Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Did Hagin use Kenyon for WOF?
DAN IRVING I know the teaching of EW Kenyon treated the name of Jesus this way, and that it infected Pentecostalism, resulting in the WOF movement, but I’m not aware to what extent this is true for Oneness Pentecostals. The only personal contact I had with them was one or two services attended many years ago when I was young.
SELECTED QUOTES by by Paul L. King, D.Min., Th.D.
In 1914 E.W. Kenyon, whose later teachings would make him known as the founder of the modern faith movement, wrote an article for Carrie Judd-Montgomery’s Triumphs of Faith magazine on the believer’s authority and binding and loosing.69 Before he began to err grievously, he had contacts with the Keswick movement, so it is likely he was drawing upon the principles Roberts and Penn-Lewis had mentioned two years prior, as well as Meyer’s earlier teaching. In her 1921 book The Secrets of Victory Carrie Judd-Montgomery devoted an entire chapter to binding and loosing, admitting it was a recent perception that had transformed her ministry.
69 E.W. Kenyon, “Legal Authority,” Triumphs of Faith (December 1914): 283-284.
Christian and Missionary Alliance missionary John A. MacMillan really wrote the seminal book on the believer’s authority with his series of articles based on Ephesian 1 in 1932.73 In effect, he developed the theology at that time for the recovered understanding of binding and loosing. The seventh edition of the unabridged version of Penn-Lewis and Evan Roberts’ book War on the Saints (published in 1933) makes reference to MacMillan’s articles in the Alliance Weekly.74 No doubt MacMillan was influenced by his mentor Robert Jaffray and the teaching of Penn-Lewis. His material is referred to by a wide variety of contemporary Christian leaders, including dispensationalists like Merrill Unger, evangelical publishers like Moody Press, evangelical scholars like Professor Timothy M. Warner and charismatic faith leaders like Kenneth Hagin.75 Chinese spiritual leader Watchman Nee, who was influenced by Penn-Lewis, Simpson and Andrew Murray, also taught authoritative “commanding” prayer and the power of binding and loosing in 1934.76 So we see that by the early twentieth century the teaching on binding and loosing as the believer’s authority had proliferated among evangelical leaders.
Parallel with these developments, in 1916 E. W. Kenyon, considered the father of the modern faith movement, also believed in a concept of territorial spirits. Theologian and historian Douglas Jacobsen notes, “Kenyon believed Satan divided the world into a host of separate ‘kingdoms and states, and communities’ and gave various demons control over those territorial domains. Virtually every community was assigned a territorial demon to oppress and control all forms of life in that region of the planet.”12
Further Development of the Concept by John MacMillan
C&MA missionary John MacMillan, perhaps more than any other Christian leader of his day, began to develop more of a concept of territorial influences. Some personality trait weaknesses that are usually considered characteristic of a certain nationality or ethnic group, MacMillan suggested, are “quite as likely to be a working of that undercurrent of Satanic force.”13 He posited the atheism of Russia and the unexplainable submissiveness of its people as due to an occult power, what he calls a “hellish counterfeit.”14 For most heathen religions, MacMillan explained, “Every god is confined to definite territorial limits, outside of which his influence does not extend.”15 MacMillan viewed Daniel 10 as an example of prayer activating God’s interference with “mighty intelligences” manipulating people, governments, and circumstances.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse Ken Van Horn WEve had a significant amount of discussion in this group with DR Paul L. King who has authored a dissertation research on the subject I will offer several quotes here later while searching for the proper discussion archive HOWEVER the connection with Kenyon as minimal as it may be is resulting from John A. MacMillan
Christian and Missionary Alliance missionary John A. MacMillan really wrote the seminal book on the believer’s authority with his series of articles based on Ephesian 1 in 1932.73 In effect, he developed the theology at that time for the recovered understanding of binding and loosing. The seventh edition of the unabridged version of Penn-Lewis and Evan Roberts’ book War on the Saints (published in 1933) makes reference to MacMillan’s articles in the Alliance Weekly.74 No doubt MacMillan was influenced by his mentor Robert Jaffray and the teaching of Penn-Lewis. His material is referred to by a wide variety of contemporary Christian leaders, including dispensationalists like Merrill Unger, evangelical publishers like Moody Press, evangelical scholars like Professor Timothy M. Warner and charismatic faith leaders like Kenneth Hagin.75 Chinese spiritual leader Watchman Nee, who was influenced by Penn-Lewis, Simpson and Andrew Murray, also taught authoritative “commanding” prayer and the power of binding and loosing in 1934.76 So we see that by the early twentieth century the teaching on binding and loosing as the believer’s authority had proliferated among evangelical leaders.
https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/paul-king-john-a-macmillans-teaching-regarding-the-authority-of-the-believer-and-its-impact-on-the-evangelical-pentecostal-and-charismatic-movements/
Anonymous
AND if you ever wonder AS Philip Williams about a connection between Hagin and Kenyon’s heterodoxy as claimed by D.R. McConnell’s “A Different Gospel” Paul L. King answers in GREAT detail with some 30+ comments under this discussion STARTING with what Kyle Williams and others wrong assert in the lines of
When the term “Authority of the Believer” is used, I think most Bible students think of Kenneth Hagin’s teaching, “The Believer’s Authroity,” which was a virtual plagiarization of E.W. Kenyon’s writings. Kenyon was clearly heterodox in his teachings, as was Kenneth Hagin. Therefore, I wonder if the laying of this principle (ie. of there existing an innate authority within the believer) upon Mr. MacMillan is not rather an attempt to sanitize this doctrine from its heterodox roots. As to MacMillan, the article relates he was a minister within the CMA; an organization which became fiercely anti-Pentecostal just prior to the 1920’s (a time when MacMillan was promoting this teaching.) Also, you might recall that when F.F. Bosworth rejected the classical Pentecostal teaching of Tongues as Initial Evidence (resulting in his ouster from the AG) he joined forces with the CMA, and became a devote of E.W. Kenyon. So, I think there is more than meets the eye here.
