Negative confession?

[ydouxist]

Will it nulify our purpose? Or is it limited?

 

[Bizzlebin Imperatoris]

Could you please explain a little more what you mean?

 

[Deb4given]

Will it nulify our purpose? Or is it limited?

James 3
5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth!

James 3
6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.

James 3
8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.


1 Peter 3
10 For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:


I don't know...seems like it could nullify things if we don't tame our tongue.

 

[ydouxist]

Could you please explain a little more what you mean?

A friend of mine said 2 years ago,
"I'm convinced God is just not going to let me have a lot of money."
Some people believe by speaking that over yourself then so be it.
You'll miss the financial blessings God had in store for you.
Well 2 months ago they found natural gas on his land. He's now worth 2.5 billion!

I guess it's a good thing he didn't know what he was speaking into his life.

I do believe in the power of our words to some degree, but it does say if we are faithless he will remain faithful.

 

[Saulball]

it can cause doubt, but God is faithful to fufill what he has promised. We must stand on the word for Faith in him.

 

[rhemarob]

I believe that a negative confession will affect your life if you speak it long enough that it becomes a truth to you.

I don't think a few casual remarks will be a persons downfall but negative speak can lead to negative thinking and negative actions and most negativity is fear based and fear is the opposite of faith.

I think our words have an impact on ourselves and others whether they be positive or negative.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I believe that a negative confession will affect your life if you speak it long enough that it becomes a truth to you.

I don't think a few casual remarks will be a persons downfall but negative speak can lead to negative thinking and negative actions and most negativity is fear based and fear is the opposite of faith.

I think our words have an impact on ourselves and others whether they be positive or negative.

Jesus said you would have whatsoever you say if you believe that it came to pass when you said it. He did not say it has to only be good things.
In fact the case He was explaining might have been considered a bad thing: He cursed a fig tree.

 

[victoryword]

A friend of mine said 2 years ago,
"I'm convinced God is just not going to let me have a lot of money."
Some people believe by speaking that over yourself then so be it.
You'll miss the financial blessings God had in store for you.
Well 2 months ago they found natural gas on his land. He's now worth 2.5 billion!

I guess it's a good thing he didn't know what he was speaking into his life.

I do believe in the power of our words to some degree, but it does say if we are faithless he will remain faithful.

No doubt God is merciful. However, our beliefs often determine our actions and our words. The Bible is clear that "according to your faith (or belief) be in done to you". You will say what is in your heart (see Matt. 12) and if your heart is full of unbelief, you will verbally express that unbelief. God is often hindered from displaying His power when we are full of unbelief (Mark 6:5, 6). When that unbelief is expressed verbally, sometimes through murmering and complaining, we could provoke God's wrath and the thing promised us is revoked (see Numbers chapters 13 and 14).

However, we are not LEGALISTIC about confession. Just because I say, "Well, I'll be a Mokey's uncle" does not mean that I will turn into a monkey. God is merciful. My saying "Stuff like that really sicknes me" does not mean I will come down with the flu in the next couple of hours. However, I should be careful about speaking words that are useless, empty, and have no edifying effect on myself or on others. Words indeed have power. God's Word is full of power and when spoken out of the mouth of a Spirit led individual, they bring results.

Thank the Lord that He is merciful and remains faithful and we do not always get what we deserve. Furthermore, thank God that He looks at the heart of the individual.

On the other hand, how many examples of people can you find who have made a "negative confession" and are now worth 2 million? I bet you couldn't fill one hand counting them.

Finally, remember that we base our beliefs and doctrine primarily on SCRIPTURE and not what happens to people (experience). While we should be careful about making RIGID rules based on Scripture (especially concerning "faith confessions"), we do not want to go the other route of just saying any stupid thing that comes out of our mouth that is contrary to God's Word or His purposes for our lives and think that God is going to laugh and say, "Oh well, I'll bless so and so anyway." God is merciful, but He still expects us to grow.

 

[Theophilus7]

No doubt God is merciful. However, our beliefs often determine our actions and our words. The Bible is clear that "according to your faith (or belief) be in done to you". You will say what is in your heart (see Matt. 12) and if your heart is full of unbelief, you will verbally express that unbelief. God is often hindered from displaying His power when we are full of unbelief (Mark 6:5, 6). When that unbelief is expressed verbally, sometimes through murmering and complaining, we could provoke God's wrath and the thing promised us is revoked (see Numbers chapters 13 and 14).

