Rhema: The Basic Belief Of The "word Of Faith Movement"..., How does it relate to Adventism? Options

[fallible humanbe...]

PB,

On page 81 in the book, where the definitions are found, Ms. Quinn cites the following sources:

Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words
Strong's Concordance
Word Meanings In The New Testament
Word Pictures In The New Testament

- FHB

Ian,
. . . It would be helpful to know where she got the definitions, so your further definitions from references given will be helpful in this discussion.

[awesumtenor]

PB,

On page 81 in the book, where the definitions are found, Ms. Quinn cites the following sources:

Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words
Strong's Concordance
Word Meanings In The New Testament
Word Pictures In The New Testament

- FHB

Her definition came from no single one of them, however; she cobbled together a definition using parts of what each has on 'rhema' and 'logos' respectively... so the citation of those sources is not altogether true.

In His service,
Mr. J

[fallible humanbe...]

AT,

I am not sure I understand, other than you seem to be finding fault with going to a number of sources to get the fullest understanding of something in the process of formulating a position.

Are you claiming that going to a variety of sources in one's study is not a good approach? Does that mean that study Bibles, like the one I had at University with four versions comparatively across a two page spread is a faulty way to study an issue?

If you will read page 75 of her book she also used the words as applied in Scripture as she developed these definitions.

On what basis are you claiming that she "cobbled" together a definition from these sources? Do you have them, and if so can you quote them here so we can have access to that information as well?

- FHB

Her definition came from no single one of them, however; she cobbled together a definition using parts of what each has on 'rhema' and 'logos' respectively... so the citation of those sources is not altogether true.

In His service,
Mr. J

This post has been edited by fallible humanbeing: Sep 21 2007, 11:44 AM

[roxe]

What do you mean by "putting it in my own words"? Like what? Can you remember a example?
As far as "repeating it over and over for hours each day"?
or "feelings"? or "Having the "rhema" makes you a prophet."?
I'm sorry. I don't know what you are talking about. I didn't in your first post either.
I realize you no longer have the book, but the things you are saying are not in the book I am looking at, at least not that I can find. I haven't ever heard anything like that in any of the programs referred to either? That is why it would be helpful if you did have some quotes and specific examples.
Maybe you are talking about, or thinking of another book?
I don't know what else to say.
There is clearly something amiss here.

What is the book you are looking at? Can you post a picture of the cover?

[PeacefulBe]

For those who would like to search through "Exalting His Word" for themselves, here is a link to an online copy.

Many of the pages are available, but not all. There is a "search this book" feature that may allow you to get to parts that are not readily available.

This post has been edited by PeacefulBe: Sep 21 2007, 11:50 AM

[Ian]

Ian,
. . . It would be helpful to know where she got the definitions, so your further definitions from references given will be helpful in this discussion.

PB,

On page 81 in the book, where the definitions are found, Ms. Quinn cites the following sources:

Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words
Strong's Concordance
Word Meanings In The New Testament
Word Pictures In The New Testament

- FHB

Here's the first one.

Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

1 Strong's Number: 3056 Greek: logos

Word:

denotes (I) "the expression of thought," not the mere name of an object,
(a) as embodying a conception or idea, e.g., Luk 7:7; 1Cr 14:9,19;

(b) a saying or statement,

(1) by God, e.g., Jhn 15:25; Rom 9:9; 9:28, RV, "word" (AV, "work"); Gal 5:14; Hbr 4:12;

(2) by Christ, e.g., Mat 24:35 (plural); Jhn 2:22; 4:41; 14:23 (plur.); 15:20. In connection with (1) and (2) the phrase "the word of the Lord," i.e., the revealed will of God (very frequent in the OT), is used of a direct revelation given by Christ, 1Th 4:15; of the gospel, Act 8:25; 13:49; 15:35,36; 16:32; 19:10; 1Th 1:8; 2Th 3:1; in this respect it is the message from the Lord, delivered with His authority and made effective by His power (cp. Act 10:36); for other instances relating to the gospel see Act 13:26; 14:3; 15:7; 1Cr 1:18, RV; 2Cr 2:17; 4:2; 5:19; 6:7; Gal 6:6; Eph 1:13; Phl 2:16; Col 1:5; Hbr 5:13; sometimes it is used as the sum of God's utterances, e.g., Mar 7:13; Jhn 10:35; Rev 1:2,9;