ONE does not have to be a an of Kenyon to see THAT McConnell and Hanegraff has demonized him worse than he was in his teaching. Several scholarly writings have debunked their severe castigation of Kenyon and Hagin, including my dissertation, as well Joe McIntyre (“The Real Story of Kenyon”), Bowman (“The Word-Faith Controversy”–he worked for Hanegraaff and found his severe claims unsound and unfair), Dale Simmons doctoral dissertation on Kenyon (Simmons was originally going to co-author the book with McConnell, but found McConnell’s claims unsound and as a result did his dissertation on Kenyon–he is not uncritical of Kenyon, more sound and balanced and scholarly than McConnell). BTW, Simmons, McConnell, and myself were all mentored by the same ORU professor and early critic of word of faith–Dr. Charles Farah, who wrote “From the Pinnacle of the Temple–Faith or Presumption.” Chuck Farah and I were close friends, and he encouraged me to do my dissertation on the word of faith movement. I dedicated the book to him. He said McConnell went too far and was too harsh. McConnell also fell into moral problems and left the ministry. McConnell and I talked a long time ago. He claimed he did not know about Kenyon’s non-metaphysical holiness roots, but Simmons told me otherwise.
https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/paul-king-john-a-macmillans-teaching-regarding-the-authority-of-the-believer-and-its-impact-on-the-evangelical-pentecostal-and-charismatic-movements/
Anonymous
Troy Day what about Hagins heresies?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams as already stated in the article by DR Paul L. King and the 3 lengthy comments I just posted :
“As a theologian and biblical exegete, I am very concerned about orthodoxy and orthopraxy. And I agree that some of Hagin’s and Kenyon’s teachings are unsound. However, not all of their teachings are unsound. I analyzed both in my dissertation. They have been accused of teaching things that they did not teach. Good honest scholarship is careful to be accurate and balanced in judgment Bosworth predates and is in a different category than Kenyon and Hagin. Although I disagree with some of Bosworths teaching, I am not sure what you would call absurd. Most of his teaching comes from AB Simpson and Andrew Murray. https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/paul-king-john-a-macmillans-teaching-regarding-the-authority-of-the-believer-and-its-impact-on-the-evangelical-pentecostal-and-charismatic-movements/
Anonymous
Troy Day “a little leaven leaventh the whole lump.” Chewing the meat and spitting the bones doesn’t work if the meat is poisoned.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams this generalization without actually reading any of what I just posted assures your own heterodoxy
Anonymous
Troy Day I was in the movement for 10 years and was the Associate Pastor in a church that had left the IPHC to partner with faith Christian fellowship… I’ve read plenty of Hagin….
Anonymous
Kyle Williams I did not post a single word by Hagin in this discussion As you can read the posts you will get to the essence – BTW what you learned in 10 yrs back in the day is NOT what WOF is today but anyhow… No excuse !!!
Anonymous
Troy Day the Keswick movement was prone to error as well. Though I believe they,that is the C&MA, we’re trying to be committed Protestants, their Keswick/Higher life/Holiness tendencies made that very difficult. It’s kind of like the Church of the Nazarene. Not heretical,, but unorthodox.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams so basically you never read MACMILLAN https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/john-a-macmillan-the-authority-of-the-believer/
Anonymous
Troy Day how has word of faith teaching changed? Do they still believe that physical healing is promised in this life through the atonement? That Tithing is a means of lucrative gain? That Jesus went to hell and suffered as a sinner? That we are “little gods” and when “Jesus says “I Am” I can just smile and say “Yes, I Am too.”
If not; great!
Anonymous
Troy Day no I haven’t but am quite familiar with Keswick Spirituality
Anonymous
Kyle Williams letS stick to the research then – no need of speculations as John Mushenhouse already rightly asserted on this OP
Anonymous
Troy Day agreed I know what I have read by my own research and not McConnel’s thesis. It has been years, but so much plagiarism.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse not really sure what research McConnel’s applied in his so called thesis but Paul L. King has brought it up to the next level 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day I understand the scholarship of United and how they are Johnny come lately to the 70s charismatic party. I am sure he is a good man, but I have read the primary sources. I find any further reading of kenyon/Hagin and their ilk a waste of precious time.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse what did McConnel contributed with his research though? Pure speculation Just another baptist money maker
Anonymous
Troy Day wasn’t it a thesis for ORU? Did Hagin profit. A money maker from the prosperity buy a blessing crowd.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse McConnell did graduate work at Oral Roberts University in theological and historical studies – did he finish? No? What was the work on? Hagin? – doubtfully
Anonymous
Troy Day Do you know for sure. I remember His book was his thesis there. Again Troy please stop as I could care less about the scholarship of others when I have read for myself. Then I look at their works and judge them by my work and not just because they added to the academic speculatory property we see way too much today. I simply study the bible simply.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse I dont know but I can list all Calvin heresies for Kyle Williams if so he wishes to lead this convo.
Anonymous
Troy Day what convo?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams the one you stared 4 days ago with the question
what about Hagins heresies?
and then skipped town 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day yeah, I skipped because you didn’t address that. I asked you about several of Hagins known documented teachings and you didn’t address a thing
Anonymous
Kyle Williams I didnt? I addressed you 3 days ago by saying
Troy Day Author Admin
Kyle Williams letS stick to the research then – no need of speculations …
Anonymous
Troy Day what speculation? I studied under a pastor who went to ORU. Pastored a church that was affiliated with FCF. I’m quite qualified to speak to Hagins theology.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams about a connection between Hagin and Kenyon’s heterodoxy as claimed by D.R. McConnell’s “A Different Gospel”?
Anonymous
Troy Day I happen to think it’s plain that Hagin plagiarized Kenyon several times, that’s indisputable. But let’s suppose he didn’t and Hagins teachings are entirely his own.
Aren’t they still problematic?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams prove it!!! Paul L. King has researched defended and published a dissertation contrary to your last statement What say ye?
Anonymous
Troy Day so you’re defending Hagin’s teachings?
