E w kenyon biography template

From 1982 to 1986, John Wimber and C. Peter Wagner taught a course at Fuller Seminary called MC510: Signs, Wonders and Church Growth. Students learned “power evangelism,” based on the assumption that all believers have power and authority to preach the gospel by demonstrating God’s power through signs and wonders. This laid the foundation for “Schools of Supernatural Ministry,” but it was not the first effort along these lines. Historically, Pentecostal groups have founded Bible colleges that value practical training more than book learning. The oldest such school to teach healing is the Christ for the Nations Institute in Dallas, Texas.

Christ for the Nations was founded by James “Gordon” Lindsay (1906-1973). In keeping with Psalm 87:5, Lindsay was born in Zion, Illinois, a town established by the early healing evangelist Alexander Dowie, to parents who were disciples of Dowie.

In 1966, the Voice of Healing opened a training center

to provide intensive days of practical instruction in prayer and intercession, the art of personal soul winning, the operation of the Gifts of the Spirit, the ministry of deliverance, the art of counseling, practical methods on the missionary field, and divine health, daily ministering to the sick until they are healed. Nationally known ministers and those who had practical experience on the subject served as teachers.

In 1970, the training center became the Christ for the Nations Institute (CFNI), which today offers a three-year program, whose purpose is described this way:

The reason CFNI exists is to train world changers. Students attend this Institute from all across the world to be trained to live out their God-given calling with boldness and power wherever He may send them.

While CFNI may be the oldest SSM, it is certainly not

It has been called “Christian Hogwarts.” It claims to welcome over 2,000 students a year from 64 countries. Its students roam public spaces near its campus, engaging in “

(For Preachers and Teachers Of The Word)

By Pastor Bimbo Animashaun

One of the greatest challenges you will ever face in ministry is meeting people or facing situations that tend to put pressure on you to change your God-given pattern in ministry.

As a minister, you must settle certain things in your heart early in ministry and one of them is to know that you’re called to please God and not to please men or play to the gallery.

Not everyone will understand you in ministry, and sometimes you will also see senior ministers who don’t flow with your pattern or style of ministry.

At this level, some young ministers bag down and begin to adapt to new modes that don’t really suit their calling, and they know that fact deep inside their spirits.

It will help you to know that not everyone will accept your ministry and not everyone will like your pattern and style – it has been like that from ages past.

And may I say very pointedly, emphatically and categorically that most of the criticisms will come from fellow ministers who don’t understand the peculiarity of your calling and who feel that their own ministry pattern is the only one validated by Scriptures.

For the avoidance of doubt, ALL OF US FOLLOW CHRIST AS OUR ULTIMATE PATTERN AND CHRIST IS OUR ULTIMATE MODEL AND EXAMPLE IN MINISTRY.

I understand that perfectly by God’s Grace. I also know that “apostolic doctrine” is the standard of the Church in all ages and across all generational layers – Acts 2:42, Eph.2:20.

But think about this; Christ is All shades of brilliance and various dimensions of manifestations and we see this running through like a thread in the New Testament.

For instance, the Word makes it abundantly clear that Christ is not divided – 1 Cor.1:13, Eph.4:5 but we realize that there are five ministry gifts, namely apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers which represent different dimensions of Christ relative to mini

The page is poorly written and its claims unverified. It needs attention. --Wordbuilder21:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree ... who is this hack! -- Banemean01:32, 08 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't my point. Hack or not, the article should be better written and sourced. --Wordbuilder02:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The only (inarguable) truth seems to be that Kenyon—twice divorced and the overseer of the tragic suicide at Bethel—was no stranger to controversy either in his life or his death." Could anyone explain the reference to "tragic suicide at Bethel"? 65.14.60.204:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found a pair of "meh" sources through google this morning and added them to the article. There's still a large bulk of the article that's largely unsourced, and some of it disagrees quite a bit with the articles I've found. I'm not really interested in deeply researching this guy's life, but I'd like to see the folks that have contributed the most cite something... :) Nswinton16:17, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Faith controversy

I'm moving this section here because it doesn't have any quality citations for discussion what, if anything, should be included in the main article.

There is considerable debate over the amount of influence Kenyon provides for the Word of Faith movement. A number of Word of Faith adherents and critics insist Kenyon's influence is minimal and restricted primarily to his teachings regarding the name of Jesus. On the other hand, a number of critics including D.R. McConnell, Dave Hunt, and Hank Hannegraaff imply that Word of Faith mainstream doctrine is little more than plagiarized Kenyon.

In 1979, Oral Roberts University professor Charles Farah wrote From the Pinnacle of the Temple, a book that took issue with a number of teachings in the Word of Faith movement. He traced Kenyon's roots to metaphysical traditions from Kenyon's time at Emerson. One of Farah's students, Daniel