Chitwood’s latest pamphlet is something of an enigma

In the latest of his pamphlets, Arlen L. Chitwood sets out to explain the enigma of James 2:14-26, yet inexplicably creates others. “James is dealing with the salvation of the soul,” he writes (p. 1). Unfortunately, he does not explain what the “salvation of the soul” is, except to refer the reader to another of his writings, Salvation of the Soul. So, from the onset, the new tract, “Faith and Works,” contains no real explanation of James’ teaching. If you read Salvation of the Soul, you learn that unlike the salvation of the spirit (he believes people are saved three times), the salvation of the soul is conditional. “The salvation of the soul is dependent on the life one lives after his spirit has been saved” (Salvation of the Soul, p. 13). Yet in “Faith and Works,” Chitwood argues that “… in the realm of faith and works, acting by faith is not acting in the realm where one seeks to go out and do a work for the Lord. Rather, acting by faith is completely stepping aside from one’s own self and allow the Lord to do a work through the one exercising faith” (p. 10). This is not consistent with James’ examples in chapter 2, verses 14-26, wherein James explicitly states Christians are actually to do certain things.

Throughout “Faith and Works,” Chitwood dives into the Old Testament, discussing Sodom and Gomorrah and other texts, but spends little time discussing the letter of James itself. Consequently, he draws conclusions that quite confounds James’ explicit teaching that Christians are actually to do certain things. “If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?” asks James (vs. 16). Here, the believer must actually give the things needed for the body. Chitwood argues the Christian must step aside.

Now, certainly Chitwood is not saying that Christians should step aside, answering, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” but what is he saying? Is the Christian actually doing anything? Chitwood writes,

Romans 4:1-4 clearly reveals that works emanating from the flesh, from man (vv. 1, 2) cannot enter into the realm of either “faith” (v. 3) or “grace” (v. 4). The works must be God’s works being performed through an individual excercising “faith,” as in James 2:21-24 and Heb. 11:17. And since they are God’s works, grace can enter into the matter; and since they are works being done through man, “judgment” on the basis of works can occur.

The whole of the matter surrounding faith and works is that simple to understand. — p. 12

This is frankly one of the more bizarre statements to issue from Chitwood’s pen. First, it is the absence of works James rebukes, not the type of work. Second, Chitwood says God must do the work (the Christian stepping aside), doing them through the Christian. Only, these works of faith are “being done through man,” so a person can be judged on the basis of them. Is Chitwood saying that God will judge his own works, punishing the Christian for the lack of them? Certain statements in Salvation of the Soul may help to clarify matters. At one point, he writes, “[the salvation of the soul is] allowing the Spirit of God to impart spiritual truth into and control his life through his own spirit” (p. 13, ibid.). This is all fine, except that he emphatically states that the salvation of the soul is conditional, based on what one does. One cannot make sense of these contradictory statements; they simply are nonsensical.

Unfortunately, Chitwood does not comment on vs. 22 of James’ letter, which reads, “You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works.” This is the qualification that James adds to his statement that Abraham was justified by works. Abraham was working all along — he actually brought his son to the alter and raised the knife; he actually embarked from Ur to the promised land — but he was working in the belief that “God was able even to raise him from the dead.” Faith was indeed active with his works (things he actually did), for otherwise he would not have done them.

Certainly, applying a particular logic, one might argue that the Christian indeed yields himself to the Holy Spirit and therefore whatever the Christian does of merit is really God working in him. But it’s not the sort of logic James applies in his letter. Rather, he views God’s work as testing the Christian through trials (1:3). The Christian’s work is to resist temptation (1:12-15), to take care of the afflicted (1:27), to avoid partiality (2:1-7), to speak and act as ones under the law of liberty (2:12), etc.

I don’t necessarily object to the idea that the Christian is one yielding himself to the Holy Spirit, but we find, scripturally, that the Christian is to actually act. He is to walk in the works God created beforehand for him. In the 12 pages of his latest pamphlet, Chitwood provides extraneous answers and draws faulty conclusions.

© 2009, Mark Adams. All rights reserved.

59 thoughts on “Chitwood’s latest pamphlet is something of an enigma

  1. brother i beg to differ with you concerning brother chitwood teachings regarding the word of the kingdom. In all due respect to your out look,the way you have interpreted arlen teachings,Ifind your position to be greatly in error and I understand why.I will say only that the revelation of scripture is clearly pointed out in twenty-five of brother Chitwood books.I am open for further discussion. lets reason from the sriptures.

  2. Bro. Mark,this shall not be an enigma.By the grace of God,I shall make myself clear.My position on Chitwoods teachings is simply that They point one to the clear revelation of scripture regarding the Word of The Kingdom,The coming kingdom of Jesus the Christ,and biblical typology,how God nas fashioned His WORD,which unequivocally surrounds the Gospel of the Grace of God and the Gospel of the coming glory of Christ- The whole of scripture. And this deals with the Salvation of the whole Man,who is spirit,soul,and body.And a correct review of scripture will reveal thus.

  3. Not to be dismissive, but Bro. Arlen has been teaching for (what?) 50 years? Christianity is 2,000 years old. What was the truth between Chitwood and the New Testament?

  4. Thank God For the 50 years of brother Chitwoods teachings. I see faithfulness if nothing else,but I see something else,praise the Lord. Brother, The Kingdom of God is God in His Sovereignty,ruling over all the Universe. But here on earth according to the revelation of scripture The Kingdom of God began with Isreal,the theocratic government. The fore runner of Christ, John The Baptist came Preaching Repent, for The Kingdom of God Was at hand becase according to Matthew, He was born King so the King was among them. And Jesus following John’s death preached The Kingdom. and after His ressurrection,He preached to them, His disciples,things concerning The Word of The Kingdom of God. The Kingdom being the central focus. Do you have a problem with that which the Word of God Reveals,brother Mark. For 2000 years the New Testament has taught The Word of The Kingdom,not just since bro. Chitwood’s teachings.

  5. Bernard,

    Your refusal to distinguish scripture from Chitwood’s unique teaching is wearisome, but expected. I place “Word of the Kingdom” in quotations when referring to Chitwood’s interpretation of the scriptures. I employ Word of the Kingdom, sans quotations, when referring to the scripture itself. That you seriously contemplate — in the face of scriptural evidence — that salvation is conditional, that Christians will suffer the hurt of the second death, and that blacks are cursed into the eternity, greatly disturbs me. That you believe this is what scripture has been teaching for 2,000 years offends me.

