The claim made by WoF critics is that E. W. Kenyon is the true father of the movement, and Kenyon took his “heretical” teachings from the metaphysical cults spawned by the New Thought movement of the late 19th century who had managed to turn the Emerson School of Oratory (a drama school) into a platform to promote their theology. One critic constantly repeats his assertion that the WoF is “New Thought metaphysics repackaged for Christian consumption”. I’ve already established in Part 1 and Part 2 that Kenyon wasn’t the true father of the movement, but now I’m going to show you that even if he was the true father of the movement it would be no indictment of WoF theology, because Kenyon didn’t subscribe to metaphysical theology (as defined by the critics, anyway) and didn’t take his teachings from them at all.
Kenyon’s Theological Roots
To address this issue I think we need to answer two questions. First, did Kenyon teach a “New Thought” version of Christianity? And if not, where did he get his views on faith, confession, and healing? When I wrote my book Defending the Faith – Word of Faith Apologetics over twenty years ago I was going by what little information I had at the time. Since then I’ve come across Joe McIntyre’s book E.W.Kenyon and His Message of Faith – The True Story which sheds a lot more light on the subject.
In that book McIntyre establishes that Kenyon’s theology was indeed influenced by New Thought, but not in the way that the critics assert. Kenyon was vehemently opposed to metaphysical theology, and objected to their depersonalization of God, their denial of the existence of sickness and death, and their characterization of Jesus as the way-shower rather than The Way. Much of what he wrote was written in response to the metaphysical cults, almost in an apologetics fashion.
McIntyre goes on to present a compelling case that the biggest influence on Kenyon’s theology was not the New Thought movement, but the Faith-Cure and Higher Life movements that sprang up out of the Holiness movement initiated by John Wesley’s revivals. He also makes a strong argument for why Kenyon was not likely indoctrinated by metaphysical theology while he was a student at the Emerson School of Oratory in Boston, as many of the critics charge. Emerson was not a seminary or theological institute, after all. It was a school for studying public speaking and the dramatic arts. Kenyon only attended Emerson when he was away from God from September 1892 to May 1893, got back in fellowship with God in 1893, and became an ordained Free Will Baptist minister in 1894.
McIntyre provides a timeline showing that the noted author of the metaphysical classic “In Tune With The Infinite” (published in 1897) Ralph Waldo Trine, became a known proponent of New Thought after leaving Emerson in 1894. His first published book entitled “What All the World’s A-Seeking” was published in 1896. The only thing that the critics can prove is that Trine and Kenyon were at Emerson at the same time. Everything else is speculation, and pretty much baseless at that. The critic who researched Kenyon’s background at Emerson even admits that:
“The direct statements of Kenyon regarding the metaphysical cults do not betray any conscious acceptance on his part of their ideas. In fact, in his earlier writings Kenyon is occasionally hostile towards these cults, describing them as “hellism” and “devilism”.”
According to McIntyre, the biggest influences on Kenyon’s theology were the Holiness Movement (he got saved in a Methodist revival meeting), the Free Will Baptists (which were aligned with the Holiness Movement), A. B. Simpson from the Christian & Missionary Alliance, Faith-Cure teachers Charles Cullis and John Alexander Dowie, South African devotional writer Andrew Murray, a close associate of D. L. Moody named R. A. Torrey, and Pentecostals like F. F. Bosworth, Aimee Semple-McPherson, Maria Woodworth-Etter, Dr. Lilian B. Yeomans, and John G. Lake.
Kenyon’s emphasis on confession came from the Holiness Movement, not New Thought. It came as a surprise to me that confession was an important expression of faith with them, but McIntyre documents this quite well in his book. It’s almost as if the New Thought people were taking their cues from the Holiness movement, rather than Kenyon borrowing from New Thought.
Gordon and Freda Lindsay
In her book My Diary Secrets Gordon Lindsay’s wife and ministry partner Freda Lindsay tells the story of being healed of tuberculosis. It was 1938. She was a 24 year old newlywed, and Gordon had just returned from his church in Billings, Montana to her family’s home in Portland upon hearing of her diagnosis. She begins by quoting Gordon’s words when he first saw her.