Anonymous
I have not much time to enter this discusion, let me give a brief review of my research, most of which is in my books “Only Believe: Examining the Origin and Development of Classic and Contemporary Word of Faith Theologies” (from Th.D. thesis through the University of South Africa) and “A Believer with Authority: The Life and Message of John A. MacMillan.” (my D.Min. dissertation at Oral Roberts University) Did Hagin Plagiarize Kenyon and MacMillan? Signs on the surface appear that he did, but several factors make the jury still out. Dr. William Artega in his book Quenching the Spirit says that Hagin had a photograph memory. I studied Hagin’s original “Authority of the Believer” from the 1960s, comparing it with MacMillan’s “The Authority of the Believer”, originally a series of articles in the Alliance Weekly, later published with more of his writings. There are sections of Hagin’s AOB that are verbatim the same as MacMillan’s AOB, without the Greek words MacMillan used–sure appears like plagiarism. However, in my research I encountered a Rhema grad w who was on the library faculty at ORU. He told me that Gordon Lindsey from Christ the Nations Institute transcribed Hagin’s sermons into his books. I listened to a cassette tape of Hagin on the authority of the believer from 1967. I found he was quoting MacMillan verbatim, reading directly from MacMillan, something that almost every preacher has done. It is very probable that Lindsey published Hagin’s sermon, but without citing MacMillan. Plagiarism by todays standard, but very common in earlier writings–I found Paul Billheimer quoted MacMilan without mentioning him, F.F. Bosworth quoted Andrew Murray without citing, etc. Regarding the issue of McConnell and Hanegraaff claming Kenyon’s teaching was New Thought, several people have debunked his claim–Joe McIntyre’s book on the True Kenyon Story; Robert Bowman, who worked with Hanegraaff, discovered Hanegraaff was in error. doing a comparison of New Thought concepts with Kenyon and Hagin–very little correspondence. Most significant, is the doctoral dissertation of Dale Simmons. Dale and Dan McConnell originally were going to co-author “A Different Gospel.” But Dale saw Dan going off in the wrong direction and making leaps of logic, and did not want to be associated with McConnells conclusions. So Dale did his own doctoral dissertation on Kenyon, and discovered, as did Bowman, very little New Thought influence on Kenyon. Most of Kenyon’s influence actually came from the classic faith leaders and Higher Life leaders, influenced by A.J. Gordon, Baptist founder of Gordon-Conwell Seminary, A.B. Simpson, and others. Yes, he was a bit of a maverick and his theology was sometimes on the edge of orthodoxy, but not New Thought. BTW, Dale Simmons, Dan McConnell, and myself were all mentored by the same godly professor, Dr. Charles Farah, an early critic of WOF, with his book “From the Pinnacle of the Temple: Faith or Presumption.” Dr. Farah said McConnell went too far. I once talked with Dan McConnell years ago and he claimed he did not know about Kenyon’s Higher Life connections, but Dale Simmons told me he tried to tell Dan but he wouldn’t hear it. Another BTW. Christian Publications, the publisher of MacMillan’s book, confronted Hagin’s publisher about the appearance of plagiarism. Hagin’s publisher rewrote his book, retitling it “The Believer’s Authority,” om which Hagin gave credit to MacMillan and said he had read his book in the 1940s,
Anonymous
probably, though neither was a worthwhile teacher.
Anonymous
Steve Losee arguably the SINGLE teaching that changed Pentecostalism toward Charismatic NAR https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/paul-king-john-a-macmillans-teaching-regarding-the-authority-of-the-believer-and-its-impact-on-the-evangelical-pentecostal-and-charismatic-movements/
Anonymous
no proof – just opinion- Troy I am not interested in discussing either hagin or Kenyon as both are false teaching wolves.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse the proof is in the dissertation by Paul L. King who has argued an exceptional scholarly case of research back to MacMillan and beyond It is worth establishing a timeline without the usual false accusations made by Kyle Williams Ken Van Horn https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/paul-king-john-a-macmillans-teaching-regarding-the-authority-of-the-believer-and-its-impact-on-the-evangelical-pentecostal-and-charismatic-movements/
Anonymous
the dissertat6ion of man and what of his background and influence. Again Troy, I have little interests in discussing heretics.
Anonymous
John Mushenhouse tagging you only because it emerged in our discussion but this this intended for all participants
WHAT did mcconnell contributed in his research? AS Paul L. King has shown ABSOLUTELY nothing
McConnell did graduate work at Oral Roberts University in theological and historical studies – did he finish? No? What was the work on? Hagin? – doubtfully
McConnell served as Senior Pastor for the Crossroads International Church in Amsterdam. – by tenancy this church one times was charismaticocostal ; their wording of DOF is strange on HSB very strange on entire sanctification
“We believe that through the indwelling Holy Spirit we can experience a progressive liberation from the bondage of Satan, the world and sin;”
arguably a very very liberal seeker church by the start of their DOF
“In the non-essentials of the Christian faith we embrace diversity. Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. One man’s faith allows him to eat everything”
and SECOND to none
7. We believe that
the believer possesses great authority
through Christ over the powers of spiritual darkness led by Satan, the ruler of this world. We actively exercise this authority
NO this sounds nothing like Hagin and MacMillan 🙂Kyle Williams
Anonymous
Hagin, Kenyon: false teachers.
Anonymous
No different than “using” your pastor or other authors as persons of theological influence.
Anonymous
Frances Merritt how do you mean? Paul L. King has built a solid case showing all sources in this equation. It is not as simple as it sounds
Anonymous
Of course he did.
Anonymous
Paul L. King has proven this was NOT the case
what proof do you offer for the opposite ? James Philemon Bowers
Anonymous
Troy Day, right. I don’t think “proof” is the right language for King or me. I did research on Hagin about 20 years ago that was published in a book titled, You Can Have What You Say: A Pastoral Response to the Prosperity Gospel. Hagin clearly considered Kenyon a mentor and borrowed many of his ideas from him. Just go read Kenyon. They were both drawing on New Thought philosophy. There were other influences, but there is definite dependence on Kenyon.
Anonymous
James Philemon Bowers this is very interesting to me personally I think Paul L. King did it some 20yrs ago I also think some 20yrs Pentecostals in America may have forgotten much about Hagin BUT I very much would like to read your research if you PM somehow THANKS – btw I first read virtually everything Kenyon and MacMillan in the 60s to no avail 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day, to no avail?
Anonymous
James Philemon Bowers I admit my conclusions were inconclusive
Anonymous
Kyle Williams Brett Dobbs Evelyn Gardiner sorry about that
I try to address everything I know
for what I do not know I relay on experts like Paul L. King James Philemon Bowers
pls tag me where you asked whatever on this OP
and I will be happy to respond with ALL I know
THANKS
Anonymous
Troy Day do you believe Hagin to be a theologically orthodox Christian teacher?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams I dont think Calvin or Luther or 100% orthodox. Which parts of Hagin are you referring to ? He was 100% good on tongues…
Anonymous
Troy Day 100% bad on Christolog?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams Christology – not really sure What did he write on Christology to consider theologically? He was 100% on sola Scriptura Sola Fide Sola Gratia …
Anonymous
Troy Day he believed that Jesus suffered in hell for sins.. he also accepted the Kenotic theory, that Christ did His miracles as a man
Anonymous
Kyle Williams Sources for this pls – is it drawn from this book? as Paul L. King addressed it?
https://www.amazon.com/Believers-Authority-Kenneth-Hagin/dp/0892764066/
Anonymous
Troy Day KENNETH HAGIN
Jesus went to hell in our place: “He tasted spiritual death for every man. He died on the Cross and took our place in spiritual death. His spirit, His inner man, went to hell in our place.”
