Is Rhema Bible School self-critical?

[Theophilus7]

Hi,

For those of you are are attending, or have recently attended, "Rhema Bible Training Center", I have a question. I'm curious. Do you ever read books that criticise your positions? Would Bruce Barron's "The Health and Wealth Gospel", or Charles Farah's "From the Pinnacle of the Temple" find a place on your bookshelves? Would you every consider reading the UK Theological Alliance's report on the Word of Faith movement (entitled "Faith, Health and Prosperity")?

I should be interested in hearing whether or not Rhema is becoming more self-critical and less isolated in the Christian world.

Cheers,

T7

 

[rhemarob]

As a current Rhema student I have read articles that are critical of WoF, some were balanced, some are not.
I'm not sure if I would call it self-critical but I like to be balanced.

I can tell you that the teaching at Rhema is much more conservative on many subjects than most people would lead you to believe, for example,
I have heard very little teaching along the lines of prosperity, most instructors are very critical of the errors of the prosperity gospel and how it is promoted on television, no names are specifically named of course.

I've never considered us to be isolated, every Rhema affiliated church I know of is part of the local ministerial organization in their cities and strives to intermingle with all denominations.

 

[Theophilus7]

Hi rhemarob ,

As a current Rhema student I have read articles that are critical of WoF, some were balanced, some are not.
I'm not sure if I would call it self-critical but I like to be balanced.

Have you read any of the titles I mentioned? Are they in your library at Rhema? From the Pinnacle of the Temple, for example, was written decades ago by Oral Roberts Professor Charles Farah as a direct reproof. DeArteaga believes Hagin eventually read some of it. What about Rhema students?

I can tell you that the teaching at Rhema is much more conservative on many subjects than most people would lead you to believe, for example,
I have heard very little teaching along the lines of prosperity, most instructors are very critical of the errors of the prosperity gospel and how it is promoted on television, no names are specifically named of course.

Having read a number of your posts it is evident that you are much more "balanced" on a number of issues than the sort of stuff I hear on the TV. I would be interested to know what you would list as "the errors of the prosperity gospel", Rhemarob. I'm guessing you have, primarily, The Midas Touch in mind (?). I quite liked that book.

I've never considered us to be isolated, every Rhema affiliated church I know of is part of the local ministerial organization in their cities and strives to intermingle with all denominations.

I meant isolated from biblical scholarship.

Cheers,

T7

 

[victoryword]

As a current Rhema student I have read articles that are critical of WoF, some were balanced, some are not.
I'm not sure if I would call it self-critical but I like to be balanced.

I can tell you that the teaching at Rhema is much more conservative on many subjects than most people would lead you to believe, for example,
I have heard very little teaching along the lines of prosperity, most instructors are very critical of the errors of the prosperity gospel and how it is promoted on television, no names are specifically named of course.

I've never considered us to be isolated, every Rhema affiliated church I know of is part of the local ministerial organization in their cities and strives to intermingle with all denominations.

Excellent post Rob. I am very glad to know that the faculty at Rhema are speaking out against the extremes. I have traced some areas where Dada Hagin has admitted to extremes in the Faith Movement. Yet Hagin Jr. seems to be the most vocal about them.

It is always better when coming from Rhema.

 

[victoryword]

Hi,

For those of you are are attending, or have recently attended, "Rhema Bible Training Center", I have a question. I'm curious. Do you ever read books that criticise your positions? Would Bruce Barron's "The Health and Wealth Gospel", or Charles Farah's "From the Pinnacle of the Temple" find a place on your bookshelves? Would you every consider reading the UK Theological Alliance's report on the Word of Faith movement (entitled "Faith, Health and Prosperity")?

I should be interested in hearing whether or not Rhema is becoming more self-critical and less isolated in the Christian world.

Cheers,

T7

Theo

As you already know, I have read at least two of those three books. I actually recommended those two to you. I liked both Barron and Perriman's books. However, I personally would NEVER give them out to students at Rhema or any Word-Faither who I do not believe is fully grounded in God's Word and can think for themselves without being influenced by others. Especially since I do not agree with many of the criticisms by Barron or Perriman.