“… The devil is trying to destroy my ministry and to take your life.”
Oh how good it seemed to have him near. To encourage me when I needed him most. He talked on about it being the will of God to heal me, quoting Scripture after Scripture. And you know the Bible says, “Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.” (I John 3:21). So with that he left me to myself.
Back in my room, I began to call on the Lord. I asked Him to forgive me of every sin of omission or commission I was guilty of. After communing with the Lord for several hours, I felt completely clean within. It was as though I had had an internal bath. Nothing between my Lord and my Saviour. I knew I was ready to be healed!
Later that evening, after having visited his parents, Gordon returned. I told him I was ready — ready to be healed! So together we prayed, Gordon leading out in a strong, clear voice, cursing the devil and asking the Lord to heal me in Jesus’ name. I was agreeing with him. “If two of you shall agree on earth as toughing any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 18:19)
A Young Freda Lindsay
So with that as the declaration of my faith, I arose from bed, declaring I was healed. Nor did I consult my feelings, for had I done that I would have stayed in bed. No feelings came at first. But back and forth I walked, praising God and thanking Him for healing me, while Gordon shouted with me. After a few minutes I did feel stronger. Praise God! For some 15 or 20 minutes this went on. Then feeling a little weary I climbed back into bed, only to arise a few minutes later and proceed again to thank God for my healing.That night I slept almost unbrokenly — the first time in several months. The next morning when mother came to ask what she could bring me for breakfast I told her that I was joining her and Gordon at the table. After breakfast, she urged me to “crawl back in bed and not overdo.” I informed her that I would dry the dishes for her, which I did.
Less than two weeks later, on July 16, I helped Gordon pack as we were on our way to Billings, stopping en route at Yellowstone for a day or two. On August 3rd I was back in church, helping in the services, healed by the power of God! (Later my sisters told me that when they and mother waved goodbye to me that morning in Portland, they thought the next time they saw me I would be in my coffin.)
Some have asked if I ever had a relapse or a recurrence. To this I must say that for a few months I would occasionally have “symptoms.” But Gordon, being the strong and thorough faith teacher that he was, had cautioned me that “lying symptoms” would return. And when they did, I was to immediately recognize that they came from the devil, and I was to resist them with all that was within me. “Resist the devil, and he will flee from you” (James 4:7). To emphasize it, Gordon would gleefully point out, “You notice, he won’t just walk away. He’ll put his tail between his legs and run for all he’s worth.” And so it worked! Praise God!
And though it had seemed at that period of my life I would never see 30, I have indeed lived a full life — working 12, 14, or 16 hours a day for 35 years by the side of my husband who prayed the prayer of faith for me.
Freda Lindsay passed away in 2010 at the ripe old age of 95! Reading this testimony, you might think that it came from a modern Word of Faith proponent, but this occurred long before anybody ever heard of Kenneth Hagin, and few outside of New England had heard of E. W. Kenyon. Gordon Lindsay was born in Zion, Illinois, a city founded by the famous Scottish healing minister John Alexander Dowie in 1901. He grew up in the Pentecostal home of believers in divine healing. As an adult he developed friendships with healing ministers John. G. Lake and F. F. Bosworth, who had also lived in Zion.
These people were old time Pentecostals, influenced by people like Dowie, Charles Parham, and Aimee Semple McPherson. They were not believers in New Thought metaphysics or Christian Science. When I attended an Assembly of God church in the 1970s I heard similar stories from some of the old timers there. Sister Lindsay’s testimony further corroborates McIntyre’s account of Kenyon’s theological roots in the Faith-Cure and similar movements birthed by the Holiness Movement.
Kenyon’s Creed
When Kenyon was pastoring in Los Angeles his church published The Kenyon Herald. They produced a creed which stated:
“If a creed should be written, and we go on walking with the Lord, it would have to be left open at the top, and on all sides, that new thoughts might be added as the Lord opened the Word …
We stand for the whole Bible as the whole revelation of God in Christ, and that what God revealed in Christ is every true believer’s heritage.
