The Assemblies of God's position on Positive Confession

[KingZzub]

AoG can be like that in the UK, that is one of the big differences between AoG and Elim, because Elim is centrally controlled. Though with the removal of most middle management a few years ago, it is not done in practice the way it used to be.

AoG are supposed to be run by congregational vote, but that doesn't seem to happen either.

I went to a great conference at the AoG in Dundee in 1996. I saw some remarkable healing miracles.

 

[lismore]

AoG can be like that in the UK, that is one of the big differences between AoG and Elim, because Elim is centrally controlled. Though with the removal of most middle management a few years ago, it is not done in practice the way it used to be.

AoG are supposed to be run by congregational vote, but that doesn't seem to happen either.

I went to a great conference at the AoG in Dundee in 1996. I saw some remarkable healing miracles.

I joined in 1999. It was wonderful for about 2 years, then died in 2001. Yes there were many miracles I can remember in those early days........

I only remember getting one vote, the result was rigged however. The result was 'unanimous' even though myself and at least four or five others {out of a congregation of 15} voted against. The vote was on whether to accept applications for the post of pastor, the outgoing pastor's view was no, just appoint one person. I voted against this, i.e to consider the other applications received.

 

[KingZzub]

How did they rig the vote then?

 

[~RENEE~]

It is one of the things they identified and got right. Unfortunately, a good portion of their leadership in churches holds to some sort of word of faith type belief system, so the positive confession stuff still goes on under their banner.

That's good news, Arbiter, thanks for posting!

yep I carry the WOF shield yet I am AOG and attending an AOG school that happens to be WOF in it's beliefs.

 

[lismore]

How did they rig the vote then?

The result was announced as 'unanimous' in favour of not considering other applications. Unanimous means without exception.

As I myself voted as an exception, I knew right away the vote was rigged.

Later in speaking to other people, I came to the conclusion that the exceptions were numerous.................if not in the majority.

In fact all this time down the line I have not met anyone from the church who voted in the way the church leadership said.

 

[ARBITER01]

Apart from sending money off annually, the church I was in didnt seem to have any dealings with their group {AOG}. I dont think they produced a statement of beliefs or a membership form or anything like that.

I was surprised when I came across the position paper on the AOG site to see how different the AOG doctrines were from the thigns preached in that individual church.

That is what I seen also. That seems to go with the territory of wof. Since they are not a denomination, their doctrinal stances can be seen in about any church. Sometimes it is just habit from people watching tbn and following different pastors, they pick up on their speach and behaviors.

It dilutes the real doctrinal stance that the denomination was founded on.

 

[KingZzub]

That's horrific, not to mention dumb as can be. Anyone who voted no would have worked out instantly that the vote was not unanimous!

 

[nephilimiyr]

Mad Hat on
This thread is not on or about the WOF movement or doctrine. If you wish to discuss the WOF movement or doctrine please make another thread on that. This thread is on the AOG church and what they believe, and specifically asking for opinions on what is said in this link http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Position_P...confession.pdf​

Also, this forum isn't here so that you may bash the AOG church so please be mindful to how you post.

Mod Hat off​

 

[NorrinRadd]

It is in PDF format so you will need adobe acrobat to read it.

Or Foxit. Smaller and more nimble.

It is link from the Assemblies of God website.

Pretty sure they used to have it in HTML form. Don't know why they felt obliged to change that.

http://ag.org/top/Beliefs/Position_Papers/pp_downloads/pp_4183_confession.pdf

For those would like to take the time to read this, I would like to hear what you think about their conclusions in this matter.[/QUOTE]

As you can see, the paper is dated 1980. I was a new believer attending C&MA churches at that time. (As a side-note, C&MA founder A.B. Simpson was "back in the day" ca. turn of the 20th C. arguably more of a "hard-core" guy about "faith" in relation to healing than most WoF preachers.) Around '84 began attending Pentecostal churches, almost all of them in the "Faith" or "Word" camp. (That was the prevailing terminology for "Word-Faith" at that time and place.) The one I attended regularly might as well have been a full-time distributor for Rhema and Harrison House in addition to being a church. Another was very much "into" Bob Tilton, having the whole satellite hook-up and such. At that time, there was more than a little friction between us and the local AG, whose pastor at the time was a huge fan of Jimmy Swaggert and Dave Wilkerson; the friction involved our "Faith" beliefs and practices, and the fact that we accepted Christian rock music even to the point of being a main church support of a local Xian coffeehouse.

