Eclectic Theology and It's Natural Errors.

By: Ted Clore

The eclectic type of theology[1] of Word of Faith (WoF) naturally leads to errors of both the theology itself and the beliefs it forces into the text of the Bible. A good case in point is found in the article,"The God-Kind Of Faith"; A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Defense (Part 1) by Troy J. Edwards. In his search for confirming materials he commits a fallacy in his logic, and instead of proving his point, he reads his belief into the materials he presents. This is a typical error of the neophyte, who instead of finding a confirming opinion, reads his presuppositions into the materials he believes is showing his point of view. This unorthodox method is often said to be the leading of the Holy Spirit, but instead is the self-gratification that is felt when something seemingly supports this type of belief. Mr. Edwards has been told about his unorthodox and misleading hermeneutics, and instead of showing a willingness to change his method and the materials he has written, has avoided the appeal of several including myself to correct his articles.

This approach to theology, although claimed to be approaching scripture to find truth, is in fact approaching scripture with an agenda that only can see through the presuppositions and error it burdens itself with. Often the promoter of ideas coming from this method reject the experts in a particular field and disdains the academic credentials and achievements of these individuals while claiming that the Holy Spirit is their teacher. They often have no need for those that are experts and have achieved high degree within a field that is reviewed by peers where they are accountable when the Holy Spirit is their teacher. But when these experts, ministers and leaders agree upon a point of the theology being promoted they are quick to seize the opportunity and claim them in support of their belief. Mr. Edwards is one of these individuals. I have had discussions with him where I have pointed out the opinion of someone that has expertise in a field, only to have him reject that expertise. And then later, he will cite the same person when he agrees with him, using that person as one of authority for his belief.

Case in point.

Mr Edwards Presupposition: "In Kenneth Hagin's book, New Thresholds of Faith, he states that the margin of Mr. Hagin’s Bible reads Have the faith of God. He goes on to state that Greek scholars say that this should be translated as "The God Kind of Faith."

Edwards accepts that Hagin's view is a proper view and is going to make the case for the believer having “the kind of faith God has”. In fact, he will in a few sentences make the statement that the believer has the "faith of God", meaning the very same faith that God has. But that is not what I want to concentrate on now, instead I want to show how WoF theology works with its approach to scripture. Instead of looking to scripture to establish its doctrine, it reads into scripture (eisogesis) and supporting materials it uses. The assumptions are what becomes the driving force and it uses them to show what it has already concluded as “truth”. Edwards is typical of this theology in his approach.

In his eclectic approach to show his belief, Edwards' looks for translations that will use the phrase "faith of God" as it is translated in Mark 11:22. Here is what the KJV says:

And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God. (Mar 11:22 KJV)

Notice it is translated "Have faith in God".

Edwards is looking to show that this means, "have faith of God", meaning having the "God kind of faith", which was in the marginal notes of Kenneth Hagin's Bible. This is a redefining of the meaning of biblical faith, which I will show in another article. Now his assumption before we go any further is that faith is a supernatural gift of God, and that God has faith that He gives to the believer. Notice the distinction here is that God has faith, and it is this divine faith that He gives to the believer. His faith is different than natural faith, because this faith is given to allow the believer to have "the God kind of faith". This is a redefining of the historical and orthodox definition of faith, which is defined as faithfulness, fidelity, reliance, belief and trust in God, or upon the ability of God. Instead, he is going to try and show that this "God kind of faith" is an ability to create and accomplish god-like acts with an attribute of the divine ability. This redefinition from believing God to having God's attributes is found in his presupposition stated at the beginning of the post.