Hagin, Kenneth E (2010-05-14). The Name of Jesus–Legacy Edition (Kindle Locations 382-383). Faith Library Publications. Kindle Edition.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams This and many others are straight from Bosworth’s Healer (1948) as John Mushenhouse Paul L. King established long ago for our group. They are not attributed to Ken H Theologically per se. There was wide range of Pentecostal preachers who believed, preached and practiced this As a matter of fact this is coming back in BETHEL full strength and we discussed it here back in the day
https://www.facebook.com/groups/pentecostaltheologygroup/posts/4122352217819762/
In the Apostle’s Creed we affirm that Jesus Christ
“descended into hell.” Exactly what and where is this
hell to which he descended? Why did he have to go
there? What did he do when he arrived in hell? And
why are his descent and our confession of it central
to our faith?
https://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/217609.pdf
NOW back to our OP are you saying Ken H. borrowed this from Kenyon or Bosworth or even MacMillan ?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams certainly a valid concern HOWEVER you are putting the fault on one person without taking under consideration the prevailing historical theology
Anonymous
Troy Day I deny that’s what the Patristics intended by Christ’s descent into hell.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams you deny WHICH part? the kenosis emptying or what?
Anonymous
Troy Day yes.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams So Jesus never went through KENOSIS?
Anonymous
Troy Day a laying aside of His divine right? Yes. A destruction of His divine nature? God forbid
Anonymous
Kyle Williams OK so what about – John Calvin’s doctrine of ‘The Person of the Mediator’ in the polemic passages of the last edition of his Institutes of 1559, to identify his idea of kenosis or ‘the concealment of divine Majesty’.
Anonymous
Troy Day concealment, not a destruction of His divine nature, in which Christ ceased to be God
Anonymous
Kyle Williams IF you mean the action of hiding something or preventing it from being known this is just a wishy washy way to say the same thing – a theological copout IF you will – the Greek word is explicit
Anonymous
Troy Day Jesus ceased to be God while on earth?
Anonymous
Both are false teachers; possibly not even redeemed.
Anonymous
were ALL your questions on this OP answered ? Kyle Williams
Anonymous
Troy Day I’ll concede that he may not have plagiarized Kenyon in the strict sense. However you seem to be avoiding the swelling elephant in the room.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams absolutely NOT I addressed all your question in full. Referred you to 2 topics you mentioned – kenosis and spiritual death and proceeded with discussion there as well YOU stopped responding when I began citing Luther and Calvin, and you appear not knowing enough about modern kenosis kenossers 🙂 like Bill Johnson from Bethel – but none of the theological terms you brought up emerge from Ken H per this here OP discussion …
Anonymous
Troy Day well bill Johnson is wildly heretical.
Did Jesus cease to be God in His earthly ministry?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams bill Johnson seems to claim that Do you have a quote from Ken H where he says the same and you can prove he got it from Kenyon – this is interesting trail DO you not believe Ken was healed in his young age by the LORD which affirmed his call to the ministry ?
Anonymous
Troy Day no I don’t believe that Hagin was confirmed in his call to ministry by the Lord. Also I don’t have the quote off hand but you know he taught kenosis and the little gods heresy
Anonymous
Kyle Williams what about his documented healing ?
Anonymous
Troy Day the Lord makes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust.
What about Todd Whites “documented healings”?
Anonymous
Kyle Williams OK so you ignore my question and deflect to another name just for argumentS sake – I challenge you to find me e direct quote where Ken H says little gods – I will wait for you on this one and shall NOT leave it alone
HOWEVER, your reference to the psalm 82 elohimS is very valid I just yesterday discussed it under the Heiser topic with Ricky Grimsley who just dont seem to get HOW heretical it is
Anonymous
Troy Day Kenneth Hagin: “You are as much the incarnation of God as Jesus Christ was. Everyman who has been born again is an incarnation.”
Anonymous
Kyle Williams yap You just googled that 🙂 that is in fact the ONLY reference you will find and refers to elohimS from ps 82 you will NOT find little gods with Ken H – you are simply confusing and conflating the topic with Benn Hinn and Kenneth Copelands teachings which is OK in some sense – BTW per OP Ken H did NOT get this from Kenyon 🙂 I will address psalm 82 under the proper OP for Ricky Grimsley to finally get
Anonymous
Publication: “Word of Faith” 1980, page 14
Anonymous
Troy Day he wrote it in a book, of course I Googled it because it’s been along time since I read his stuff, I actually don’t own any of it anymore, I left all my heretical books at the FCF church when I removed my family from that fellowship
Anonymous
Kyle Williams empty words if you ask me; You will NOT find him using the term little gods Sorry to inform you 🙂
Anonymous
Troy Day he says that every regenerate man is as much an incarnation of God as was Jesus Christ. The scriptures do not teach this.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams are you saying the SPIRIT does NOT enter every saved man? Is our nature then not changed after the divine example? Are you not NEW creatures – of course we are IN what sense are we NEW creatures except in the divine adoption? You are speaking against things we know for a fact Luther and Calvin believed
Anonymous
Troy Day New creation, yes. As much an incarnation of God (which means to be God in the flesh) as was Jesus Christ? God forbid! It is heresy, Troy. And I’m astounded that your defending it. Luther, nor Calvin, nor Zwingli, nor Knox, nor Owen, nor Baxter, nor Davies, nor Spurgeon ever taught this. No orthodox Christian would ever defend such an errant and blasphemous supposition.
Anonymous
Kyle Williams I addressed this under Heiser’s multiple elohims topic which I too reject as non-biblical and heretical
Anonymous
Troy Day well good, you should reject Hagins error as well
Anonymous
Yes, Dad Hagin learned from Kenyon’s books. Also from Smith Wigglesworth and Cornelia Nuzum.
Troy Day
NOT sure why FB banned this as spam which is NOT for MORE better discussions JOIN US directly at the page where FB does not censure much for now https://www.facebook.com/pentecostaltheology @highlight
Media: https://www.facebook.com/pentecostaltheology
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse weVE discussed this with Paul King for years NOW especially in LIGHT of new all knowing believers like Glynn Brown Jose Salinas Jared Cheshire Kyle Williams AND J.D. King who edited William DeArteaga Nevertheless I DO hope Dr King shares his findings for our @followers NOT a small issue for modern day Pentecostals-50x as Philip Williams may point out from his pure and poor popish position with the last pope
William DeArteaga
Troy Day Hi, Troy, please read the text i sentyou via messenger, I nned your help
William DeArteaga
Hi Troy, I need a new login from you. My computer was hacked and I had to whipe out a lot of stuff, Lost the login. Thanks
Troy Day
William DeArteaga
Praise God brother, much greetings from Africa Kenya in the mighty name of Jesus Christ.
