationability is able to see the positive and agreeable aspects of anything that is said or written, no matter how negative it might appear to others. Therefore a person with this attribute is able to reply, not from a defensive stance, but from a positive and agreeable stance, thereby defusing any further acrimonious exchanges that might result otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

SavedByGrace3

Jesus is Lord of ALL! (Not asking permission)
Site Supporter
Jun 6, 2002
20,645
4,401
Midlands
Visit site
✟751,818.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Of course. We all knew that.

SuperDuperMan said:
It is no surprise that the author has no idea what he is talking about because he has never read The Great Fred in which all things pertaining to seeing beyond the horizon are made completely clear. I think that it is because the atmosphere is much clearer in Antarctica and people can see much further than other places in the world.

The term Visualisationabilitation is defined in our founding and doctrinal document as the ability to see things in the Spirit in a way that promotes Oneness and Agreeability. A person with the attribute of Visualisationability is able to see the positive and agreeable aspects of anything that is said or written, no matter how negative it might appear to others. Therefore a person with this attribute is able to reply, not from a defensive stance, but from a positive and agreeable stance, thereby defusing any further acrimonious exchanges that might result otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

Mikecpking

Senior Member
Aug 29, 2005
2,389
69
60
Telford,Shropshire,England
Visit site
✟25,599.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Trish1947 said:
I don't have a clue what is in Kenneth Copelands mind when he says things. That would be presumptious of anyone to judge.

But, If we have Christ in us, the hope of glory, and we were dead before, but now will live forever more by His Spirit that dwells in us.. then "I Am too"..

Jhn 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

All we need is some spiritual growth to understand these things.

He's teaching a spiritual truth here.. He's not claiming to be God.

Because Jesus lives I Am too.

Hi Trish,
You are absolutlely right that we have the Holy Spirit indwelling when we become believers.

My problem with Kenneth Copeland saying "I AM too!" is that I AM in the New Testament refers to God's name (I AM = YHWH). Example.. John 8: 58-59, "before Abraham was, I AM!". Thats why the pharisees were trying to arrest Jesus, stone him etc when Jesus was identifying HIMSELF as as YHWH from Exodus 3:14 ..I AM who I AM (YHWH literally means, the 'One who is'). I don't think even when parousia comes we will be 'swallowed up' as one with the Godhead!

Thanks for your response in this thread.
 
Upvote 0

JohnM

Regular Member
Aug 8, 2005
155
14
49
Cardiff
✟22,855.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
didaskalos said:
This is the results of a Google search:

Your search - "ransom was paid to satan" COPELAND HAGIN KENYON - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

- Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
- Try different keywords.
- Try more general keywords.
- Try fewer keywords.

Here are the results of a Google search I just ran:

Results 1 - 10 of about 44,500 for ransom devil OR satan copeland OR hagin OR kenyon

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...satan+copeland+OR+hagin+OR+kenyon&btnG=Search

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_atone7.htm

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:...opeland+OR+hagin+OR+kenyon&hl=en&client=opera
 
Upvote 0

Father Rick

Peace be with you
Jun 23, 2004
8,997
806
Sitting at this computer
Visit site
✟29,431.00
Country
Thailand
Gender
Male
Faith
Utrecht
Marital Status
Private
I just looked through the links that JohnM posted... some very interesting articles that I think would be good reading for all involved in this discussion as they are probably the first un-biased arguments/discussions I have seen. These give both scriptural and theological support for both sides of the arguement.

I am posting part of one here. I highly suggest these be read in their entirety.



The Ransom Theory -- God deceitfully bribes and tricks Satan:

This was the dominant belief in the early Christian church. It has also been called the "Classic" theory of the atonement. It was accepted by church leaders for about a millennium, from the second to the twelfth century CE. There are very few theologians outside of the Eastern Orthodox churches and the Protestant Word-faith Movement who believe in it today. 1 However, one might argue that this concept may be the most accurate theory of all, because it was accepted by Christian leaders within two centuries after Yeshua's (a.k.a. Jesus Christ) and Paul's death. This happened when memories of their teachings were still relatively fresh.

The early church father Origen (185-254 CE) was a leader of the Alexandrian School in Egypt. He suggested that, as a result of the sin of Adam and Eve, Satan had acquired a formal dominion over, and ownership of, all of humanity and the rest of the world. In order to free people from the grip of Satan, God agreed to arrange the death of Yeshua, his son, as a ransom price to be paid to the devil. This would formally compensate for Adam and Eve's sin, and would release humanity from Satan's grip. Origen wrote: "The payment could not be [made] to God [be]cause God was not holding sinners in captivity for a ransom, so the payment had to be to the devil." 2 Origen believed that Satan accepted the offer because he assumed that he would end up with ownership of Yeshua. The devil didn't realize that Yeshua would escape his clutches. God deceitfully pulled a "bait and switch" operation by resurrecting Yeshua a day and a half after his death on the cross. This left Satan without any reward. Yeshua had escaped Satan's grasp and was reunited with God. Origen concluded that humans can then be reconciled with God if they trust Yeshua as Lord and Savior. 3,4