Edwards lists translations that he feels tells us that the believer has the faith of God, he says:

"My research has shown that there are Bible translations that affirm that Mark 11:22 can indeed be translated as "Faith of God" rather than "Faith in God." Take a moment to read through the translations below:

And Jesus answering saith to them, 'Have faith of God; for verily I say to you, that whoever may say to this mount, Be taken up, and be cast into the sea, and may not doubt in his heart, but may believe that the things that he saith do come to pass, it shall be to him whatever he may say. Because of this I say to you, all whatever -- praying -- ye do ask, believe that ye receive, and it shall be to you. (Mark 11:22-24; Young's Literal Translation)

And answering Jesus said to them, Have faith of God. For truly I say to you that whoever shall say to this mountain, Be moved and be cast into the sea, and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that what he said shall occur, he shall have whatever he said. Therefore I say to you, All things, whatever you ask, praying, believe that you shall receive them, and it will be to you. (Mark 11:22-24; Modern King James Version, © 1962-1998).

And answering, Jesus said to them, Have faith of God. For truly I say to you, Whoever says to this mountain, Be taken up and be thrown into the sea, and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will happen, it will be to him, whatever he says. Therefore I say to you, All things, whatever you ask, praying, believe that you will receive, and it will be to you. (Mark 11:22-24; Literal Translation of the Bible)

And Jesus answering, saith to them: Have the faith of God. Amen I say to you that whosoever shall say to this mountain, Be thou removed and be cast into the sea, and shall not stagger in his heart, but be believe that whatsoever he saith shall be done; it shall be done unto him. Therefore I say unto you, all things, whatsoever you ask when ye pray, believe that you shall receive: and they shall come unto you. (Mark 11:22-24; The Douay Rheims Bible)

And Jesus, answering, saith unto them, "Have the faith of God." Verily I say to you, whosoever says to this mountain, 'Be taken up and cast into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says comes to pass; he shall have it. Therefore, I say to you, all things whatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe that ye received them, and ye shall have them. (Mark 11:22-23; The Worrell New Testament)

All translations that have the phrase "have faith of God." His belief is that he thinks he is showing that the scriptures is telling us to have "the God kind of faith", when in fact, he is reading this into the verse. He says:

"So far we see five translations that confirm that Mark 11:22 can be translated "have the faith of God" vice "have faith in God." Don't let anyone tell you that it does not make a difference whether we use of or in when dealing with Mark 11:22. These two prepositions describe the source of your faith. One finds it's origin in God Himself while the other finds it's source in us. I believe that Jesus is telling us in Mark 11:22 that the source for the faith that we need to move mountains comes from God Himself. The late Greek Scholar, A.S. Worrell said this in his notes on Mark 11:22-23:" Emphasis mine

His mistake is thinking that there is a discrepancy in the translations and that "in" and "of"; are a distinction of source. He is proposing that there is a conflict of translation between those that use "of" and those that use "in". This is his reading into the verse, a predetermined belief and presupposition, that the believer has the "faith of God" or as he stated it "the God kind of faith". In fact, these translations are not making a distinction at all, both are agreeing in the direction of the faith. The faith is directed at God and in His ability, and neither is telling us what is the source of faith. In other words, the text is telling us have faith in God's ability, and it matters little if we say it have faith in God"s ability or have faith of God's ability, the meaning is the same. Just like the various translations tell us.

Edwards assumes that the translators are making a distinction of source, when in fact they are not and they are agreeing in the object that faith is placed upon. His reading is that we should "have the God kind of faith" when the Apostles meaning is that we should have faith "of" God's ability, meaning we should have faith "in" God's ability.

He continues:

"A.S. Worrell, Robert Young, and the translators of the Douay Rheims Bible were not the only ones who believed this to be the correct translation of Mark 11:22. In the Original 1599 Geneva Bible notes on Mark 11:22 says "The faith of God is that assured faith and trust which we have in him."[5] A small note on Mark 11:22 in R.A. Torrey's Treasury of Scripture Knowledge says, "faith in God. or, the faith of God."[6] So perhaps the margin of Kenneth Hagin's Bible was not totally wrong after all." (Emphasis Edwards).