God’s good to hear from you today
Troy Day
RT Paul King with Ed Brewer Dale M. Coulter Eddie L. Hyatt and John Lathrop Terry Wiles + @highlight 4 our @followers
Dan Irving
Hagin quotes Kenyon adoringly as the genius behind this false teaching.
Troy Day
Dan Irving not really the point here
If you read the discussion many were claiming
Hagin => Kenyon => McMillan
which Paul King disproved
NOT merely speaking of quoting
but borrowing and using through and through
Stanley Wayne
Yes
Pentecostal Theology
Stanley Wayne prove IT proof is needed here NOT just empty words from you as always
Stanley Wayne
Pentecostal Theology I feel the love
Read A Different Gospel by King
Jim Newbould
I do know that it was powerful
When he prayed over me,
It was powerful
Brother Jim
Troy Day
Jim Newbould YES indeed Paul King will clarify this question for our @followers later on today Philip Williams take heed on this one NOT Wagner style !
Stanley Wayne
Jim Newbould were you healed of some condition?
Dan Cross
This article has a lot of bait ads taking you places you don’t want to go
Troy Day
Dan Cross no – not really AND this is pretty lowBall
Most newspapers today and TV stations have the same
amount of ads. For a FREE resource no one is complaining
and there is no 2 ways of running a website with 500 000
and millions of visitors for FREE – if you know pls advise
Paul Hughes
Everybody who knows anything and is not in denial knows that Kenneth Hagin plagiarized books by E. W. Kenyon, who was influenced by the Metaphysics taught at Emerson College.
Troy Day
not sure WHY I am just NOW seeing this comment Paul King that sparked your publications Before responding to Mr Hughes we must be aware that John Mushenhouse unveiled him as a non Pentecostal OR wannaBe @ best . So is Glynn Brown who as a master Calvinator does NOT believe Judas lost his salvation His unitarian stance will not stand here BUT on this OP
Kenneth Hagin has not been proven to have plagiarized books by E. W. Kenyon,
and when one says BOOKS – what books 🙂 we know of only 1
Kenyon influenced by the Metaphysics taught at Emerson College is ALSO wrong. Anyone in the 19c was influences by something They are also saying Tishendorf was occult and John Darby was spiritist But ppl say lots of things without knowing much of anything such are Hughes + glynn We will keep on rolling anyways AS we are not working on bringing forth the solid proof documents of William DeArteaga on this here OP
Glynn Brown
Troy Day Judas was never saved since he died before the resurrection. You don’t know theology or else you would know that. Did John Calvin teach you this? Your heretical oneness belief is sheer nonsense.
Glynn Brown
Troy Day Tishendorf wasn’t occult,but your idol Ruckman was a zen Buddhist and a hippie.
Troy Day
Glynn Brown you are obvious hyper-calvinator who believed Judas was predestined for damnation along with all who believe this as well However, a closer examination of the historical record raises serious questions about the veracity of Tischendorf’s account. Evidence from within St. Catherine’s Monastery, along with inconsistencies in Tischendorf’s own narratives over time, suggests that the dramatic claim of finding the Codex Sinaiticus in a trash basket destined for fire may have been fabricated. This portrayal not only cast aspersions on the monks of St. Catherine’s but also provided Tischendorf with a convenient justification for removing the manuscript under questionable circumstances. By framing the monastery as neglectful custodians of ancient treasures, Tischendorf was able to present his actions as noble and necessary, rather than as a breach of trust or an act of cultural appropriation.
Glynn Brown
Troy Day you are obviously a Calvinist like your idol king James.
None of your comments even come close to proving that Tischendorf was occult in any way,except your warped mind.
Troy Day
Glynn Brown you should either learn to read English OR worse check your post-panemidc cognitive skills with professional help. The PAID type – free advise from your pastor or wife if you still have either would not help ya much Here are MY TOP 10 now where’s yours? https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/why-am-i-not-a-calvinist/ I’ll get @tj tipton to assist you
Glynn Brown
Troy Day Tischendorf either misunderstood the actions of the monks ,or he lied in order to obtain their most prized possession . That’s a far cry from being an occultist. Why do you lie and bear false witness?
Or the other hand,Erasmus prayed to dead people like Mary and the saints. Necromancy is part of the occult.
Paul Hughes
If you actually READ McConnell’s book, A Different Gospel, he puts long passages of Kenyon and Hagin booklets side-by-side and proves that they are almost identical, just slightly reworded in places.
When one talks about Christian Metaphysics, one is basically talking about Neoplatonism, which theorizes about ascending toward personal divinization through methodologies such as Contemplative Prayer, which I happen to have written a book about. Neoplatonism as religion goes back to Pagan philosophers Ammonius Saccus and Plotinus, and Christian Neoplatonists Origen and Clement of Alexandria.
Troy Day
Good morning Dr. Paul King our old friend Paul Hughes has made another irrelevant and wrong conclusion NOT even considering your research and the NEW edition of McConnell which BTW is not far from the old one – just another cash cow to republish J.D. King We will attempt to get the actual NEW research from Paul King published by tomorrow as a @highlight to our @followers and William DeArteaga who also published on it as per Philip Williams
Dan Cross
Paul Hughes I went to church with McConnell and took a postgraduate Greek reading course at ORU with him under Dr. Mansfield. When he published his books, I debated with him on the steps of the ORU library. While I have my own criticism of Bro Hagin’s theology  I said to him that his criticisms attempt to apply post graduate, doctoral academic publication standards to a country preacher who had it best a Bible college education. Bro Hagin did, however, have what I would suppose would be a photographic memory and could recite almost verbatim anything he read. And the standard did he applied to the writing of his books was the same that he applied to his sermons. In fact, brother Hagan had ghost riders who wrote his books for him compiled from his sermons and teachings. When won understands that process a major point of Dr. McConnell‘s book seems rather ludicrous.
Troy Day
Dan Cross attempt to apply post graduate, doctoral academic publication standards to a country preacher who had it best a Bible college education is RIGHT John Mushenhouse applied post graduate, doctoral academic publication standards to Glynn Brown and IT didnt work Paul King has done his extensive research right and I believe he should publish a counter McConnell book – the time for this is RIGHT and we can help like we helped William DeArteaga but we will work on a post collecting all these to discuss anew
Glynn Brown
Troy Day at best it would be nice if you could write one comment in proper English. You sound like a hillbilly.
Dan Cross
Troy Day what Baptist, Evangelical Presbyterian, or other evangelical preacher has not ripped off Charles Spurgeon sermons? McConnell did not write a book about them.