You know, it's interesting. I remember a Bible scholar called David Pawson (definitely, definitely not Word of Faith!) reprimanding his audience for the loose, negative way Christians often talk. -- 'You said, "oh, I'll be sick on Friday for sure"... and now God has rewarded you for your faith '. --

Any confession that doesn't honour God as the sustainer and upholder of our lives will, in my opinion, get us into trouble. It astonishes me that some people think they can blab anything out of their mouths and it will have no effect on their lives.

 

[victoryword]

You know, it's interesting. I remember a Bible scholar called David Pawson (definitely, definitely not Word of Faith!) reprimanding his audience for the loose, negative way Christians often talk. -- 'You said, "oh, I'll be sick on Friday for sure"... and now God has rewarded you for your faith '. --

Any confession that doesn't honour God as the sustainer and upholder of our lives will, in my opinion, get us into trouble. It astonishes me that some people think they can blab anything out of their mouths and it will have no effect on their lives.

I agree 100% with you Theophilus7. While "positive confession" has been made a "Word-Faith" stigma, I think that many other Christians outside of the Faith Movement have learned that our words make a difference - positive and negative.

I had a book by Dr. David Stoop titled "You Are What You Think" (or something like that). He has a chapter in the back of the book disputing Word-Faith Movement. Yet the majority of the book is teaching the same principles and language I have heard in the Faith Movement. Neil Anderson of "Freedom in Christ Ministries" occasionally takes potshots at the Faith Movement in his books. yet, he teaches "positive confession" though he may not call it by that label. I recorded a program by Charles Stanley who is definitely not Word-Faith. The title of his message: "Positive Confession". He was teaching his people the need to make "positive confessions" based on Phil. 4:13. I could name others like Don Matzat (not WoF) and even Elmer Towns and his book, "Say It Faith."

I would agree with anyone that we Word-Faithers have occasionally bordered on LEGALISM and sometimes have taught the principle in a way that sounded like we "magical formulas" but to totally dismiss the TRUTH of this principle because of some past extremes is to hurt ourselves in the long run.

Anyway, good post.

 

[Theophilus7]

I agree 100% with you Theophilus7. While "positive confession" has been made a "Word-Faith" stigma, I think that many other Christians outside of the Faith Movement have learned that our words make a difference - positive and negative.

I had a book by Dr. David Stoop titled "You Are What You Think" (or something like that). He has a chapter in the back of the book disputing Word-Faith Movement. Yet the majority of the book is teaching the same principles and language I have heard in the Faith Movement. Neil Anderson of "Freedom in Christ Ministries" occasionally takes potshots at the Faith Movement in his books. yet, he teaches "positive confession" though he may not call it by that label.

Pawson also takes a 'potshot' in his controversial thesis, "The Normal Christian Birth". He writes:

"It is a modern heresy that the expression of a desire in words can actually bring it about ('Name it, claim it!')... This has more to do with the pagan notion of the so-called divine powers inherent in man than with faith in the biblical God."
​

I think he overstates the case, at least as far as Hagin was concerned. But he does surely have a point when he writes,

"The New Testament clearly teaches that faith needs to be put into words. But the emphasis is not on the persons by whom they are expressed; it is on the persons to whom they are addressed."
​

Recall Vreeland's observation that Word of Faith theology needs to move from a fidecentric faith confession (with the focus on the individual and his level of faith) to a theocentric confession (with the focus on God fulfilling - or choosing not to fulfill the words spoken).

Food for thought.

 

[victoryword]

Recall Vreeland's observation that Word of Faith theology needs to move from a fidecentric faith confession (with the focus on the individual and his level of faith) to a theocentric confession (with the focus on God fulfilling - or choosing not to fulfill the words spoken).

That statement would have to be better explained to me before I accept it in totality. Otherwise I have some problems with Derek's viewpoint. I used to have a disclaimer on my link to Derek's paper informing the reader that I was not in total agreement with his thesis. I removed it because after some discussions with him I thought that the statement bothered him. Unfortunately I may have to put it back there.



Anyway, I would agree with you and Derek that confession has to be "God Centered" being that God is the object of our faith. However, if I am standing on God's Word (not making foolish and ridiculous "confessions" for a new sports car, a mansion, a billion dolllars in the bank, and other lusts and greeds) then God has obligated Himself to fulfill His Word.