    As regards Rev. 2:11, what does scripture say? He who believes will not suffer the second death. He who does not, will perish forever in the everlasting flames. The second death is the lake of fire! Do you believe Death and Hades will ever be released from the lake of fire? Do you believe anyone who is cast into it will be released? If so, simply point of the scripture which says that.

  6. Bro. Mark, Iam Black.And I do not and have not advocated the so call hamitic doctrine. My position is strickly the position of scripture reagarding the Word of the Kingdom which refers to the coming Kingdom of The Christ,Jesus The Christ,His millinial reign,when He returns to rule for a thousand years.Brother Chitwoods Teaching regarding the Word of the KIngdom is scripturally right on point. Im not concerned with chitwood’s editorial endorsement of A. Edwin Wilson’s book expressing his interpretation of scripture regarding Noah’s curse of Cannan, Ham’s son . Jesus said seek first the Kingdom of God and he was speaking to the jews who were saved folk,a people whon were able to deal in the spiritual realm,for people dead in their trespasses and sins cannot operate in the spirit realm.Soin order for a person to seek the Kingdom he/she must be born again,broughtforth from above,meaning he/she has to be saved first;must be brought from spritual death to spiritual life. The clear and plain teaching of scripture is A difference in eternal Life and The Kingdom of God . One is a free gift from God(eternal Life)and the other is inherited(The Kingdom) . Now regarding revelation 2:11 it doesnt say he who belives,but rather he who “overcomes” will not be hurt by the second death, and this admontion is given to the church,to saved indiviuals. The savation of the soul is most deffinitely different from the salvation of the spirit. For that wich is born of the SPIRIT is spirit(your spirit)and there is a difference in the spirit and the soul. Continue to study,Bro. Mark.I trust you havent surpassed the need for study. The address to scripture has no power,but scripture itself.

  7. Bernard,

    Perhaps a little study would be helpful. What is the second death?

    Also, that you are black does not qualify you to excuse Chitwood’s conduct (I do believe “accountability” is a core value of his teaching). Chitwood condemns entire races — no, he does not simply “endorse” Wilson’s teaching: he teaches it himself (in 2010 he published two pamphlets championing the curse). Chitwood claims Arabs, Africans and others of Hamitic descent are cursed (yourself included). You are welcome to excuse Chitwood as it pertains to yourself, but as it pertains to the Body of Christ, that is not your prerogative. Look at what James says regarding making distinctions among ourselves. It leads to blasphemy.

    The more pressing matter, however, is your definition of the second death. Based on scripture, what is it?

  8. Bro. Mark, Revelation 20:14 clearly explains the second death refered to in Rev.2:11 as being the lake of fire.Paragraph. Period! That’s the conclusion of the matter. It’s simply what scripture declares. It’s the Word of God.Belive it. Receive it. For the choice is exclusively yours. As for any doctrinal teachings regarding the so called hamitic curse doctrine,I stand firm on scripture without any adding to or taking therefrom;I believe that the curse is broken “in Christ”. That is why it is so imperitive that we be educated and not miseducated and under educated in the Word of God. WE must come into the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus The Christ:2peter 1:8. And coming into the knowledge of our Lord Jesus is to come into the knowledge of both the Gospel of The Grace of God and the Gospel of The Glory of Christ,Him coming in Glory to rule and reign for a thousand years,the mesianic era, the Mellinial Kingdom. God bless you, brother, and I trust you got somethig out of this. I trust by the Grace of God I have imparted something encouraging,comforting,or edifying into your spirt. With love, brother.Keep serving in a spirit of Love. Please allow me to say that I haved “study” 25 of Chitwoods books;I am very familiar with the writings of the late bro. minister Watchman Nee. I read both the finest of the wheat volume one and two;I’ved read much in way of biblical history and much in way of Church history,biblically and secularly. I bless God That I am at this point well versed and learned in scripture so that I don’t be carried about with every wind of doctrine. The book of James declares,”Let not many of us be teachers for we are held to more stricter Judgement. I adives all my breathen to take heed to that passage of scripture. For not all of us were called to Word Ministry,to be Preachers and teachers of the Word of God.(James 3:1). Take heed my brother. And be careful how you talk about God’s Anointed. Remeber Touch not my anointed and do my prophets no harm. Watch how you speak,always, for life and death are in the power of the tongue,for by your words shall you be justified and by your words shall you be condeemed says Jesus.

  9. Brother Mark, some times our approach to scripture can be our henderence in seeing exactly what scripture reveals to us.Instead of reading and studying scripture as The All Knowing and all Mighty God has revealed and structured and fashioned His Word we have a natural tendency to approach the Word of God with a preconceived notion of God’s revelation, believing only what is most comfortable for us. And in doing so, we for the lack of knowledge perish-miss the mark. WE miss the correct and complete revelation of God’s plans and purposes for man in respect to His Son’s person and work in His redemptive process.We come into a knowledge of the Letter of the word and not the Spirt of the Word. Remember, the scripture declares that the Letter Kills, but the Spirit gives Life! So from this point, let us go on,as appostle Paul would say, with reveiwing scripture in the Spirit of the Word and not just the lETTER,which unequivocally will move us into the study of Biblical Typology. Are you ready for a life long study,Brother Mark?

  10. It is crystal clear that Revelation 20:14 describes the secon death as the lake of fire and thats the gist of the argument. AS to who the scripture is applying to when Jesus is speaking to Apostle John reference the scripture in Revelation2:11,it is absolutely without doubt that Jesus is speaking to the body of Christ, the Church.It is smiply saved folk who can be hurt by the second death, which is the Lake that burns with brimstone and fire.And that is the clear revelation of scripture,bro. Mark. There is the scripture that declares that He will wipe a way their tears, and there will be no more pain and there will be no more death. And that means that the second death will have passed. Who are these folk?