In Dr. Mansfield’s doctoral Greek reading class on Mark. He used his own book “the Spirit and gospel in Mark “. In that class, with McConnell present, I confronted Dr. Mansfield about an apparent bias in which he seemed to import into his exegesis and hermeneutic the cultural context of Tulsa charismatics into the setting in which Mark was written the train his own biases. At the time there was very much a rival between ORU seminary and Rhema Bible School that seemed to bleed through professors discourse. McConnell was there, he heard my criticisms, Mansfield failed to answer them, and he saw that I received an a for the paper that I presented in rebuttal.
I want to be very careful here because it is very easy for we ourselves to slip into the same pride that we identify in others. So I am walking on a very dangerous precipice here. But it has been my experience that there was pride on both sides of that rivalry. And I think that McConnell‘s book “academized” a prideful reaction.
The truth is that Rhema has its faith formulas and ORU has it systematic theology—and both thought they were superior to the other—a very sad occurrence in the body of Christ, especially for those preparing for his ministry
Troy Day
Dan Cross you sharing this info is MUCH appreciated
IT is indeed a MAJOR MAJOR development in our conversation with Dr Paul King Years ago I found out BH Clendennen took the whole idea for SOC from Theodore W. Austin-Sparks was born in London, England in 1888 The SOC curriculum was taken 1:1 from the School of Christ Book written by T. Austin Sparks. We thank God for the life and legacy of Brother Sparks and this revelation of the School into which Jesus brings every true disciple. We believe that apart from the Bible this is the best book ever written for the basic principles of true Christianity.
http://www.austin-sparks.net/index.html AND John Duncan Jeff Latham Nelson Banuchi literally NONE of them liked my find 🙂 there was a guy ready to kill for Clendennen
Dan Cross
Troy Day A quick Internet search reveals that Dan McConnell seems to have dropped off the face of the Earth. His social media accounts appear to be inactive. All Internet listing seem to be associated with the book and or with crossroads international Church. Looking under crossroads international Church, he is nowhere among the pastors. A search for him by name alone, yields nothing.
Paul King
Troy Day has asked me to interact with this discussion.As my schedulle is very heavy, I can respond only briefly at the moment, and as Troy has already stated, this has been discussed at length in the past. So I will give just an overview of my background in this post, then a brief bullet point response to the issues.
1. My background for this: I am an ordained Christian and Missionary Alliance (C&MA pastor, theologian, and historian, who has spoken in tongues for more than 50 years. I served on the faculty of Oral Roberts University for 16 years, as well as other colleges and seminaries
2. My first doctoral dissertation (D.Min., ORU)—600 pages—was “A Case Study of the Authority of the Believer in the Life and Ministry of John A. MacMillan.” MacMillan was a missionary and spiritual warfare pioneer with the C&MA in the 1920s, and professor of Nyack College and Editor of the Alliance Weekly 1930s-early 1950s (followed by A.W. Tozer). My biography of MacMillan distilled from the dissertation was published as “A Believer with Authority: The Life and Message of John A. MacMillan.” I also showed that MacMillan was the original seminal author on his book The Authority of the Believer, which began as a series of articles in the Alliance Weekly in the 1930s, then published as a tract or booklet, then more of his material was compiled together as a full book. I most recently published an updated and expanded version of his original classic.
3. My second doctoral dissertation (Th.D., University of South Africa) was “A Practical-Theological Investigation of Classic and Contemporary Faith Theologies”, published as “Only Believe: Examining the Origin and Development of Classic and Contemporary ‘Word of Faith’ Theologies.” My thesis was basically sorting out and discerning what is sound and what is unsound in modern word of faith theology and practice. While there is much that is unsound, not all of it is, and much of it is based, not only on Kenyon, but what I call the classic word of faith leaders—George Mueller, Hudson Taylor, F.B. Meyer, Oswald Chambers, Charles Spurgeon, Andrew Murray, A.B. Simpson, John MacMillan, F.F. Bosworth, as well as Pentecostal leaders like Smith Wigglesworth, Carrie Judd Montgomery, John G. Lake, and many others.
4. Both of these dissertations involved extensive research into Kenneth Hagin, E.W. Kenyon, and many other contemporary word of faith teachers.
5. The first academic critiques of the modern word of faith movement came from Dr. Charles Farah, Professor of Theology at Oral Roberts University, Ph.D. from the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. He first presented a critique paper at the Society for Pentecostal Studies in the late 1970s, then published the book “From the Pinnacle of the Temple: Faith or Presumption.”
6. After that came a spate of critical papers and books, most notable being Dan McConnell’s “Another Gospel” and Hank Hanegraaff’s “Christianity in Crisis.” My research showed that both books, though containing elements of truth, are highly inaccurate and grossly exaggerated, which I demonstrate in “Only Believe.”
7. The other important background information is that Dr. Farah had been involved with the Navigators before becoming a professor at ORU, and his life was invested in discipling and mentoring men. I was one of those men, as well as Dan McConnell and Dale Simmons, who was going to co-author the book with Dan McConnell, but backed out. Even though Dr. Farah (or, Chuck, as we knew him) was critical of word of faith, he believed McConnell had gone too far, and Dr. Farah had encouraged Dale and myself to do doctoral work to set the record straight. I dedicated my book “Only Believe” to Dr. Farah, but he had passed away before seeing the finished work.
8. In my next post, I will address the issues more specifically.
Troy Day
William DeArteaga in Quenching the Spirit, stated that Hagin had a pornographic is just plain wrong Philip Williams Jose Salinas Rasiah Thomas Jared Cheshire
RT Paul King literraly stated:
While that is in the realm of possibility, and I would not rule it out, such I don’t recall if DeArteaga had verifiable documented evidence, as that kind of evidence might be difficult to obtain. In Hagin’s response to Christian Publications, he alluded to revelation from the Holy Spirit being given similarly to different people, but he mentions nothing about having a photographic memory. DeArteaga also mentions Hagin as doing “informal borrowing” as other preachers do. This is more verifiable.
Troy Day
NOW THEN did/does William DeArteaga have verifiable documented evidence???
William DeArteaga
Troy Day That was 30 years ago. The evidence is cited in the footnotes.
Troy Day
William DeArteaga no NOT really – but you can post it if you would like it to read it AS Paul King stated there is no evidential document mentioned apart from what we already have been discussing here for a decade now
Paul King
Now that you have the background, I will address the issues more specifically, though briefly.
1. Yes, Hagin did use Kenyon extensively. I don’t have data on whether direct quotation or thought for thought. Dale Simmon’s paper, referenced in Point 2 below, wrote that Hagin’s plagiarism of Kenyon was minor compared to his plagiarism of MacMilla.