I do not believe that God's SOVEREIGNTY overrides His INTEGRITY. The strength behind faith and its subsequent confession is the promise of God and His willingness to fulfill it. If I can't count on God to "do as He has said" then why waste my time standing on His Word in the face of adversity?



Now Pawson, like so many of his type, misrepresents the Faith Movement. The use of the caricature, "Name it and claim it" speaks volumes to me. It shows that not only does he misrepresent what most faith teachers truly believe but he goes as far as to caricature it by using "name it and claim it" in a derogatory manner.



It is typical of people like this. In order for them to not be criticized and compared to the Faith Movement they simply misrepresent us and then promote their own teaching as being biblical. However, let's read a couple of statements by the Faith teachers themselves and see if it is anything close to "pagan"?

"Now we dare to act on what we know the Word teaches. We dare to take our place and confess before the world what the Word says about us is true." (E.W. Kenyon)

"....I am not referring to the negative confession of of sins, but to the positive confession of the Word of God and the positive confession of our faith in God's Word." (Kenneth E. Hagin, Sr.)

"When your confession agrees with the Word of God then and only then will you receive what God has promised you. A true confession of faith is always based on the Word of the Living God." (Frederick K.C. Price)

"Learn to put the WORD into confession form" (Charles Capps)

"There is a vast difference between lying and speaking by faith. A lie is meant to deceive someone. It's designed to make someone believe that something is not true. But to speak by faith is simply to speak words that agree with the Word of God instead of the circumstances around you." (Kenneth Copeland)

​

I think Pawson really needs to do his homework as he will have to answer to God for misrepresenting others (as well as some of the other folks I have mentioned before in a previous post).

 

[Theophilus7]

That statement would have to be better explained to me before I accept it in totality. Otherwise I have some problems with Derek's viewpoint. I used to have a disclaimer on my link to Derek's paper informing the reader that I was not in total agreement with his thesis. I removed it because after some discussions with him I thought that the statement bothered him. Unfortunately I may have to put it back there.

Can't think why he'd mind a disclaimer. Incidentally, I have recently put a copy of Derek's paper on my website at www.logosword.co.uk/articles/ROF.htm (divided into bite-sized chunks for easy reading), along with Mcintyre's "Healing in Redemption" (complete with the Hebrew words which I painstakingly added through the highly unsophisticated process of taking snapshots of the screen, cutting out the Hebrew words, pasting each one into MS Publisher, saving the document as a web page and extracting the GIFs!) Both come under the general disclaimer at http://www.logosword.co.uk/articles.

Anyway, I would agree with you and Derek that confession has to be "God Centered" being that God is the object of our faith.

Yup. I think problems arise here due to some of the WoF teachers' speculations on "faith as a force", or even "a heavenly materiality", words being "things" or "containers or power" etc. Vreeland's "reconstruction" includes the transition from what he apparently perceives as a vague concept of "mystical power" to "initiatory request" followed by worship.

Actually, the whole section is worth quoting. First, he notes:

"The weakness in the word of faith doctrine of positive confession is the emphasis on the words themselves and their efficacious nature to create reality.[73] The claim that faith as spoken over human lips has the power to create contradicts the word of faith insistence upon God’s provision for human need. It destroys whatever positive components the doctrine may contain. Ultimately, it breaks the most fundamental characteristic of God’s nature, his unique ability to create reality."

He then explains what he believes to be the necessary transition:

The reconstruction of this doctrine consists in making a shift from a fidecentric confession to a theocentric confession. This shift places the power not upon the words of faith themselves, but on God’s sovereign choice to honor (or not to honor) what is spoken. This frees God to operate in his sovereignty, which can be trampled under the current state of word of faith theology. God is not compelled to honor the confession of faith by some higher spiritual law. God is not compelled to move upon the behalf of the confessor because of the confessor’s “legal rights.” God is not overwhelmed by a (faith?) force and obligated to submit to the verbal commands of any person. The theological shift demystifies “faith-filled words” from mystical power to initiatory request and devotional worship. The confession of faith in this manner is only as powerful as God’s desire to act in accordance to the word spoken. This takes into account God’s freedom to act in his preordained time. This theological innovation of confessing not just sin, but confessing the truth of God’s word cannot be lost in the process of reconstruction. Yet the spirit of the practice – which pertains to confessing statements within the boundary of Scripture – must replace the unfortunate practice of confessing things outside of God’s purposes.