  11. I will like to interject something as a followup up of my previous writting,this second death,contrary to popular opinion and belief,pertains to christians and is Millinial. It has to do with the thousand year reign of Christ and who will be apptoved at the judgement seat of Christ as opposed to those who won’t, and will be cast into outer darkness described in scripture by Jesus as being Gehenna,in Hebrew called the vally of the son of Hinnom, this pointing to the south side of Jerusalem, the garbage dump where refused burned 24/7 and Jews whorshiping pagan gods and scrificing there sons in the fire, specifically Hinnom’s son, God is always seen on the north side , and so scripture here reveals that gehenna brought over into the english language as Hell. For there are some things we need to know about hell and how it has been translated into the english language from the greek.Hell brough over into the english in the Greek is three different words describing three different places and dealing with three different entities and at three different times. Lets continue to open our hearts to teaching.WE must come to the knowledge of how hell is to be preached, rightfully dividing the Word of Truth.

  12. According to Revelation, the only ones who will suffer the consequence of the lake of fire are those whose names are not written in the book of life: “And if anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:15). Included in this judgment are “Death,” “Hades” and the Devil. No mention is made of anyone or anything exiting the lake… ever. If you wish to include Christians in this judgment, you must include them entirely, i.e. forever and ever, for Revelation clearly states that no one will enter God’s city whose name is not found in the book of life — “only those who are written in the Lamb’s book of life” (Rev. 21:27).

    Bernard, your interpretation of Rev. 21:4 serves no other purpose than to solve a theological problem created by including Christians, saved people, in the judgment of the lake of fire. This passage applies to all the saints, not to those whose names are absent in the book of life. Consider that the very next passage — the very next passage — states: “The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death” (Rev. 21:7-8). Thus, to use language you are fond of, only the ones who conquer will have the “heritage” — only their tears will be wiped away. Nee, Wilson and Chitwood are very wrong in their interpretation of Revelation.

    You speak of a “deeper” study of scripture, but if your “deeper” study of scripture leads you to change the scriptures’ meaning, I advise you to reconsider your method. I cannot accept a teaching that contradicts the meaning of scripture.

  13. First off, we must understand that there is a defference in the book of life and The Lamb’s book of life.And the scripture in Rev.21:8 is speaking to saved folk, for the previous verse 7 strickly speaks to those who overcomes, a scripture which parelles and shines light on Revelation 2:11: One shall receive an heritage , and the other the second death. If, brother, you can get around the clear revelation of scripture ,brother Mark, I only pray that God will open your eyes. I wish to thank you that you fine me of such calible to equate me with such fine brother-men as Nee, Wilson, and Chitwood and the likes, for its a great commendation even if given unawares. God bless you,brother. Keep prayig,interceding for your brothers,and keep on loving them,for it is the only way you can love God , it’s the only way you can enter the Kingdom of God. And please know that according to the clear revelation of scripture that there is a defference in eternal life ( which deals with going to heaven and spending eternity with the Father) and with the coming thousand year Kingdom reign of Jesus the Christ. And please note in closing that in order for anyone to have either Eternal Life Or The Kingdom he/she must be saved.So smiply who could scripture be admonishing and encouraging to overcome but those who could operate in the spiritual realm,the Saved! Those who fail to be faithful to his/her calling. We’re running a race, and we must run this race the way sripture instructs us to run in order to win.

  14. There’s no difference between the “Lamb’s book of life” and the “book of life.” That’s a man-made invention to explain away what scripture actually says. Again, this is not a “deeper” approach to scripture, this is simply a bad approach.

  15. Because you say there’s no difference, there is no difference, and that it’s a man made doctrine? Why would the Holy Spirit of God be descriptive in using the term “The Lamb’s book of Life ” spicifically in the context having to do with His Messianic reign? and simply the book of life when deeling with eternity, living with the Father forever? Tonight I am going to go into a study with you on the subject mstter and let the scripture be the Authority,plain and simple. Right now Im pressed for time and want to say only that you are not really dialoging with me ,for evading issues, and I say this this morning by the power of the Holly Ghost,while in the mist of prayer.

  16. What you propose is not a Bible study. It is certainly not a deeper study of the Bible. First, you will present what you believe is true doctrine. Second, you will find an assortment of scriptures, taken in whatever context necessary, to describe your beliefs. If a scripture contradicts what you are claiming, you will simply say it’s saying something else. If a scripture does not say what you claim, you will say, “Let the Holy Spirit guide you.” Not once will you acknowledge that the “Word of the Kingdom” has a heritage, that it can be traced through men to its origin. (In fact, you will not find anyone teaching what you believe any earlier than the 1800s.)

    You will defend men such as Arlen Chitwood entirely forgetting that he frequently attacks Christians, saying they have little to live for. You will defend him, even though he teaches that you, a black man, are cursed.

    Bernard, have you no dignity?

    What is striking about Chitwood’s belief in the curse is that is so obviously derived from the traditions of man. His belief is no different than any run-of-the-mill Southern pastor with racial prejudices. Yet, you cannot see this. Open your eyes.

    I am quite prepared for your response, which you will call a “Bible study.” You will repeat, ad nauseum, everything Chitwood has written in his books, which is merely him repeating what he learned from Wilson, which he essentially learned from Nee or Govett.

    Dialogue? You hear nothing I’m saying. Instead, you go blindly on about how if I only heard the truth, I’d understand. Can’t you recognize that Chitwood’s teachings are lies?

  17. Good morning,brother Mark. God bless you this morning,brother. I want take offense of your previous writting. Bruther I have read your bio and im not impressed, no none what so ever. You have a bachelor in english and thats great, but you minor in bible and theology, and brother you still minoring in your study of scripture,unfortunately. Let me profer to you a bit about Me. Im practically self educated. I have only a modicum of conventional education. But Im very well read,by the Grace of God,A Gift from God; I’ve read so many books that I’ve forgotten many titles and authors. I had much time to read as I’ve spent approximately 15 years in the penitentiary. And Ive read a varity of subjects. Im a product of the fifties. I’ve been in the blace movement far as far back as I can remember. Ive bee as apostle Paul a chife sinner. Oh’ how I know the GRACE of God! And this is my testamony. I was once a honorary black panther for all tht it would mean to you , and I said that to say this,If I was not of the scolarship that I am when it comes to scripture coupled with experiential knowledge including but not limited to,black history, the history of my people and yours too,if I wasnt qualifided to expound on the word of God and wasn’t sharp when it comes to my people and if I wasn’t a new creation in HIM Christ Jesus my Lord I would I would be very offended from your last reply. So brother before I allow thi dialogue go ihto a debate I fair you well in grace.