I like the books because, unlike the majority of critics of the Faith Movement, they make every attempt to be fair and charitable. And I do agree with some of their criticism. The ones I agree with, I think the Hagins would have agreed with as well. Yet, I think that even these fine gentlmen (Barron and Perriman) did not take into account ALL the material by Word-Faith preachers that may have made a case for balance in the movement.

For those of you who are grounded, the books are highly recommended. Personally, I will NEVER recommend books by McConnell or Hanegraaff to anyone. I even have trouble recommending the book by Bowman, though he shows a bit more charity than the latter two.

 

[Theophilus7]

Excellent post Rob. I am very glad to know that the faculty at Rhema are speaking out against the extremes. I have traced some areas where Dada Hagin has admitted to extremes in the Faith Movement. Yet Hagin Jr. seems to be the most vocal about them.

It is always better when coming from Rhema.

Another look at faith was one more book you introduced me to through your website, victoryword. As you know, I'm not a fan of "the God-kind of faith" doctrine, or "faith forces", come to that . Nevertheless, there were a lot of things in that book that I did like and appreciate.

 

[victoryword]

Another look at faith was one more book you introduced me too through your website, victoryword. As you know, I'm not a fan of "the God-kind of faith" doctrine, or "faith forces", come to that. Nevertheless, there were a lot of things in that book that I did like and appreciate.

Its probably one of the few Hagin Jr. books I regard highly. Nothing against Hagin Jr. I'm just a bigger fan of Dad Hagin

 

[Theophilus7]

Hi victoryword,

As you already know, I have read at least two of those three books. I actually recommended those two to you.

...for which I am grateful.

I liked both Barron and Perriman's books. However, I personally would NEVER give them out to students at Rhema or any Word-Faither who I do not believe is fully grounded in God's Word and can think for themselves without being influenced by others. Especially since I do not agree with many of the criticisms by Barron or Perriman.

I like the books because, unlike the majority of critics of the Faith Movement, they make every attempt to be fair and charitable. And I do agree with some of their criticism. The ones I agree with, I think the Hagins would have agreed with as well. Yet, I think that even these fine gentlmen (Barron and Perriman) did not take into account ALL the material by Word-Faith preachers that may have made a case for balance in the movement.

I am writing a review on Perriman's book at the moment, as you know. I have just finished reviewing his 3-chapter synopsis of Word of Faith theology where he presents the faith message to the public before making any substantial criticisms. I made the following observation:

Missing from Perriman’s presentation is any reference to the late Kenneth Hagin Sr.’s book, The Midas Touch, in which Hagin lamented many of the faith movement’s excesses, withdrew his support from the “hundred fold” teaching, questioned the “end time transfer of wealth” predicted by many of the faith movement’s luminaries, and repudiated a number of assertions that had been made by its teachers, calling for a more moderate theology of prosperity based on the whole counsel of God. The Midas Touch was altogether too much back-pedalling for some of the leading lights, and the hundredfold formula continues to be defended today[1], but for those who accepted its message even Perriman’s summary may not be ‘nuanced’ enough!

---- Footnotes----
[1] If I am not mistaken, Kenneth Copeland, Jerry Savelle, Keith Butler and others have continued to insist that the Bible promises us a hundredfold return on our giving, although I believe it has been suggested (presumably as a concession to what Hagin believed was a word from the Lord on the subject) that it may not all come in this life.

Would you go along with that, more or less?

For those of you who are grounded, the books are highly recommended. Personally, I will NEVER recommend books by McConnell or Hanegraaff to anyone. I even have trouble recommending the book by Bowman, though he shows a bit more charity than the latter two.