The mystery of God is also incorporated by making a shift to a theocentric confession of faith. God in the innumerable dimensions of his nature contains an element of mystery. When a theological system removes all mystery from God and his action in history (as is the common assumption in the word of faith movement), that system ceases to relate to the God of Scripture. Old Testament theology proclaims a transcendent God. The worshiper of Yahweh experiences a God whose actions defy human comprehension. Worshipers stand in holy awe of the God who declares, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways. As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”[74] From this perspective, confessions of faith can be made in a spirit of holy fear, culminating in a greater faith that is empowered by a transcendent God who controls the outcome.

 

[Jim B]

No doubt God is merciful. However, our beliefs often determine our actions and our words. The Bible is clear that "according to your faith (or belief) be in done to you". You will say what is in your heart (see Matt. 12) and if your heart is full of unbelief, you will verbally express that unbelief. God is often hindered from displaying His power when we are full of unbelief (Mark 6:5, 6). When that unbelief is expressed verbally, sometimes through murmering and complaining, we could provoke God's wrath and the thing promised us is revoked (see Numbers chapters 13 and 14).

However, we are not LEGALISTIC about confession. Just because I say, "Well, I'll be a Mokey's uncle" does not mean that I will turn into a monkey. God is merciful. My saying "Stuff like that really sicknes me" does not mean I will come down with the flu in the next couple of hours. However, I should be careful about speaking words that are useless, empty, and have no edifying effect on myself or on others. Words indeed have power. God's Word is full of power and when spoken out of the mouth of a Spirit led individual, they bring results.

Thank the Lord that He is merciful and remains faithful and we do not always get what we deserve. Furthermore, thank God that He looks at the heart of the individual.

On the other hand, how many examples of people can you find who have made a "negative confession" and are now worth 2 million? I bet you couldn't fill one hand counting them.

Finally, remember that we base our beliefs and doctrine primarily on SCRIPTURE and not what happens to people (experience). While we should be careful about making RIGID rules based on Scripture (especially concerning "faith confessions"), we do not want to go the other route of just saying any stupid thing that comes out of our mouth that is contrary to God's Word or His purposes for our lives and think that God is going to laugh and say, "Oh well, I'll bless so and so anyway." God is merciful, but He still expects us to grow.

Thanks victoryword.

I think this as balanced of an answer as anyone could give regarding the positive/negative confession issue.

\o/

 

[Theophilus7]

Now Pawson, like so many of his type, misrepresents the Faith Movement. The use of the caricature, "Name it and claim it" speaks volumes to me. It shows that not only does he misrepresent what most faith teachers truly believe but he goes as far as to caricature it by using "name it and claim it" in a derogatory manner.

I am inclined to be reasonably indulgent on this point. Probably Pawson has read several of the scholarly-looking volumes condemning the WoF movement and been convinced on the grounds of other people's research. WoF theology, at least as it is presented by popular proponents, is (IMO) rather messy, sometimes vague and contradictory, and with the odd shock thrown in for good measure (). It would be easy for someone to walk away with an exaggerated impression of its faults. And since it is well known that WoF teachers, at least in general, resist (and have resisted) correction, he wouldn't have bothered to get in touch with them himself. Being no lover of "health and wealth" gospels, Pawson is probably repulsed by the Word of Faith movement anyway (which he didn't mention by name) and tempted to believe the worst of it. I recall being told that, on one occasion when he was attending some conference that several teachers had been invited to speak at, one of the teachers had given a message on prosperity. Our friend, David Pawson, who was next in line, got up and gave exactly the opposite message, lauding the virtues of passive forbearance - I should imagine you'd feel the same way about large portions of his theology as he would feel about K. Copeland's .

 

[Theophilus7]

Hi didaskalos.

Jesus said you would have whatsoever you say if you believe that it came to pass when you said it. He did not say it has to only be good things.
In fact the case He was explaining might have been considered a bad thing: He cursed a fig tree.

Whilst I believe bad confessions ("I'm always sick") can affect us, I wonder at using Mark 11:22-23 as a justification for this belief. God simply isn't going to bring to pass things that he doesn't want to bring to pass, because you believe them to be so, or expect them to happen, and then go ahead and express your thoughts in words. Surely here Jesus is telling us to have faith in God to do works of power through us - as we move in obedience to His will, of course.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Hi didaskalos.