  18. I would just like to make myself clear on something. My concern is strickly the word of God,not the position of Chitwood and others surrounding racism and thier interpretaion of the curse Noah placed on his grandson Cannan, and how the white man has used the scriptures to justify slavery and esspecially so here in America,theese are not my concerns.Just the correct teaching of scripture. The peace and grace of God be with you brother.

  19. The purpose of this website is to analyze the teachings of Chitwood and others, men who have crafted doctrines variously called “Word of the Kingdom” or “Kingdom Exclusion” — thus, the subheading for this blog: “Information about Kingdom Exclusion and Word of the Kingdom.” Having studied this issue since around 2005 or 2006, I conclude that both teachings are heretical.

    I’m glad that we agree on one point: that the Hamitic curse, as taught by Chitwood and Wilson (and other white and even sometimes black theologians), IS NOT a correct teaching or understanding of scripture. I’m also glad that we agree that the Hamitic curse, as taught by Chtiwood and Wilson, is an evil teaching, used to defend slavery and segregation. I’m exceedingly glad that you agree that the scripture has been “used” — to quote you — to justify that which is evil.

    The question is, if Chitwood teachings something which we both agree is evil, why do you regard him as a godly man?

  20. Again, good morning,brother, this glorious Sunday morning. I would first like to say that you have blessed my spirit tremendously in your last reply.Thank God this morning and thank you,brother.
    God bless you and yours this morning from the bottom of my heart.God bless you and keep you;Let His eyes shine upon you and be gracious to you; Lift His countence upon you and give you peace. Now to answer your most pertinent question,”why do I regard brother Chitwood as a Godly man”,understanding his positon on certain subject matters; one’s doctrinal beliefts outside of their profession of faith of Christ being the the son of God and that He is Lord,has absolutely no bearings on one being a Godly man wrapped up in Christ,being a child of the Living God, accountable to God for what he/she teaches. For many Godly men called by God having been set apart by Him,for Him, has errored. However, our errors have nothing to do with God’s gifts and callings. For the gifts and callings of God are without repentence( without God changing His mind).Godly men are only men having been called by God according to His purposes. We are all subject to error. For we were all messed up before we were saved and dressed up in Christ. For there is not a local church on this planet that has no mess in it and dosen’t speak some measure of error in some realm of scripture,notwithstanding we all have our thorns in the flesh. None of us have apprehened yet and this we must come to terms with. As for the word of the kingdom teaching,according to the clear revelation of scripture,Matt.13:52 clearly reveals Jesus speaking about the word of the kingdom; John the Baptist the fore runner of Christ came preaching The kingdom, so did Jesus take up the cry immediately after John went to prison; He then sent out the 12 then the seventy to preach the kingdom; and after His ressurection, Jesus for forty days preached to them things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. AND THE KINGDOM OF GOD and THE KINGDOM OF The HEAVENS are synonomous. Kingdom teaching is scrictly bible.

  21. I wholeheartedly agree that ministers of God sometimes err, and that forgiveness should not be withheld. However, Chitwood does not admit error; rather, he persists in championing the curse, as he has for decades. When a man willfully sins, what remains? Hebrews 10:16 states, “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.”

    I do not say that Chitwood has sinned eternally, but his stubbornness does disservice to his ministry.

    In case you have not followed the many articles I’ve published on this subject, here is a reply Chitwood sent me regarding his beliefs on the curse (note: he says that his and Wilson’s views are the same) —

    “The curse connected with Gen. 9:25, 26b, 27b, of necessity, remains in effect today, will remain in effect until the Millennium, and will then pass out of existence (Zech. 14:21b)…

    “The preceding would reflect A. Edwin Wilson’s position, my position, and the position of anyone who takes the Bible at face value and believes it. The latter would have to be the case, for the preceding is simply what the Bible states — something which no one can get around, no matter how hard that person might try.”

    In 2010, he wrote two pamphlets avowing the Hamitic curse, see:

    Considering that Chitwood edited and promoted Wilson’s book, around 1981, it can be calculated that Chitwood has been championing the curse for at least 30 years. He’s never admitted error; in fact, according to his own words, you, Minister Bernard E. Wright, are in error, for you do not accept the Bible “at face value” and “[believe] it.”

    Frankly, his position on the curse is inexcusable, and it is shameful that so many of his friends apologize for him. This shows a real misunderstanding of the issue.

  22. Brother Mark, I empathize with you brother with regards to your passions when it comes to your understanding of scripture according to your studies and the way you have been taught. And I’m a firm beliver that all men teachings begins with man and continues, its just the way of God.That is why He appointed in the church some,not all, but SOME, to be TEACHERS. For there is and will always be room for teaching,not to go off on a tangent. I understand your passion for the word of God, for I, too, have a deep passion for the same. And when I find what I think and belive to be sound doctrine, I, like Paul, am zealous to the death. For before Christ was revealed in him, he persecuted christians to death. I’ve said all of that to say this, NO matter how one believe in their doctrine,inspite of all disagreements,LOVE has to out weigh them all.For knowledge puffs up(when it is obtained and ministered without love) but love edifies. We have got to love one another inspite of; and that’s basic,fundamental christianity. Something we must all as christains come to terms with if we want our faith to work and to receive the fulness of God’s blessings, if we want to see God’s best. For faith works by LOVE. No love, no working of faith.Plain and simple. Not to mention that along with faith there must also be PATIENCE. For it is with Faith and Patience that they received the promise. Sometimes it takes time and a whole lot of time before truth is revealed to us. No matter what we believe,however it came, It is the holy Spirit and the holy Spirit alone that leads us into all TRUTH,through spiritual growth,by various means: Listening to one preacher after another,reading one book after another,sometimes finding error before truth so that we can have a point of reference,something that is Prerequisite when coming into the knowledge of the truth of God’s word. There has to be a point of reference. To know truth is to know error. Again, let me state my position on the hamitic curse doctrine. It does not matter what one believes,one way or the other,the curse today is broken in Christ,though if we are not obedient we will still experience those consequences that comes under the curse as a result of the curse.

  23. Let me add something that I believe is of vital importance. In the scholarship of scripture,the primary question to all ministers of God,especially you who are of word ministry,is, “at what point in scripture do you see Jesus”? Where is He first introduced, since Jesus Himself said to the jews,”Had you belived Moses,you wold belive me,for he wrote about me”. And to the two disciples walking down the Emmaus road,Jesus said, Oh’ foolish ones and slow in heart to belive “ALL” that the prophets has spoken, and beginning at Moses, He expounded to them in “ALL” the scriptures the things pertaining to Himself. The whole of scripture is about all the various facets of the person and work of Christ. You have got to see Jesus from the very first verse of scripture,and through out. You have got to see Him as YHWH and LORD throughout scripture. This is a must in order to Know Jesus in HIs redemptive work,in His seperate and destinct ministerial offices.To God be the Glory!