I wouldn't recommend those too WordFaithers either. I am in the process of writing a brief appraisal of Bowman's work, however. This is what I have put so far:

...Still, some people have done a much better job than others of fairly representing and honestly evaluating the distinctive body of teachings that constitute the “faith message”. Recently reviewed in the Pneuma Review, Robert Bowman’s substantial critique[1] of the Word of Faith movement, The Word-Faith Controversy, is one of the most careful attempts that have recently been made to assess its teachings and classify the faith movement’s doctrinal status. Unlike other authors, Bowman managed to avoided a number of common errors:

Firstly, he did not make the mistake of viewing the faith movement as a monolithic entity, where we can safely assume that what one teaches, all are teaching, but recognised the considerable diversity and disagreement within the movement, and the need for caution in making sweeping assertions about the movement as a whole[2]. Secondly, whilst Bowman affirmed the faith movement’s substantial (and largely uncredited) borrowing from the teachings of E.W. Kenyon, he uncovered Kenyon’s chief theological influences in the Keswick/Higher Life/proto-Pentecostal movements, not the metaphysical cults. He also recognised other formative Christian influences on the faith movement, besides Kenyon. This cleared the way for Bowman to thoroughly examine the Word of Faith doctrines on their own merits against the biblical witness. Thirdly, Bowman let the ‘faith teachers’ speak for themselves at each stage of his analysis, but took pains to avoid taking their words out of context. Some of the more colourful and disturbing quotations were treated with considerable charity. Finally, Bowman observed that Word-Faith teaching, in many places, lacks internal consistency, and avoided putting words into the Word of Faith teachers’ mouths by extrapolating certain aberrant ideas to what may appear to be their logical (and sometimes heretical) consequences. Bowman’s final conclusion was somewhat ambivalent: The faith movement is “suborthodox and aberrant”, he claimed, but “simply does not belong in the category of cults along with the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons and Christian Science”[3], being “neither soundly orthodox nor thoroughly heretical” – a less scalding and more reasonably considered conclusion than previous polemics.

Nevertheless, Bowman’s book was not without its flaws, a fair handful of which have been identified in Paul King’s recent review[4]. In my own opinion, an additional failing was Bowman’s blindness to certain weak points in traditional evangelicalism that might be redressed by a more balanced appropriation of certain Word of Faith emphases. Surely one weakness – if we are to take Bowman’s book as a thorough critique of Word of Faith teaching and practice – was the comparatively small amount of ink he expended on the subjects of healing, confession and prosperity, the very distinctives for which the movement is best known. But then the Word of Faith stress on health and wealth was, for Robert Bowman, “merely the tip of the theological iceberg”[5]. The subjects of Christology, the nature of man, the nature of faith, the nature of Satan and theology proper predominated his analysis as he sought to untangle the hotchpotch of good and bad Word of Faith doctrines in these important theological categories.

--- Footnotes ---
[1] Pneuma Review; vol 7; number 2
[2] One need only spend some time among Word of Faith Christians – particularly those who have stuck with the movement for many years – to find that out.
[3] Robert Bowman, The Word-Faith Controversy, pgs 227-228
[4] Pneuma Review; vol 7; number 2
[5] Robert Bowman, The Word-Faith Controversy, pg 8

That's not final, but would you say it's a reasonable summary of the book's strong and weak points, victoryword? (Of course, we won't perfectly agree on that, but I'd like to know your thoughts.)

 

[victoryword]

I enjoyed reading both of your reviews T&. On the Perriman thing, I especially like what you stated concerning Perriman's book.

However, you did not mention that Frederick K. C. Price has stood with Kenneth Hagin in repudiating the 100fold return. If I provide you a quote and reference, would you include that in your review? I personally don't think that Fred Price is given enough credit for his own efforts to bring some balance to faith teachings.

 

[Theophilus7]

Hi,

I enjoyed reading both of your reviews T&. On the Perriman thing, I especially like what you stated concerning Perriman's book.

I'll send you the whole thing when I've finished. It's getting rather long, though...

However, you did not mention that Frederick K. C. Price has stood with Kenneth Hagin in repudiating the 100fold return. If I provide you a quote and reference, would you include that in your review? I personally don't think that Fred Price is given enough credit for his own efforts to bring some balance to faith teachings.

Yes. If you send me a proper reference I'll include it as a footnote.

T7