© discourse, speech, of instruction, etc., e.g., Act 2:40; 1Cr 2:13; 12:8; 2Cr 1:18; 1Th 1:5; 2Th 2:15; Hbr 6:1, RV, marg.; doctrine, e.g., Mat 13:20; Col 3:16; 1Ti 4:6; 2Ti 1:13; Tts 1:9; 1Jo 2:7;

(II) "The Personal Word," a title of the Son of God; this identification is substantiated by the statements of doctrine in Jhn 1:1-18, declaring in verses Jhn 1:1,2

(1) His distinct and superfinite Personality,

(2) His relation in the Godhead (pros, "with," not mere company, but the most intimate communion),

(3) His deity; in Jhn 1:3 His creative power; in Jhn 1:14 His incarnation ("became flesh," expressing His voluntary act; not as AV, "was made"), the reality and totality of His human nature, and His glory "as of the only begotten from the Father," RV (marg., "an only begotten from a father"), the absence of the article in each place lending stress to the nature and character of the relationship; His was the shekinah glory in open manifestation; Jhn 1:18 consummates the identification: "the only-begotten Son (RV marg., many ancient authorities read "God only begotten,"), which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him," thus fulfilling the significance of the title "Logos," the "Word," the personal manifestation, not of a part of the Divine nature, but of the whole Deity (See IMAGE).

The title is used also in 1Jo 1:1, "the Word of life" combining the two declarations in Jhn 1:1, 4 and Rev 19:13 ( for 1Jo 5:7 see THREE).


2 Strong's Number: 4487 Greek: rhema

Word:

denotes "that which is spoken, what is uttered in speech or writing;" in the singular, "a word," e.g., Mat 12:36; 27:14; 2Cr 12:4; 13:1; Hbr 12:19; in the plural, speech, discourse, e.g., Jhn 3:34; 8:20; Act 2:14; 6:11,13; 11:14; 13:42; 26:25; Rom 10:18; 2Pe 3:2; Jud 1:17; it is used of the Gospel in Rom 10:8 (twice),17, RV, "the word of Christ" (i.e., the "word" which preaches Christ); 10:18; 1Pe 1:25 (twice); of a statement, command, instruction, e.g., Mat 26:75; Luk 1:37, RV, "(no) word (from God shall be void of power);" Luk 1:38; Act 11:16; Hbr 11:3.
The significance of rhema (as distinct from logos) is exemplified in the injunction to take "the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God," Eph 6:17; here the reference is not to the whole Bible as such, but to the individual scripture which the Spirit brings to our remembrance for use in time of need, a prerequisite being the regular storing of the mind with Scripture.

Notes:

(1) Epos, "a word," is used in a phrase in Hbr 7:9, lit., "(as to say) a word," RV, "(so to) say," AV, "(as I may so) say;" logos is reasoned speech, rhema, an utterance, epos, "the articulated expression of a thought" (Abbott-Smith)...

This post has been edited by Ian: Sep 21 2007, 12:17 PM

[Ian]

What is the book you are looking at? Can you post a picture of the cover?

It is exactly as PeacefulBe just posted it in post #65.

This post has been edited by Ian: Sep 21 2007, 12:08 PM

[watchbird]

I'd like to add one more element to this. Can we get someone who is actually practicing and has current knowledge of Word of Faith, Rhema today? I don't doubt the validity of the info in that which is supplied by Clay. However, since the person used to be a part of it. It's like getting all your info aobut SDAs from ex-SDAs. All their info is going to be from a stand point of why they have rejected that former belief system. Does that make sense?

The url given earlier in this thread was of the main Word of Faith Movement headquarters group, The Kenneth Hagin Ministries site. That has links to many other connected groups.

While I didn't read everything Clay pointed to, it looked to me as though he had selected some that gave very valid information. I understand your concern about getting info from those who have "escaped" the Word of Faith Movement, and the reasons why you might fear they would be comparable to the anti-sda sites that have been put up by some ex-sdas, I think if you read awhile... both in the actual history of the churches involved and what they have to say publicly about their own beliefs, you will soon see that there is little similarity between the two sets of critics as a whole.