Whilst I believe bad confessions ("I'm always sick") can affect us, I wonder at using Mark 11:22-23 as a justification for this belief. God simply isn't going to bring to pass things that he doesn't want to bring to pass, because you believe them to be so, or expect them to happen, and then go ahead and express your thoughts in words. Surely here Jesus is telling us to have faith in God to do works of power through us - as we move in obedience to His will, of course.

Thanks for the response T,
If Jesus did not mean what He said in Mark 11:22-24, then I wonder why He intentionally connected these things together.
Very often I run into people who insist verse 22 means "have faith in God" rather than what it literally says "have the faith of God" or as one Greek expert says "have the same kind of faith that God does". This because they do not believe that God has or needs to have faith. Here we run into a problem.
When Jesus cursed the fig tree; was He

• excercising faith in God to do it for Him which is what would have happened if He was having "faith in God", or
• was He having faith that His own words would come to pass, which is what would have happened if He was having the "same kind of Faith as God"

The same folks who insist that Jesus was telling us to have "faith in God" are also the ones who insist that God does not have faith... which means Jesus could not have been having faith (He is God). So what caused the tree to dry up? If it was not Jesus having faith for God do it for Him and it was not His own faith... then verses 22-24 have no meaning. They do not reflect what Jesus did and are not an explanation as to why the tree dried up or how we should exercise faith.

My belief is that faith spoken words are alive. They go out into the world and bring the world into the conformity to their content. That is what Jesus did to the fig tree, what God did when He called creation into being, and what we do when we speak in faith with the "God kind of faith."

 

[Deb4given]

2 Corinthians 8
9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that you through his poverty might be rich.

The word Rich in Greek means abounding with material possesions. Does anyone care to respond to this particular scripture?

 

[Theophilus7]

Thanks for the response T,
If Jesus did not mean what He said in Mark 11:22-24, then I wonder why He intentionally connected these things together.
Very often I run into people who insist verse 22 means "have faith in God" rather than what it literally says "have the faith of God" or as one Greek expert says "have the same kind of faith that God does". This because they do not believe that God has or needs to have faith. Here we run into a problem.
When Jesus cursed the fig tree; was He

• excercising faith in God to do it for Him which is what would have happened if He was having "faith in God", or
• was He having faith that His own words would come to pass, which is what would have happened if He was having the "same kind of Faith as God"

The same folks who insist that Jesus was telling us to have "faith in God" are also the ones who insist that God does not have faith... which means Jesus could not have been having faith (He is God). So what caused the tree to dry up? If it was not Jesus having faith for God do it for Him and it was not His own faith... then verses 22-24 have no meaning. They do not reflect what Jesus did and are not an explanation as to why the tree dried up or how we should exercise faith.

My belief is that faith spoken words are alive. They go out into the world and bring the world into the conformity to their content. That is what Jesus did to the fig tree, what God did when He called creation into being, and what we do when we speak in faith with the "God kind of faith."

Thanks for the clarification. I don't agree, but we had a fairly long debate on that one a while back (if you recall) - I won't begin another of those just yet .

Cheers,

T7

 

[Theophilus7]

Anyway, I would agree with you and Derek that confession has to be "God Centered" being that God is the object of our faith.

Our friend didaskalos gives us a prime example of the fidecentric notion of confession Vreeland wishes to change (sorry to pick on you, dids ).

When Jesus cursed the fig tree; was He

• excercising faith in God to do it for Him which is what would have happened if He was having "faith in God", or
• was He having faith that His own words would come to pass, which is what would have happened if He was having the "same kind of Faith as God"

The same folks who insist that Jesus was telling us to have "faith in God" are also the ones who insist that God does not have faith... which means Jesus could not have been having faith (He is God). So what caused the tree to dry up? If it was not Jesus having faith for God do it for Him and it was not His own faith... then verses 22-24 have no meaning. They do not reflect what Jesus did and are not an explanation as to why the tree dried up or how we should exercise faith.

My belief is that faith spoken words are alive. They go out into the world and bring the world into the conformity to their content. That is what Jesus did to the fig tree, what God did when He called creation into being, and what we do when we speak in faith with the "God kind of faith."

Of course, didaskalos would insist that "faith begins where the will of God is known", as F.F. Bosworth said. Nevertheless, examine the above in the light of the passage I quoted from Vreeland's essay and I think you'll see what I mean.

T7