We believe in the finished work of Christ.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, and His indwelling presence.
We believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
We believe that healing is for us.
We believe that the miracles of the book of Acts are to be perpetuated.
We believe in the new kind of love that Jesus brought to be the law of the brethren and we believe that we are to walk in that love …
We believe in the Great commission ..
We believe in the second coming of our Lord.”
Doesn’t sound like New Thought to me. And apparently I’m not alone. Several anti-WoF people see through the allegations as well. Take for example this book review from a leading apologetics group.
“In his analysis of these concerns, however, McConnell falls short. He does so by trying to prove that the “faith” movement is, in some sense, metaphysical thought masquerading in evangelical garb.
Because of certain similarities between metaphysical teachings and the “faith” message, McConnell argues that they share the same doctrines. In so doing he ignores critical differences between the two, and fails to address much of what is distinctively “faith” teaching.
This is seen, for example, in his comments on the “faith” teaching regarding faith. He states that the “laws and formulas [regarding faith in the “faith” gospel] can only be understood in the light of the doctrine of God in the metaphysical cults.” But the premises of these two schools of thought are different. For the metaphysical cults God is an impersonal principle. For the “faith” teachers God is a personal being who operates by faith. Even if we grant that the effects of such ideas are similar, the root cause is quite different.”
– Brian Onken
Or this comment on the same book from another WoF critic.
“… it is unfair to equate faith teaching with Christian Science, since faith teaching shows much more respect for biblical authority and the person of Jesus than do the ingenious but indefensible interpretations of Christian Science founder Mary Baker Eddy.”
“At its best when refuting the biblical proof-texts most often used by Faith teachers; at its weakest when relating Faith teachings to the Mind Science cults and the New Age movement.”
-Curtis Crenshaw
The fact is Kenyon made very clear distinctions between himself and metaphysical cults like Christian Science.
Christian Science rejects the doctrine of the Trinity. Kenyon believed in the Trinity.
Christian Science rejects the deity of Christ. Kenyon did not.
Christian Science says that God is mind, not a person. Kenyon emphatically stated that God is a person, not an impersonal force.
Christian Science teaches a universalist view that man is already saved. Kenyon rejected universalism and taught that salvation is conditional.
Christian Science teaches that evil, Satan, sin, and sickness are only illusions. Kenyon said that they are quite real.
Christian Science rejects the belief in a literal hell. Kenyon believed in hell.
Summary
Given that the main critic of Kenyon admits no clear indication of Kenyon’s acceptance of metaphysical theology, given the refutations from other WoF critics that WoF theology is metaphysical in origin, given the fact that Kenyon was an ordained Free Will Baptist minister in good standing for half a century, given the statement of faith his church’s magazine published, given his lengthy, documented influences from the Holiness, Faith-Cure, and Higher Life movements, and given that numerous old time Pentecostals like the Lindsays understood rebuking sickness and standing on the Word for healing apart from what their physical senses might say, I would say that the preponderance of evidence suggests that E. W. Kenyon was a faithful servant of God with a few unorthodox ideas and expressions who has been grievously wronged by critics in their unbridled attacks on the Word of Faith movement. They should be ashamed of themselves. This is not what Christian apologetics is all about.
Given that the main critic of Kenyon admits no clear indication of Kenyon’s acceptance of metaphysical theology, given the refutations from other WoF critics that WoF theology is metaphysical in origin, given the fact that Kenyon was an ordained Free Will Baptist minister in good standing for half a century, given the statement of faith his church’s magazine published, given his lengthy, documented influences from the Holiness, Faith-Cure, and Higher Life movements, and given that numerous old time Pentecostals like the Lindsays understood rebuking sickness and standing on the Word for healing apart from what their physical senses might say, I would say that the preponderance of evidence suggests that E. W. Kenyon was a faithful servant of God with a few unorthodox ideas and expressions who has been grievously wronged by critics in their unbridled attacks on the Word of Faith movement. They should be ashamed of themselves. This is not what Christian apologetics is all about.