So far, nearly all of the urls that has been posted on this thread has been from those within the Rhema Movement... including those that give definitions of Rhema. The reason is simple.... that only within the Movement is the word used in the ways described. So if you want to find the difference between ordinary usages of the word and WOF usages, it will either be from within the WOF itself or will be from Christian analysts of WOF in comparison to other Christian groups.

I don't have specific urls to suggest at the moment... whether my schedule will allow me to do current research in this area, I know not. At the time I did my lengthy research in it, there were many fewer groups, and everything was in print rather than on web.

I think that even if you were to confine yourself to the primary source material written in the official WOF sites, that you would soon see the difference between what they teach and what we believe. However, I can't be sure of that. On a slightly different topic, I followed a "teaching" for a long ways before I realized just how they deviated from Adventist teaching. Once I realized the "basic world view" difference in the underlying assumptions behind their words and practices, the differences stood out like the proverbial "sore thumb". This is what you are looking for here... not merely words and definitions, but the "world view" that is underlying those terms that seem similar to but different from the way we normally think of them.

So trust yourself... and trust God to guide you.... and venture out to learn what you can about them. Bring things back here and we can discuss them.

[awesumtenor]

AT,

I am not sure I understand, other than you seem to be finding fault with going to a number of sources to get the fullest understanding of something in the process of formulating a position.

Things are not as they seem to you...

Are you claiming that going to a variety of sources in one's study is not a good approach? Does that mean that study Bibles, like the one I had at University with four versions comparatively across a two page spread is a faulty way to study an issue?

I am claiming no such thing... either explicitly or implicitly... however that does not either prevent or preclude you from errantly inferring such.

If you will read page 75 of her book she also used the words as applied in Scripture as she developed these definitions.

On what basis are you claiming that she "cobbled" together a definition from these sources? Do you have them, and if so can you quote them here so we can have access to that information as well?

On the basis of what she said on the page Ian attached to his post... while she referred to the things you noted, the definition she is working with is not that of those study helps; it is one of her own devising, based on how she reads scripture and those study helps... which you yourself note above when you state that "she also used the words as applied in Scripture as she developed these definitions" and, although unstated, her preconceived notions of what rhema is and how it is to be used play into the formulation as well.

It might help if you didn't read your own biases into posts... it only serves to make you jump at shadows.

In His service,
Mr. J

[roxe]

It is exactly as PeacefulBe just posted it in post #65.

Thanks. Just as I thought... it is the latest version. I had her first version of the workbook, with a different cover.

Will be back later to possibly add to this posting.

[princessdi]

Thanks, Excellent WB. I have gotten a good understanding of these things long ago from friends and bible scholars who are excellent teachers. So I will mainly just be watching this one, unles we move into the " advanced" class. Just making sure that all info is provided to those who are looking for understanding. Also, as I said Adventists are good imitators, and we mimick ways and practices from others, then add out Adventist twist to them, wothout really finding out much about the ways or practices. When we get through with this, we need to move on teh praise and worship, so we can get a good understand of that also. So many things we missed trying to convince people to go to church on Sabbath, and not to eat meat......just sad.

The url given earlier in this thread was of the main Word of Faith Movement headquarters group, The Kenneth Hagin Ministries site. That has links to many other connected groups.

While I didn't read everything Clay pointed to, it looked to me as though he had selected some that gave very valid information. I understand your concern about getting info from those who have "escaped" the Word of Faith Movement, and the reasons why you might fear they would be comparable to the anti-sda sites that have been put up by some ex-sdas, I think if you read awhile... both in the actual history of the churches involved and what they have to say publicly about their own beliefs, you will soon see that there is little similarity between the two sets of critics as a whole.

So far, nearly all of the urls that has been posted on this thread has been from those within the Rhema Movement... including those that give definitions of Rhema. The reason is simple.... that only within the Movement is the word used in the ways described. So if you want to find the difference between ordinary usages of the word and WOF usages, it will either be from within the WOF itself or will be from Christian analysts of WOF in comparison to other Christian groups.