I would say that Position Paper does a pretty good job of handling the Positive Confession issue, at least as it stood back then; I don't know if WoF teaching has changed in the past decade or so. I'd say that it misses the mark in saying that PC teaches that believers can lead lives of ease and comfort, free of suffering; my experience was that PC taught that the devil would try to attack everyone. However, we were always supposed to be able to defeat the difficulty by praying in "faith," then maintaining proper confession; in other words, any time suffering DID come, it was not God's doing, and it would not last if we properly applied PC.

 

[JimB]

Sounds like a true eyewitness to the AOG back in the 80’s, a turbulent decade for the denomination. It was during that era that I became enamored with Kenneth Hagin’s teachings and joined the Rhema tribe. I loved the Word-Faith emphasis on healing but never bought into the confession-possession belief (it sounded like voodoo to me—conjuring up things with magical words). I was happy to see the AOG (my denom. of choice at the time) issue the position paper on it and that was probably the beginning of my disillusionment with the whole Rhema body of teaching. While Rhemaites (including me) talked a lot about healing we seldom saw anyone actually healed in our meetings and that frustrated me.
​

There was also a lot of talk about “prosperity” through giving—you-have-to-release-what’s-in-your-hand-before-God-will-release-what’s-in-his-hand sort of thing—and Mark 11.23 mountain-moving confessing—that hurt several young couples in the AOG church in Pasadena TX I attended at the time while I was doing graduate work at UH (c. 1979-80) who stepped out on “faith” and sunk in a sea of financial loss in the process, some losing homes and marriages and filing for bankruptcy by extending themselves too far and risking too much ("faith," they were told). It began to look like the whole Rhema thing worked better on paper and in evangelist’s stories than in real life.

And it wasn’t working for me. In 1987 I was in such serious financial straits that the bank foreclosed on my home and I moved to my present city a whipped puppy wondering why I was clinging to a belief system that did not work so well for its practitioners. It seemed to me that it worked great for the media preachers who preached it (and collected the “seed-offerings”) than for their eager hearers.
​

BTW, the real turning point, though not instant, for me was in 1986 when I attended a Signs & Wonder’s Conference in Anaheim CA and actually saw people healed—intentionally!—without hype, or confessing healing, or oil, or stage lights. The idea that I was privileged, not entitled, to be allowed to participate with God in his great work of the Kingdom and the dialed-down way Wimber & Co. approached healing that focused on results and not a stage show or proof-text theology, action and not words—just do it; not talk about it!—strongly appealed to me and that conference changed my life and service in the kingdom.

Truth is, I have had a much more effective (and prosperous) life and ministry since I abandoned the confession-possession crowd (and it took years to make the final break) than I ever would have had sticking to it. IMO, it was the wisest albeit scariest move I ever made—I was labeled a faithless compromiser of God’s Word and a heretic by my former colleagues, many (okay, a few) of which have since also abandoned their former belief system.
​

Now confession-possession may work for you and you may be happy in that tribe but it just didn’t work so well for me and others I know. It was an appealing doctrine that tickled the ears of my hearers who were looking for an easy way out of a complicated mess they had made of their lives but for the most part it didn’t work for them (or me).
~Jim

Even the smallest thing when, held close enough to the eye, can blot out the sun.​

 

[lismore]

That's horrific, not to mention dumb as can be. Anyone who voted no would have worked out instantly that the vote was not unanimous!

Yes it was a little bit odd.

I have just invited someone to Christian forums, 'handofgodministries'. He was one of the applicants for the post of pastor in that situation. He was rather upset when he heard about the rigged vote!!! { He heard about it from someone else who voted no!}

 

[KingZzub]

I saw him post, looks like a great chap.

I love the old time AoG guys. We have Melvin Banks coming to hold a crusade for us in August.

 

[NorrinRadd]

...Now confession-possession may work for you and you may be happy in that tribe but it just didn’t work so well for me and others I know. It was an appealing doctrine that tickled the ears of my hearers who were looking for an easy way out of a complicated mess they had made of their lives but for the most part it didn't work for them (or me).

If "you" refers to "me," as opposed to being the generic "you," then no, I'm no longer in that "tribe."

The "confession" stuff has always seemed to me the single clearest distinction between Word-Faith and "regular" Pentecostalism. In one way or another, most of the other aspects of WF that I find questionable seem to derive from PC.