Edwards has now, because of presuppositions, started reading the commentaries and the translations he uses in the same manner. He asserts that Worrell, Young and the Douy Rheims Bible in translating this passage support his presupposition. Not that he has shown that they do, he has only quoted the translation, then asserted that they agree with his presupposition. He hasn’t given any of their opinions about translating, but instead has taken their translation and then said they are agreeing with him in asserting that there is a distinction between “of” and “in”. Notice he has taken the Geneva Bible as well, and read the commentary as "The faith of God is that assured faith and trust which we have in him" and highlighted the "faith of God". But the commentary goes on to say that this faith is "that assured faith and trust we have in Him." Nowhere is it implied that that faith is the "God kind of faith" that Hagin and the WoF doctrine assumes from the start. Here is the Geneva Bible verse and commentary:

And Iesus answered, and said vnto them, Haue^(e) the faith of God. (Mar 11:22 Geneva)

(e) The faith of God is that assured faith and trust which we have in him.

He does the same with Torrey's comment, which says "faith in God Or the faith of God." I would have you note that this is the entire comment by Torrey on this clause. How can Edwards’ know that Torrey was making a distinction here? Torrey was pointing out that either translation was proper, and makes no appeal to whether “in” or “of” are making some kind of distinction, he just says “faith in God Or faith of God.”. Torrey is not making a distinction of the source, but affirming the object of the faith. He with his statement is defining them exactly alike and this apologist doesn't realize that he is reading his supposition in to the commentary, but instead sees the phrase "the faith of God" and assumes this confirms his presupposition. Torrey is not referencing "the God kind of faith" which Edwards has defined previously, and the disingenuous theology and motives of Edwards’ theology is clearly seen.

With this paragraph the WoF apologist has now read his assumptions into the meaning of something that clearly refutes his claim and doesn't realize that both the text and the commentaries are saying something quite different than his asserted meaning, which is being read into the text of both the scriptures and the commentaries. In his zeal for his agenda, to propagate his view, Edwards’ blindly has taken things that refute him and his belief, and read them in such a manner to think that the reader can’t see his agenda. BTW, Hagin was wrong, and his use of the verse is quite misplaced, and Edwards continues in the same error.

Edwards says:

"However, does this mean that we can take the statement "the faith of God" and imply that it is "The God Kind of Faith?" Well, before I answer that, let's read two other Bible translations of Mark 11:22-24 that might just make this implication:"

And Jesus, answering, said to them, Have God's faith. Truly I say to you, Whoever says to this mountain, Be taken up and be put into the sea; and has no doubt in his heart, but has faith that what he says will come about, he will have his desire. For this reason I say to you, Whatever you make a request for in prayer, have faith that it has been given to you, and you will have it. (The Bible In Basic English)

He responded, "Have the kind of trust that comes from God! Yes! I tell you that whoever does not doubt in his heart but trusts that what he says will happen can say to this mountain, 'Go throw yourself into the sea!' and it will be done for him. Therefore, I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, trust that you are receiving it, and it will be yours. (The Jewish New Testament by David Stern)

Now we have it. His eclectic style of theology has paid-off in his mind. He believes he has now justified the translations he has hunted for that has his word’s stated in a manner that shows his opinion. A Bible translated with the purpose of having a very limited vocabulary, based upon 850 English words and a translation that has the agenda of restoring the "Jewish-ness" of the NT. I am not commenting on the authenticity or the motive of the translations, but instead pointing out how the WoF apologist and theology operates, seeking from any source something that confirms its assumptions. Any source will do if it seemingly supports its view, and if it says what the apologist's assumes in his belief, it is appealed to for authority to legitimize his theology.

I am not writing this to be critical of Edwards' belief that faith's source is found in God. What I am doing is showing the method of the theology, the hunt until finding some source that confirms what is presupposed, which I find is the calling card of WoF apologist. Mr. Edwards has on several occasions demonstrated this technique, as well as others that I have recently commented on. It is a pick and chose theology that has little to offer on its own. Edward's article is a very good example of Eclectic Theology in operation.

I will remind you of Edwards remark that was noted earlier, “Don't let anyone tell you that it does not make a difference whether we us of or in when dealing with Mark 11:22. These two prepositions describe the source of your faith. One finds it's origin in God Himself while the other finds it's source in us. I believe that Jesus is telling us in Mark 11:22 that the source for the faith that we need to move mountains comes from God Himself.” As I have shown in this article, Edwards comes to the discussion looking for things that will confirm his belief. In doing this he misplaces the proper historical apologetic, which states its presupposition and confirms it with scripture and opinion, for one that states it's presupposition then reads that into the scripture and opinion he selects to represent his belief.