I don't have specific urls to suggest at the moment... whether my schedule will allow me to do current research in this area, I know not. At the time I did my lengthy research in it, there were many fewer groups, and everything was in print rather than on web.

I think that even if you were to confine yourself to the primary source material written in the official WOF sites, that you would soon see the difference between what they teach and what we believe. However, I can't be sure of that. On a slightly different topic, I followed a "teaching" for a long ways before I realized just how they deviated from Adventist teaching. Once I realized the "basic world view" difference in the underlying assumptions behind their words and practices, the differences stood out like the proverbial "sore thumb". This is what you are looking for here... not merely words and definitions, but the "world view" that is underlying those terms that seem similar to but different from the way we normally think of them.

So trust yourself... and trust God to guide you.... and venture out to learn what you can about them. Bring things back here and we can discuss them.

[watchbird]

I have never posted, but read a lot. This idea of Rhema concerned me, so got on the web and did some searching. This site helped me to understand it:

http://ati.iblp.org/ati/family/articles/concepts/rhema/

Thank you, grandmad.... this is a very concise statement of how the Word of Faith Movement groups define their concept and application of "Rhema". Since this is by a "true believer" it does not give us an understanding of the difference between ordinary Christian understandings and Rhema group understandings.

Ian has provided a link to a page from the book that shows Ms. Quinn's working definitions. I will add some additional information here to, hopefully, flesh out the discussion further.

. . . . .

A web page I came across yesterday dealing with the words and the issue of Pentecostal/Charismatic interpretation and usage of the said words. There is a brief historical explanation of the development/rise of the Pentecostal application/origins of the "rhema" concept that is being attributed to Ms. Quinn.

Thank you for your comments... and now that we have seen that she uses the same defininitions of Rhema as is used by the Word of Faith Pentecostal Rhema groups... I guess we can lay aside the "attributed" part of the statement?

If any who feel that she is teaching in error can work from this explanation of origin and apply it directly to specific examples of her book or her appearances on 3ABN that would be helpful.

Can anyone find examples of the Pentecostal definition and application of the Charismatic idea in her work (work or on-air)?
Or has her use of the word been wrongly connected to the issue of the Pentecostal/Charismatic teaching . . . and a wrong accusation made because of the potential controversy surrounding the word "rhema"?

- FHB

I think you misunderstand the significance of the word "Rhema". That was a clue... and an important one to me... though I heard the Pentecostal Word of Faith essences coming through on her TV presentations even before I heard of the book or that she was using the term Rhema.

PB,

On page 81 in the book, where the definitions are found, Ms. Quinn cites the following sources:

Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words
Strong's Concordance
Word Meanings In The New Testament
Word Pictures In The New Testament

- FHB

Yes, she does... but she also says that she drew her definitions "In part" from these sources. Since we have found a lot of other identical definitions, it seems to be fairly well demonstrated that she is in basic agreement with those who are leaders in the Word of Faith Rhema Movement.

For those who would like to search through "Exalting His Word" for themselves, here is a link to an online copy.

Many of the pages are available, but not all. There is a "search this book" feature that may allow you to get to parts that are not readily available.

Thank you very much for this link, PB.... this is most helpful... and really quite sufficient to show what kind of world view she has built her belief ediface on. I won't go into that today... perhaps tomorrow.... but it is there ... very plain to see ... in her very first chapter. She simply has a different view of reality than what scripture portrays. Though it is not without its echo in some Adventist circles....

I'll leave it here for now.... so sad........... ......

[LaurenceD]

The image came through just fine. Thank you for posting the definitions for rhema and logos that Shelly Quinn uses in her book. It would be helpful to know where she got the definitions, so your further definitions from references given will be helpful in this discussion. I am pasting in below definitions for the two words as found in the Wikipedia Widtionary, for "logos" and on Wikipedia itself for "rhema". I will let the reader compare Ms. Quinn's published definitions to these from the internet.

Yes, And thanks for reposting the url. And the link to the book. I was able to capture a copy of that definitions image before it disappeared...to use as a reference later. I also wondered where Quinn's definition came from. Are we putting together our own definitions here, or is there some outside and reliable source that can be used with which there is no disagreement?