  24. Seeing Jesus as described above is seeing Jesus in the Sprit of the word, not the letter of the word.Seeing Him in the letter of the word is seeing Him when He came in Bethleham in a manger in the book of Mathew. This is where the average person/christian sees Him for the first time. But you have got to see Him throughout scripture.

  25. “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from him: whoever loves God must also love his brother.” — 1 John 4:20-21

    How does a man honor the commandment and hold simultaneously that blacks are cursed and shouldn’t fellowship with whites in Christian churches?

  26. Sounds like it doesn’t matter what these men say or do as long as they are teaching the kingdom. I’ve shown your blog to family members and all they do is shrug and say it’s not important. That isn’t how I was raised to act and its dissappointing that that’s the way it is now.

  27. When I first started this site, a few individuals suggested the “teaching” should be called the “accountability gospel,” but I don’t believe it’s earned that designation. It’s one thing to err, but it is quite another to persist. Why Chitwood and others continue to teach the Hamitic curse, I don’t know. For whatever reason, they believe it is an important doctrine, and one that must be advanced for the sake of the gospel.

  28. Bless God for the opportunity to comment. It is a great thing when one is knowledgeable in the Word of God. There can be no greater thing. It is divine. As brother Chitwood says, coming into a correct study of the Word of God takes time and effort,and it is a life long process that one never completes. We’re dealing with an infinite God whose Word is Him,just as infinite,and we would do well to take heed to the clear teaching of scripture and get away from all of these man-made doctrines.God is a God of Perfection first. He is LOVE,and that’s His nature,but His Love is perfect Love.Perfect is He. And to come into a correct knowledge of God’s word we must understand first in the scolarship of scripture that the bible is a book of redeemption and that it is all about the Christ from front to back,from Genesis 1 to Rev. 22. To dwell on such things as the Hamitic curse doctrine is a trick of the enemy, for it keeps one’s mind from the central focus of scripture,which surrounds the Word of the Kingdom,the coming Kingdom of Jesus the Christ,when He comes into His Mellinial reign.Let us take note that the curse is broken in Christ . He became the curse for us.This white and black thing,this hamitic curse thing,is of no moment when it comes to Christ,in whom the curse is broken.Even Calvin,Luther, and other reformers were off course in many of their doctrinal standings,but that does not negate the truth God used them to teach concerning the doctrine of the Grace of God,salvation by Grace through faith alone! The Word of the Kingdom teaching is just as scripturely sound and that’s the gist of the issue . Anything other is of no importance.

  29. The Gospel of the Grace of God ,and the Gospel of the Glory of Christ contains the full counsel of God. The Gospel of the Grace of God deals with Salvation, and the Gospel of the Glory of Christ deals with it’s purpose. For we were saved for a purpose, a revealed purpose. To God be the Glory! It’s all about His plans and purposes,which is revealed in The Holy Writ, the 66 books we call the Holy Bible. Brother Mark, have a great day this glorious morning.Keep trusting in Him. Let the holy Spirit lead you into all truth.

  30. Bernard, I recommend that you read my other articles too. The Hamitic curse is but one heretical element of the “Word of the Kingdom.” I am also concerned with WOK claims that salvation is not entirely by grace, but by works also. Chitwood and others plainly teach that salvation is conditional, not by grace only.

  31. Brother Mark, I would like to emphasize that the Word of the Kingdom teaching has it’s New Testament revelation beginning with John the Baptist, and Jesus prior to His ascension taught the Kingdom(Acts 1:3).
    Jesus also speaks of those who will be cast out of the Kingdom,and He’s speaking to the Jews who are saved folk. It must be clearly understood that the Kingdom has two realms,heavenly and earthly. And we must understand that according to the clear revelation of scripture (Mathew 21:43)the heavenly aspect of the Kingdom has been taken from Israel and has been given to the Church,brought into existence io be the receipient of that which the nation of Israel rejected. Our calling is a heavenly calling(Hebrews 3:1). The coming Kingdom of Jesus is both heavenly and earthly. He will sit on His throne ruling with His bride in the heavens, and on the throne of David on the earth,according to scripture. He will sit on dual thrones simultaneously. The word of the Kingdom as pointed out in brother Chitwood’s books that I’ve read surrounding the word of the Kingdom is that part of his teaching that I commend. Let me stress that the salvation of the soul is another scriptural teaching that has it’s roots in the old testament,and is sopken parabolically in the New. It simply has to do with having a life with Christ in His coming Kingdom,which has nothing to do with eternal life and going to heaven. And I submit that having a life with Christ in His Kingdom is earning a position with Him. It deals with our works,those works we were spiritually created unto,for we are His workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works . For surely there is a race appointed for us to run,and we are admonished and exaulted to run this race to win. Brother, Im talking scriptrure hear and I dare everyone and the devil to this teaching. For this is the one teaching not even satan himself care to hear,because it reveals God’s plans and purposes which surrounds his end, the septer being taken from him…

  32. Bernard, the purpose of this website is not to simply discuss whatever it is one believes about the Bible. There are other forums for that sort of discussion. Instead, the purpose here is to critique a teaching called the “Word of the Kingdom.”

    Apparently, we agree more than we disagree. You reject the Hamitic curse, I reject it. You reject (apparently) the idea that salvation is conditional, and I reject that teaching. On specific details, it seems you agree with my critique of Chitwood’s theology.

    I don’t know, maybe you really do believe salvation is conditional, but are unwilling to admit that belief. You are verbose, but you rarely commit yourself to any one idea. As such, I really can’t understand why you have a problem with my articles.