2. But on the authority of the believer, Hagin used MacMillan extensively. Dale Simmons wrote a 16-page graduate paper at Oral Roberts University entitled “Mimicking MacMillan” in which he showed, side-by-side, 24 statements (some of them lengthy) from Hagin’s “The Authority of the Believer” and MacMillan’s “The Authority of the Believer”, demonstrating that Hagin quoted MacMillan in many cases virtually word-for-word, and in some cases a close paraphrase. Additionally, Simmons showed a thought-for-thought close comparison. His conclusion was that Hagin had plagiarized MacMillan extensively.
3. On the surface, this plagiarism appears evident and could have been a legal issue. Hagin was confronted by the publisher of Christian Publications, the C&MA publishing house where MacMillan’s book was published. As a result, Hagin rewrote his book, titling it as “The Believer’s Authority” and acknowledging MacMillan as a source.
4. DeArteaga, in Quenching the Spirit, stated that Hagin had a photographic memory. While that is in the realm of possibility, and I would not rule it out, such I don’t recall if DeArteaga had verifiable documented evidence, as that kind of evidence might be difficult to obtain. In Hagin’s response to Christian Publications, he alluded to revelation from the Holy Spirit being given similarly to different people, but he mentions nothing about having a photographic memory. DeArteaga also mentions Hagin as doing “informal borrowing” as other preachers do. This is more verifiable.
5. In my research, I talked with a staff member of the ORU library who had been on staff at Hagin’s Rhema Bible Training Center, who gave the most likely scenario: In the 1960s, Gordon Lindsay, founder of Christ for the Nations Bible Institute, transcribed Hagin’s sermons into books. And as so many pastors have done through the years, they use other people’s material and preach other people’s sermons without mentioning whom they are quoting, so probably the case here that Hagin’s teaching on the authority of the believer probably used MacMillan’s material (as well as Kenyon’s material) and the transcribed sermons never gave a citation in the books.
6. I verified this myself, as I listened to a cassette tape of Hagin on the authority of the believer in 1967 (the same year his original book came out). Though Hagin never mentioned MacMillan in his sermon (although it is possible that he might have mentioned MacMillan before the tape recording began or in an earlier sermon in a series or conference, and/or the audience may have seen him reading from MacMillan), as I listened with MacMillan’s book in my hand, it was clear that he was quoting directly word-for-word from MacMillan, with the exception that when MacMillan would mention a Greek term, Hagin would skip over it and not mention the Greek. Again, apparent plagiarism, but not any different than what I know that many preachers do.
7. In my dissertation on MacMillan, I show in a side-by-side comparison that Wesleyan holiness preacher, Bible school president Paul Billheimer in a 1952 article for Herald of His Coming quoted MacMillan eight times verbatim without mentioning MacMillan as the source. I also show side-by-side two instances in which F.F. Bosworth in Christ the Healer cites Andrew Murray verbatim but without mentioning the source. Further, MacMillan borrows phrases from Jessie Penn-Lewis, George Pember, and perhaps even Watchman Nee (Latent Power of the Soul) without acknowledging the source. So this appears to have been common practice in earlier days, but clearly not acceptable today.
Stanley Wayne
https://www.kenyons.org/plagiarism-of-ew-kenyons.html
Paul King
To respond to Paul Hugh’s post and link to McConnell’s updated book “A Different Gospel,” I have both the original and the updated, and frankly, not much is updated. Other than his response to DeArteaga, Dan does not interact with other scholarship since his original book that, while most of them still being somewhat critical of Hagin and Kenyon and word of faith, are not nearly as critical and have much more in-depth and balanced approaches.
In 2004 I talked with Dale Simmons, who was going to co-author the book A Different Gospel with McConnell, but Dale found out that McConnell’s information was inaccurate and backed out. McConnell went ahead in spite of Simmons warnings. Dale Simmons went on to research Kenyon in-depth in his PhD. Dissertation through Drew University, entitled “E.W. Kenyon and the Postbellum Pursuit of Peace, Power, and Plenty.” Dr. Simmons concluded:
“As for Kenyon himself, it would appear that he is best placed within the Keswickean/ Higher Christian Life tradition. . . . This is not to say that there are not aspects of Kenyon’s teaching—specifically those centering on one’s confession—that he stresses to a point that is only comparable to that of New Thought. . . . It would be going too far to conclude that New Thought was the major contributing factor in the initial development of Kenyon’s thought.”
After talking with Dr. Simmons at the Society for Pentecostal Studies some time later I saw Dan McConnell and asked him about Kenyon’s Keswick/Higher Life connections, McConnell said he did not know anything about it. He was not forthright with me, and he ignored Dan Simmons. Our own mutual mentor Dr. Farah had said he had gone too far. McConnell touts his book as being updated in 2011, but he does not reference or dialogue with any of the scholarly works between his first and second edition except DeArteaga.
Here are a list of the scholarly sources,
• Dale H. Simmons, E.W. Kenyon and the Postbellum Pursuit of Peace, Power, and Plenty (Lanham, MD and London: The Scarecrow Press, 1997);
• Joe McIntyre, E.W. Kenyon and His Message of Faith: The True Story (Lake Mary, FL: Creation House, 1997),
• Robert M. Bowman, The Word-Faith Controversy (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001),
• Geir Lie, “E.W. Kenyon: Cult Founder or Evangelical Minister? An Historical Analysis of Kenyon’s Theology with Particular Emphasis on Roots and Influences.” Masters thesis, Norwegian Lutheran School of Theology, 1994;
• Derek E. Vreeland, “Reconstructing Word of Faith Theology: A Defense, Analysis and Refinement of the Theology of the Word of Faith Movement.” Paper presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Society for Pentecostal Studies, Oral Roberts University, Tulsa, Oklahoma, March 2001.
• Paul L. King, “Theological Roots of the Word of Faith Movement: New Thought Metaphysics or Classic Faith Movements,” paper presented to the Society for Pentecostal Studies Annual Conference, March 11-13, 2004, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
• Paul L. King, “A Practical-Theological Investigation of Nineteenth and Twentieth Century “Faith Theologies,” Doctor of Theology thesis, University of South Africa, 2002.
• Paul L. King, Only Believe: Examining the Origin and Development of Classic and Contemporary Faith Theologies (Tulsa, OK: Word & Spirit Press, 2008).
• Eddie Hyatt, “The Nineteenth Century Roots of the Modern Faith Movement,” unpublished paper. Tulsa, OK: Oral Roberts University, April 25, 1991.