I wanted to address this portion of Edwards' comments as well. As I have shown in the previously in this article the preposition "of" and "in" are not referring to the source of faith, but instead are speaking about the exact same thing, that Christian faith is directed toward something, it is placed upon God and His ability. There is genitive case in the Greek preposition and the accusative case in the predicate, and that portrays a particular action of being directed toward an object. Let me explain.

And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God. (Mar 11:22 KJVA)

This is Greek 101, and is something that the first year Koine Greek student should come to grips with, and that is the case that the preposition takes. The subject of the statement is “the disciples”, and Jesus tells them to have faith in God. Jesus' words were an answer to the disciples. The word "faith" is the verb in the clause and is in the accusative, which speaks of the subject of the sentence, "you disciples". But the word "God" is in the genitive, and this distinguishes that "God" is not the place that "faith" is coming from; it is coming from the disciples and being directed toward God.

In other words, the verse expresses this idea; "you disciples have your faith in God". This is called the Genitive Case in respect to the use of God in the predicate, and is specific in what it is stating. Modern English does not have the genitive case and so the neophyte (like Edwards) easily takes liberty with the Greek, thinking he is translating the Greek but instead is reading his belief into scripture. The disciple's are the subject of the sentence, not God. In other words, the Apostle is not telling us, "Have God's kind of faith", but contrary to that he is saying specifically, have your faith directed in and of God. If this would be telling us to have God's kind of faith "God" would be the accusative case.

How do we know this?

The action of the accusative case would be that the faith is moving from God toward the Disciples. That would read the God kind of faith or perhaps have God's faith. But, in the case of the genitive it is showing an action from the subject toward an object, a moving away from the subject toward an object. That would read faith in God, in this instance. The accusative preposition being used of the disciples faith being directed toward the genitive God. Correctly translated, "Have faith in God."

The Greek word for "God" is theos, and that word has various ways it is spelled in order to denote the case or grammatical category showing the function of the word. In the instance of the genitive case the word is spelled theou. Note the last letter in the spelling. The changing of the last letter of the word tells us clearly that God is in the genitive. I welcome the reader to check this out and see for themselves how the word is spelled in the Greek and research the grammatical category that this falls into.

In other words, the faith of the disciples is toward God. The action is toward God, not toward the disciples. Edwards' attempt, and this shows his novice and uninformed handling of the word, changes the case of the predicate from genitive to the accusative. And instead of telling us that our faith is directed toward God, he is telling us that we have "the faith of God" or a faith that comes from God to the believer and the believer can have the attributes of the Almighty because he possesses the divine faith. And in this case, in this instance in scripture, his theology tells him to change what is clearly and plainly stated. I would contend that he does this ignorantly not knowing the very basics of the Greek language, being motivated by his Eclectic Theology which is looking for precisely what will confirm his belief. Therefore we see, yet again, a very good example of eisogesis in operation.

So with this in mind, he states that "faith in God" and "faith of God" is explicitly two different ideas designating source. He is distinguishing that the source of faith is being spoken about, which it is not, but instead is talking about the action of the faith and what it is directed at. He states, "One finds its origin in God Himself while the other finds it's source in us." This tells us that Edwards neither understands what he has read nor is he handling the word of God properly.  He is reading into the text what he wants it to say. But Jesus is telling the disciples something very different than what the WoF apologists Hagin and Edwards want from the text. That is, that faith, which is a gift of God by the way and fruit of the Holy Spirit, is a result of a relationship with God. Not a derived action from their desires, and not from something that magically makes God's faith be in a believer. They are not using "the faith of God", but placing a "faith in God". It is properly translated in so many translations, and as so many scholars have explained, and as the text itself tells us so clearly and plainly, HAVE FAITH IN GOD.