  33. First off, It would not be fair or correct for me to just say salvation is or is not conditional. It would not be fair or correct for anyone to say such in such terms. For salvation/soteria meaning simply deliverance needs very badly to be taught to the people of God,for it is the root of where our problem lies in the many twisted up doctrines we have in Christiandom regarding salvation. Salvation in scripture is given in three tenses,and two senses. And this must be clearly understood,for this is the clear revelation of scripture. Scripture presents salvation in the first tense in Eph.2:8; and in the second sense in 1cor.1:18 (the greek rendering being that of those being saved,present tense);the first tense being that rendered in the past,based soley on the finished work of Christ. And the third tense in Hebrews 1:14 speaks of salvation in the future tense. and the first sense is salvation in the sense of placing man back into the position for which he was created, and secondly in the sense of man ultimately fulfilling that purpose for which he was created, to rule and reign. The man and his wife, Christ and his bride. And this is the full Gospel,and these are the things you need to be teaching on your site, for ther is absolutely no spiritual fruit bearing in all that other mess.It’s a spirit of strife behind it all.

  34. Bernard, decide whether salvation is conditional or unconditional, and then return. Until that time, study the scriptures carefully. That a minister should not know whether salvation is conditional or unconditional is surprising and not a little disturbing.

  35. Brother you are a trip.To have a bachelor degree you should have much better comprehension.You don’t seem to understand anything I say.You are so stuck on what you believe from what you ‘ve been taught that you don’t have an ear to hear anything else. Brother,anyone who has any basic ,fundamental knowledge of Christianity knows that salvation as it pertains to eternal life,the born again experience, being broughtforth from spiritual death to spiritual life,is a spiritual work based solely on the finished work of Christ at Calvary and is unconditional, having absolutely nothing to do with man,he having only to receive that which has been provided for him by faith. However,receiving the end of our faith,the salvation of our soul as mentioned in 1Peter 1:9 is future and deals with the word of the Kingdom,the coming Kingdom of Christ,and Christians being approved at the judgement seat of Christ and ruling with Him. And that is conditional. It depends upon your works,those by which you will be judged,and that, my man, is the clear revelation of scripture.

  36. Then explain the gift of salvation we presently possess apart from the salvation that is to be received in the future. The book of Hebrews is built around 5 warnings to Christians ,another place in scripture other than James that literally deals with the salvation of the soul(all in the context dealing with the heir of all things, the one who is to rule in His Kingdom in the order of Melchisedec,as King/Priest…Christ). The book of Hebrews draws from Old Testament type and give warnings to Christians to be careful so that they do not fall as those in the wilderness and did not make it into the promise land(earthly)where with Christians it’s a heavenly land,forget not that we are partakers of the Heavenly calling,for our citizenship is in heaven. These warnings in Hebrews are simply dealing with some standing and some falling,the future salvation that deals with the Judgement seat of Christ where we all must appear to give an account for all those things we have done in the Body whether it be good or bad. For this has nothing to do with sins,which has already been judged in Christ.

  37. Mark,

    I’d like to give an answer of my own to your last question. Your soul is made sinless by the shed blood of Christ. We are cleansed by confessing our sins to Christ, then He pleads the blood for us. We are responsible for allowing Him to cleanse us by confessing our sins to Him. That makes the Christian responsible for their own soul/life presently. If we don’t allow Christ to continually wash us we will not have a part with Him as He told Peter; Jesus told Peter “if I don’t wash you you’ll not have a part with me” and, that is the part that will be lost for the duration of the next age (millennium) and, that is the PART that will be cast into the Lake of Fire after the millennium in Revelation 21, not the body or soul, but the “PART” (inheritance). As for the ages beyond the Millennium, Christ has made our souls/lives perfect by His finished work. And, without the finished work of Christ we could do nothing of, or by our selves. His Grace is what allows all things that pertain to glory. Whoo! Now that’s something to shalt about!

    Is your life perfect, presently? Do you have days when you do not commit a single sin? Is your body presently perfect?

    If you answer yes you have some serious issues other than the obvious.

    A christian’s body is not perfect presently but it will be perfect in the future.

    A christian’s life is not presently perfect but it will be in the future. God’s Word says if you say you have no sin the truth is not in you and you are calling God a liar.
    By the way, life and soul are the same thing.

    If your life/soul is not presently perfect it is not presently redeemed. IT IS NOT PRESENTLY SINLESS. But, your soul/life will be sinless and redeemed in the future.

    My question to you Mark is this:

    Is the life of a Christian presently perfect (sinless)?

  38. This statement is false: “If we don’t allow Christ to continually wash us we will not have a part with Him” — your reference is the gospel of John, but that’s not what the text says.

    As for the soul being cast into the lake of fire, I suppose it is a comfort that the spirit will be with God. Don’t know where the body will be. Of course, Revelation says nothing about the soul being cast into the lake of fire (or that the lake of fire is for temporary punishment).

    As for your questions, I reject them out-of-hand. A living person is a whole being, not parts. There is no scriptural justification for regarding the parts of a person (body, spirit, soul, mind, joints, heart, etc.) as independently exiting components needing different types of salvation.

    If the “soul is made sinless by the shed blood of Christ,” I am satisfied that nothing but the blood of Jesus (offered once and for all — Heb. 7:27) is necessary. If you wish to add something to Christ’s finished work, do so at your own peril.

  39. Mark,

    I didn’t say the soul or body would be cast into the Lake of Fire. That is why I emphasised “PART (inheretance)”.

    So you will not answer whether or not your life is presently sinless? That should be a very simple and easy question for any Christian to answer. But, if you did answer my question it would contradict your critiques of the Word of the Kindom. I understand.

    Are you saying that Jesus didn’t tell Peter if I don’t wash you you’ll not have a part with me?

    You don’t have to accept my interpretation but don’t make it sound as if I miss quoted what Christ said. How would you interpret what Christ said to Peter? This is probably what your reply will be: Jesus said it to Peter only, and it was not meant to be interpreted any other way.

    We can add nothing to the finished work of Christ but, we can and should work for our inheritance that Christ has prepared for us if we choose to do so. Or, we can choose not to do so and forfeit our inheritance, Christ gives us that choice. If your happy with Mark so be it. I’m not happy with myself and that is why I must carry my own cross daily as Jesus said. If we were sinless we would not need to carry our own cross.

    Simple question Mark, are you sinless? If you’re not sinless than you are not perfect and if you are not perfect you are not fully redeemed presently. You can not explain these facts away.

  40. “I didn’t say the soul or body would be cast into the Lake of Fire. That is why I emphasised ‘PART (inheretance)’.”

    Scripture never says this. Revelation never states this.