The Ransom Theory was based, in part, on Mark 10:45 and 1 Timothy 2:6, where Origin interpreted the word "ransom" literally: 5

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Mark 10:45: "For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many."[/font]

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]1 Timothy 2:5-6: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time."[/font][font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]
(Emphasis ours)

topruled.gif

Subsequent variations of the Ransom Theory:

Gregory of Nyssa altered Origen's theory. He taught that God was not acting deceitfully. He was only repaying Satan for his own deceptions. 6 Other theologians taught that "the devil lost his dominion over mankind by unjustly trying to extend" his control to a sinless Christ in addition to humanity. 7 In later, more highly developed versions of the Ransom Theory, God is not seen as deceiving Satan. The devil is tricked by his own "inordinate pride." 4 This adaptation at least avoids having God playing an dishonorable role in the transaction.

...

Criticisms of this theory:

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]The Ransom theory, as well as other violence-based atonement explanations, suffer from an inconsistency in Christian teaching:[/font]
topbul2d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]The church has traditionally taught that a person is responsible for their own sin, and that a person cannot morally be punished for the sins of others. Of course, they deviated from this teaching, as when they taught as late as the mid-20th century that modern-day Jews were responsible for the execution of Yahweh. But in general, people were not held responsible for the sins of others.[/font]
topbul2d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]The church also teaches that the default destination for Adam, Eve, their children, their grandchildren and their descendents to the present time, after death, will be Hell because of the first parents' transgression in the Garden of Eden when they ate the forbidden fruit. All will be tortured in Hell, unless they are saved through sacraments and/or good works and/or faith. The sin of Eve and Adam were imputed to the entire human race.[/font]

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Most liberal and many mainline Christians believe that Adam and Eve were mythical humans. That is, they didn't exist as actual people. Without that belief, this atonement theory collapses.[/font]

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Some Christians note that Eve and Adam were created as proto-humans without a sense of sin. After all, they ate the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in order to develop a knowledge of good and evil. Being without a moral sense, they cannot be responsible for eating the fruit any more than an animal might. Again, if the first parents are not responsible for eating the fruit, the atonement theory collapses.[/font]

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Phil Johnson, Executive Director of Grace to You states that there is no support in the Bible for the concept that Satan has a legitimate claim on sinners. He suggests that the "Biblical word ransom simply means 'redemption-price;' it does not necessarily imply a price paid to Satan." 9[/font]

topbul1d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Several passages in the Bible imply that Christ's death was a ritual sacrifice to God, and thereby not to Satan:[/font]
topbul2d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Isaiah 53:10: "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand." King James Version.[/font]
topbul2d.gif
[font=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Ephesians 5:2: "And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour." KJV. 9 The reference to a sweet smelling savor is seen throughout the Hebrew Scriptures in reference to animal sacrifices in the Temple being cooked at the altar, with the fragrance wafting upwards towards Heaven where God was seated on his throne. The ancient Hebrews believed that Heaven was only a few hundred feet above the earth.[/font]
[/font]
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnM
Upvote 0

SavedByGrace3

Jesus is Lord of ALL! (Not asking permission)
Site Supporter
Jun 6, 2002
20,645
4,401
Midlands
Visit site
✟751,818.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I reviewed the frist 10 links found in the first search.
4 of the ten refer to the link posted by JohnM... which offers no proof that Copeland or any other faith teachers actually teaches this. It says they do.... but not a single quote supporting this accusation!
The rest all (again) simply quote each other and offer nothing more than the accusation. I could not help laughing. They all point to each other as references to this accusation. Yet not one offer any actual proof.
Sounds very much like what the pulled on Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

SavedByGrace3

Jesus is Lord of ALL! (Not asking permission)
Site Supporter
Jun 6, 2002
20,645
4,401
Midlands
Visit site
✟751,818.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
TreeOfLife said:
There is not one doubt in all of reality that he did say such a thing. Why in the world would you dissemilate in such a way? Incredible.
Teaches what?
 
Upvote 0

FrankFaith

Just don't call me late for dinner!
Aug 19, 2005
586
23
60
Mid Missouri
Visit site
✟23,346.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jim M said:
I would not want anyone to “protect” me from those who expose false doctrine that I may have fallen victim to. So long as we can stick to the doctrine and avoid smearing the man/woman, I feel that a service could be provided to help us all debate good and bad issues that confront us.

We do not wrestle against flesh and blood (people) “ but against the evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against those mighty powers of darkness who rule this world, and against wicked spirits in the heavenly realms” (issues).

So long as we can stick to issues, I say bring the heresy hunters on. They may be true watchmen (or they may just be self-appointed witch hunters), but stopping the mouth of the watchman just because he is irritating does a city no good at all.

~Jim

Well, it seems I'm in agreement with you again here, Jim.

-- Happy B-Day, too. How old are you, anyway? :sorry:

I have a question for ProAmerican, though...

Do you have a list of Kenneth Hagin's correct teachings? I'd like to see a list of them from you.

Where's the Love, bro?

Where's the Love?

:cry:

Got any Good News, or just all bad?

:confused:
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.