Here is one very important study from Robert Bowman, who had worked with and for Hank Hanegraaff. Bowman took a quote to his boss about the Kenosis passage in Philippians 2, and asked Hanegraaff what he thought of it. Hanegraaff declared the quote heretical, but Bowman revealed that the quote was from Hanegraaff’s former boss Dr. Walter Martin. Hanegraaff showed he did not know what he was talking about, He didn’t know the difference between heretical and non-heretical views of Kenosis.
So Bowman did his own research on Kenyon. Taking a more scientific approach than McConnell and Hanegraaff, Bowman compared 23 standard New Thought concepts with Christian Science and Kenyon. From this statistical analysis, he concluded that while there is much in common between Christian Science and New Thought, there is “little resemblance” between Kenyon and New Thought. Further, he concluded that Kenyon is “far closer to orthodoxy than is Christian Science.” Kenyon may share some similarity with metaphysical thought, but his views are “fundamentally different.”6 He demonstrates that McConnell’s methodology is faulty, and thus his conclusions regarding Kenyon’s connections with metaphysical New Thought are deeply flawed. While there may have been some metaphysical influence, Kenyon’s views are more unlike such concepts than like.
Troy Day
Paul King WELL Dan Irving may not have both editions
but I am sure Terry Wiles does
William DeArteaga mentioned a thing or 2 in the books
while I am sure Philip Williams never read Kenyon or McMillan
My initial sense was YES on Kenyon but NO on McMillan
Now we see McMillan could have been used somewhat as well
Troy Day
BTW @paul hughes from the original discussion about a decade ago is NO theologian – more like a wanna be as John Mushenhouse calls them and trying too hard
Keswick/Higher Life Influence: Scholarly research (like Dale Simmons’ dissertation) places Kenyon more in the Keswick/Higher Christian Life tradition than in New Thought metaphysics. This challenges the long-standing claim that Kenyon was heavily shaped by metaphysical movements.
Confession Emphasis: Kenyon did stress the power of confession, which is one of the few areas where his teaching overlaps with New Thought ideas, but scholars argue it’s not the dominant influence.
✍️ Kenneth Hagin & Plagiarism Debates
Kenyon vs. MacMillan: While Hagin borrowed from Kenyon, evidence shows he plagiarized John A. MacMillan’s The Authority of the Believer even more extensively—sometimes word-for-word.
Publisher Confrontation: Hagin was confronted by Christian Publications (the C&MA publishing house) over this plagiarism, which led him to rewrite his book as The Believer’s Authority and finally acknowledge MacMillan as a source.
Photographic Memory Claim: Some writers suggested Hagin had a photographic memory, which might explain his “borrowing,” but this remains unverified.
Troy Day
in this regard Philip Williams @Stanley Wayne claims healings on conditions
Jerome Herrick Weymouth has ALL the new books and my confirm this somewhat
Troy Day
takeAways Paul King
1 Dale Simmons was going to co-author the book A Different Gospel with McConn
2 Dale found out that McConnell’s information was inaccurate and backed out.
3 McConnell went ahead in spite of Simmons warnings.
4 Dale Simmons went on to research Kenyon in-depth in his PhD. Dissertation through Drew University, entitled “E.W. Kenyon and the Postbellum Pursuit of Peace, Power, and Plenty.”
5. we have the dissertation – it was published @ DREW alongside another PhD on ROBERT college
6. s for Kenyon himself, it would appear that he is best placed within the Keswickean/ Higher Christian Life tradition.
7 McConnell said he did not know anything about it. He was not forthright
8. McConnell touts his book as being updated but references no other scholarly work except William DeArteaga
9. Hanegraaff declared the quote heretical, but Bowman revealed that the quote was from Hanegraaff’s former boss Dr. Walter Martin.
10. McConnell’s methodology is faulty, and thus his conclusions regarding Kenyon’s connections with metaphysical New Thought are deeply flawed.
Pentecostal Theology
in REGARD to our @followers today reading the 3-4 notes posted by Dr. Paul King here this THANKSGIVING week we would like to move the discussion to a NEW fresh post where his comments will receive the needed attention for discussion AS WELL the responses from @william deartega IN FACT I have heard Kenneth Hagin personally testify to the fact that many of the phrases he has used and ideas he has taught, he heard from some other preachers before he ever heard of E.W. Kenyon. It is quite possible that they were quoting Kenyon and using his material and Kenneth Hagin didn’t know the original source. Liking the sound of the phrases, Hagin added them to his preaching vocabulary. We cannot ignore the issue as proposed by one Stanley Wayne who posted article asking – If Kenyon himself wouldn’t be bothered about it all, why should anyone else? Kenyon himself would be bothered and was bothered by random interpretations of his works as the one Stan John wayne proposed. IT WAS the very goal of Dr King’s post to clarify namely such irresponsible quotes and link them with the original author and context WE will strive to followup with this one and collect most helpful responses in a future article GOD BLESS !! Glynn Brown
Troy Day
Accusations of Plagiarism
Author D.R. McConnell, in A Different Gospel, argued that Kenneth Hagin plagiarized E.W. Kenyon’s writings.
Some readers contacted Kenyon’s Gospel Publishing Society upset about this claim.
Nature of Hagin’s Books
Hagin’s books were largely transcriptions of his sermons, not written works.
Preachers often quote influences without footnotes, making it difficult to track sources.
Kenyon’s Influence
Kenyon was widely quoted but seldom credited directly.
Many ministers adopted his terminology and style, which became common in preaching circles.
Hagin himself testified that he picked up phrases from other preachers, sometimes unaware they originated with Kenyon.
Hagin’s Memory & Style
Hagin had an almost photographic memory, enabling him to recall phrases verbatim after hearing them once.
This contributed to similarities with Kenyon’s language.
Kenyon’s Likely Perspective
The page suggests Kenyon would not have been offended by others using his phrases.
He trained ministers who carried forward his teachings, and imitation was seen as a sign of respect.
Specific Example: “The Name of Jesus”
Hagin published The Name of Jesus, based on Kenyon’s The Wonderful Name of Jesus.
He credited Kenyon in the introduction and worked with Kenyon’s Gospel Publishing Society, receiving approval from Kenyon’s daughter.
Relationship Between Ministries
Hagin’s ministry maintained a good relationship with Kenyon’s Gospel Publishing Society.
Kenyon’s works were even included in Rhema Bible Training Center’s curriculum.
Conclusion
The page defends Hagin, portraying him as a great man of God.
It argues that Kenyon would likely be pleased his message of faith was spread widely by Hagin, rather than upset about plagiarism claims.
Troy Day
@followers William DeArteaga Paul King Paul Hughes Philip Williams John
Media: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=2567774716940801&set=p.2567774716940801&type=3