    (By the way, so where is the soul during the millennial kingdom? And, if the soul is not yet saved [as Chitwood claims] how is it ultimately saved? Frankly, there is no way for you to answer this question, but I pose it anyway.)

    “Are you saying that Jesus didn’t tell Peter if I don’t wash you you’ll not have a part with me?”

    No, I’m saying that passage does not teach that Christians must continually be washed. For that matter, Jesus never said that Peter had to be continually washed.

    As for my present? Sinless? Only through Christ am I sanctified, never by my works, nor by my striving for the goal, nor by my believing a certain doctrine, nor conditionally. In fact, I have never said that a Christian, any Christian, is perfect. My critique of the so-called “Word of the Kingdom” has never been based on that assumption. I have always asserted that the whole person — spirit, soul, body — is being sanctified by God and will be kept blameless at Christ’s coming (and here’s the scripture reference: 1 Thess. 5:23).

  41. Mark,

    I don’t hesitate in answering your question of “where is the soul in the millennium?”.

    The soul is with the spirit and the body of the believer always and forever. The term of “losing ones soul” is synonymous with the loss of the inheritance that has been provided by Christ and His finished work. Without His finished work we could not obtain the inheritance/salvation of the soul for the Millennium. We take up our cross so that we can rule along side of Christ. All Christians will be in the Millennium but, not all will rule along side of Christ: Only the elect; the called out of the called; the bride; sons; whichever term one chooses to use WILL RULE WITH CHRIST. Only those who have been granted the garment spoken of in Revelation 19. The overcomer will be granted the garment because he or she prepared for it, just as the Bride of Christ did in Revelation 19, “she made herself ready”. In this we can see why Jesus told Peter, “if I don’t wash your feet you will not have a part with Me”. After hearing Jesus say this, Peter then allowed Christ to wash his feet and, by allowing this, Peter was preparing for the future, (Who hath ears to hear, let him hear). Just as the Bride in Revelation 19 made herself ready for that coming day to rule, Peter was doing like wise so that he could rule also but, Peter will rule in another position; a position over the nation of Israel in the Millennium. Peter will not be part of the Bride of Christ.

    We can draw from these two examples that I’ve illustrated and see part of the process of preparing for our judgment and the outcome of our judgment.

    As for your continual reference to what Chitwood wrote, I don’t see a problem at all. As I said, the non overcomer’s PART/INHERITANCE (not their soul or body) will be cast into the Lake of Fire after the Millennium. The Lake of Fire in Revelation 21 is used METAPHORICALLY not literally. The PART (inheritance) was lost for the Millennium, and one can never get it back, that is literal and that is the reason for the METAPHOR in Revelation 19. The Lake of Fire is eternal. One more thing, it’s imposible for any Christian to ever be put into the Lake of Fire because of the Holy Spirit that dwells in the Christian forever, through out the ages. If a Christian were to be put into the Lake of Fire he or she would have to take the Holy Spirit with them and that is an impossibility! This is how I see the reference you so often bring up in Chitwoods book.

    Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

  42. I do not believe it could be emphasized enough the simplicity of the Gospel of the Grace of God. Acts16:30,31: ” What must I do to be saved? the Phillipian jailer asked”. ” Believe on the Lord Jesus the Christ and you shall be saved”,was the reply. and that simply is all it takes to be saved,to be brought from spiritual death to spiritual life,to possess eternal life, to become a member of the body of Christ, the one New Man. This however has nothing to do with the Kingdom of God other than it places one in position to enter it. One comes before the other. Christ and Him crusified must be preached before the Kingdom can be preached. One must first be saved before he can receive or know spiritual things such as the word of the Kingdom. The things that brother Chitwood Teaches/points out from scripture in his books I personally recommend reading for every Christian on the planet. If you have read any theology books in any siminary or bible college,no matter the author, Arlen Chitwood’s books dealing with the word of the kingdom (ref. the 25 books Ive read) are worthy to be studied. I challenge any theologian to his writtings . And I say this in qualification as a much read man. to God be the Glory!

  43. Bernard and Arlen, you have been deceived. While Bernard does a great job rephrasing Chitwood’s thoughts from Salvation by Grace through Faith, I can’t emphasize enough that Chitwood teaches that this form of salvation applies ONLY to the spirit, not the soul or body. Only the spirit is saved by grace through faith by believing in Jesus, as Paul preached in Acts 16.

    Can it be plainer?

    “The salvation of the soul, unlike the salvation of the spirit, is conditional The salvation of the soul is dependent on the life one lives after his spirit has been saved. It is dependent on the individual allowing the Spirit of God to impart spiritual truth into and control his life through his own spirit” (p. 13, Salvation of the Soul).

    Further, Chitwood painstakingly goes on to describe that the soul, unlike the spirit is unredeemed, unsaved, in darkness, and partnering with Satan, etc. In short, the soul is NOT NOW saved by grace, and it is NOT EVER saved by grace.

    These are Chitwood’s own words, if you can find where he ever says the soul is saved by grace through faith (as in Acts 16), just show me — book and page number. Until you do, I won’t allow you to say otherwise.

    Now, you will reply that the salvation of the soul only pertains to ones inheritance, not eternal salvation. That sounds good until you remember that, according to Chitwood, the soul is NOT NOW saved by believing in Jesus (Acts 16). And, according to Chitwood, the soul is NOT EVER saved by believing in Jesus (Acts 16). Bernard’s reference to Acts 16 regards UNCONDITIONAL salvation. Remember, according to Chitwood, the soul is NOT saved UNCONDITIONALLY.

    According to Chitwood the soul is NOT EVER saved UNCONDITIONALLY by grace through faith. Again, don’t tell me I’m wrong without first providing written evidence from Chitwood (a book or a sermon) that says otherwise.

    I won’t even publish your comment if you do not provide evidence that Chitwood teaches otherwise. I simply won’t let you waste any more of my time.

  44. Note: Four comments from Bernard have been rejected, per my prior statement. When either Arlen Banks (or, for that matter, Chitwood) or Bernard can show me where Chitwood teaches that the soul is EVER saved UNCONDITIONALLY by grace, then I will post their comment. Otherwise, this conversation is finished.

  45. I am new to these postings… If the “Kingdom Exclusionist” are incorrect in there interpretation of the curse placed on Noah’s son, what is the correct interpretation of the curse. Is there a difference between this curse and other curses in the bible… are we to see them as magic spells placed on someone. Please explain sense this seems to be a major point of this forum.