One interesting thing I found under Logos, in Answers.com was this:

Some scholars of the Bible have suggested that John made creative use of double meaning in the word "Logos" to communicate to both Jews, who were familiar with the Wisdom tradition in Judaism, and Hellenic polytheism, especially followers of Philo. Each of these two groups had its own history associated with the concept of the Logos, and each could understand John's use of the term from one or both of those contexts. Especially for the Hellenists, however, John turns the concept of the Logos on its head when he claimed "the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us" (v. 14). Similarly, some translations of the Gospel of John into Chinese have used the word "Tao" to translate the "Logos" in a provocative way.

Based on Ian's post above, 1 Strong's Number: 3056 Greek: logos, and 2 Strong's Number: 4487 Greek: rhema, both words can mean utterances. Strong also says

rhema - and utterance (individ., colect., or specific) by impl. a matter or topic (espec. of narration, command, or dispute);

PS: thanks to roxe for making clear the statements in that first post. Nice to see the issue come into focus. I'm beginning to see something specific I can work with.

[Ian]

Thank you, grandmad.... this is a very concise statement of how the Word of Faith Movement groups define their concept and application of "Rhema". Since this is by a "true believer" it does not give us an understanding of the difference between ordinary Christian understandings and Rhema group understandings.

Thank you for your comments... and now that we have seen that she uses the same defininitions of Rhema as is used by the Word of Faith Pentecostal Rhema groups... I guess we can lay aside the "attributed" part of the statement?
I think you misunderstand the significance of the word "Rhema". That was a clue... and an important one to me... though I heard the Pentecostal Word of Faith essences coming through on her TV presentations even before I heard of the book or that she was using the term Rhema.
Yes, she does... but she also says that she drew her definitions "In part" from these sources. Since we have found a lot of other identical definitions, it seems to be fairly well demonstrated that she is in basic agreement with those who are leaders in the Word of Faith Rhema Movement.
Thank you very much for this link, PB.... this is most helpful... and really quite sufficient to show what kind of world view she has built her belief ediface on. I won't go into that today... perhaps tomorrow.... but it is there ... very plain to see ... in her very first chapter. [b]She simply has a different view of reality than what scripture portrays. Though it is not without its echo in some Adventist circles....

I'll leave it here for now.... so sad........... ......

You say " She simply has a different view of reality than what scripture portrays."

Perhaps tomorrow you could quote the portion in her very first chapter where you think she has a different view of reality and then show us the view portrayed in the scriptures, and explain how they are different?

It may be plain to you, but I don't understand what you are referring to. I can't see a problem.

The entire first chapter can be read here.
http://www.adventistbookcenter.com/Detail.tpl?sku=0816321477


Thanks.

This post has been edited by Ian: Sep 21 2007, 01:40 PM

[watchbird]

You say " She simply has a different view of reality than what scripture portrays."

Perhaps tomorrow you could quote the portion in her very first chapter where you think she has a different view of reality and then show us the view portrayed in the scriptures, and explain how it's different?

It may be plain to you, but I don't understand what you are referring to. I can't see a problem.
Thanks.

Ian, have you ever done any reading in basic world view explanations? If not, you may have to do some study in that area before you can understand what I mean by a "different view of reality."

If you are really serious about understanding... and I really hope that you are... then the place to go is to James Sire and his book, The Universe Next Door, where he explains the concepts of world-views and why it is difficult for someone who has never thought outside of their own views to understand different ways of looking at reality.

However, the next best thing would be to get the book I previously recommended... the smaller one by McConnell.... for he will, I think, be able to help you see the difference in world views between that held by the various Word of Faith groups and that held by mainline, orthodox, Biblical Christianity.

It would be easy enough to point you to the sentences which reveal Shelley's view of reality to me.... but that would not necessarily mean that they would tell you any thing.... unless you have some knowledge of what different worldviews are held by different people.

I shall give it some thought and see if I can think of a way to communicate what I see.... in the meantime you might help yourself and me by doing some reading in some of the Christian critiques of Word of Faith that I'm sure are available on-line, though I don't have them at my finger-tips.