  46. Sorry for not posting in my last comment, but should have included this observation.
    It would seem to me this discussion can not be about the “salvation of the soul” because there has been no agreement on what the soul is. One side “admin” said on February 18, 2011 that there should be no distinction or separation of the parts of man “As for your questions, I reject them out-of-hand. A living person is a whole being, not parts. There is no scriptural justification for regarding the parts of a person (body, spirit, soul, mind, joints, heart, etc.) as independently exiting components needing different types of salvation.” The other side would like to separate man into body, soul, and spirit. Me, being of simple mind would have to say any discussion without an agreement on a foundation is just exercise in futility.

  47. Two more comments from Bernard have been rejected. Again, where does Chitwood teach that the soul is EVER unconditionally saved by grace through faith? Just the title of the book and page number and/or sermon recording.

    Also, Bernard, why don’t you just start your own blog? Your last several comments had nothing to do with anything we’ve been talking about here. Just start your own blog. Visit

  48. Robert, you wrote: “If the ‘Kingdom Exclusionist’ are incorrect in there interpretation of the curse placed on Noah’s son…”


    Did you read A. Edwin Wilson’s “The Sons of Noah”? Is that, by any stretch, the correct interpretation?

    (Chitwood thought so — he edited and promoted the text, only pulling it a year ago after I exposed it at Arlen Banks faithfully makes it available at his website. Countless others offer and promote the text. Apparently, a lot of people think Wilson was correct.)

    Did you listen to Powell’s sermon on race? Is that the correct interpretation?

    Robert, it is time to take a stand. Was Wilson offering a correct interpretation of the Hamitic curse when he opposed integration of Christian churches?

    Postscript: As regards your question about the soul, I do not believe people are contending over what the soul is, but rather if the soul is saved differently than the spirit, i.e. conditional vs. unconditional salvation. Do you believe that salvation is unconditional?

  49. Yes I believe the soul is saved unconditionally. When we stand before God to be judged we will stand there, spirit, soul, and (new)body. I believe Christians will be rewarded(not to be understood as only in the good sense) for there faithfulness or lack of. The blood of Christ covers us completely, we can not affect our (whole)salvation in any way. If you think that Chitwood does not teach this then so be it… I disagree with Chitwood.
    As far as “The Sons of Noah”, there can be many interpretations but only one correct interpretation(not being condescending.) I am not saying your interpretation is wrong(we have not heard it yet.) It is clear that there is a curse there on one of the sons of Noah, what that curse meant then and what it means now is what I want to know from you. I believe that the best cometary of scripture is scripture so to understand any cures(or doctrine) the easiest way would be to see how God handles curses else ware. But of course this raises the question can someone use scripture to prove scripture. If you believe that this curse has no meaning now that’s fine.
    If you are tiring to get me(people) to say(believe) that Wilson’s interpretation of this curse is wrong that may be a little more difficult(need more defining.) The conclusion(how Christians should treat each other) he draws from that scripture would be what’s in question, I will assume you agree with this, as you have already said his interpretation is incorrect.
    So… What do I(me not Wilson) believe this cures on Noah’s son means today.
    A cures was placed on Noah’s son. It was bad curse and pretty specific. I don’t see any indications that this curse should be treated any different than other curses(if you do please enplane.) I don’t see were the curse has been lifted and will not until all curses are lifted.

    Having said that, I know say this.

    If I only read the account of the curse then my conclusions(interpretation) would be different but I have read more of the scripture. So drawing on what I stated before about using scripture to interpret scripture my understanding of the the curse(which still is the same as stated above) the question is how do I live my life not just with that understanding but from all of scripture.
    Friendship with the world is enmity with God.
    So this and other scripture would limit my close friends to Christians. I think we would all agree on how we are suppose to treat other Christians according to the New Testament so I wont go there(LOVE.) So do I believe that Christians of different races must worship separately NO, do I believe that different Christian races should not marry NO(I do believe that Christians of different cultures should be cautious) as all those that marry should be.

    One last thing… You are right, the question is not about what the soul is, it is the part of a completely redeemed man that fights against the spirit. It is not the spirit of a redeemed man that leads him to temptation ending in sin it is the lust of the flesh, and selfish desires of his mind that believes that God is not sufficient to meet its needs.
    I believe that the bible is the complete instruction book for the Christian.
    I believe that we will be judged according to what’s in that book.
    I believe that saying to God at the judgment that I believe this because Wilson said it or Chitwood or Robert or admin said it would not be a good idea. You and I can not change someones mind the Holy Spirit will do that if God permits.

    We both agree that man is completely saved by Christ blood.
    My question to you is this, does our faithfulness now have ANY consequences in our future after death? I am being very general because I do not want to get into Millennial Kingdom eternity discussion.

    So if anything I have written here is in disagreement with Wilson, Chitwood, or admin so be it.

    Jhn 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and(Satan)hath NOTHING in me.

  50. Robert,

    We seem to agree more than we disagree. You maintain the soul is saved unconditionally, I maintain the soul is saved unconditionally — Chitwood does not. You say some other things regarding the soul, but, essentially, we agree on the main point: the soul is saved unconditionally. (Chitwood has never, to my knowledge, taught that the soul is saved unconditionally — if you disagree with this statement, provide evidence.)

    We also generally agree on the Hamitic curse. In a word, we both agree that Wilson was wrong to oppose integration. You believe in mixed-race worship, I believe in mixed-race worship. You support intermarriage, I support intermarriage — Wilson did not. What Chitwood believes is anyone’s guess. All I have to go on is that Chitwood edited, endorsed and promoted Wilson’s Selected Writings.

    I do not believe that you and I agree completely on every issue, but I am satisfied with what level of agreement we have.

  51. What’s the latest expo? Im still Preaching The Word,the full counsel of God, which of course, deals with the word of the Kingdom.Are you still in opposition, brother Mark?

  52. My position remains that the “Word of the Kingdom” stands in opposition to scripture. If the message is, you must work, I don’t believe WOK says much that is unique. Its auxiliary parts (conditional salvation, the Hamitic curse, etc.) are heretical. I haven’t observed anyone who teaches WOK doing anything remarkable for the kingdom. At this point, I’m wondering why anyone within that movement believes they’ve discovered something extraordinary. At best, it’s bad theology; at worst, it’s heresy. Doesn’t seem to make people better Christians.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *