Many of your concerns have been considered on the On Doctrine website in the articles about Kenneth Copeland and others at:

"Kenneth Copeland" www.ondoctrine.com/10copela.htm

"Kenneth Copeland - What Did He Say?" www.ondoctrine.com/3word001.htm

"Kenneth Copeland, Kenneth Hagin, Mark 11:12-23 and False Prophecies" www.ondoctrine.com/3word004.htm

"Why Do I Criticize God's Anointed?" www.ondoctrine.com/0faqs013.htm

Because you have adopted the teachings of Kenneth Copeland, you have also adopted his erroneous application of the Scripture, especially in relation to your attempt to use 1 Chronicles 16:22 (Psalm 105:15) as a prohibition against any disagreement that a person might have in relation to what Kenneth Copeland teaches or does. The manner in which Kenneth Copeland and you apply the verse is not acceptable on four grounds:

1. God has not spoken to the church stating that Kenneth Copeland is one of His special anointed individuals. Kenneth Copeland may claim that position, but he can say anything that he wishes and those words don't make it so, even when he claims to be able to create by the use of words, an ability which he has provided zero evidence of reality. Until his claim is confirmed by God, his words are only expressing his self-proclaimed authority.

2. The Scripture says nothing about touching God's anointed being defined as theological disagreement based on the Scripture itself. Kenneth Copeland wishes to exempt himself from accountability, not only for what he says, but what he does as well, and so he attempts to hide behind the Scripture in order to coerce people into a belief that they are violating a command of God by daring to question what he says or does. The term "touch" in 1 Chronicles 16:22 means to physically abuse by violence resulting in injury or death. The attempt to stretch that meaning into the concept of a prohibition against disagreement, calling a person to accountability or comparing what a person teaches or does with the Scripture is a perversion of the Scripture. Pharaoh called Abraham to accountability because of his lie (Genesis 12:10-20), Abimelech called Abraham to accountability because of his lie (Genesis 20:18), Abimelech called Isaac to accountability because of his lie (Genesis 26:6-11), Moses called Aaron the High Priest to accountability because he constructed the golden calf (Exodus 32:2135), Samuel rebuked king Saul because of his disobedience (1 Samuel 15:10-35), and Nathan called David to accountability because of his immoral conduct with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah (2 Samuel 12:1- 15), Those men were the directly anointed and called by God, yet they were not exempt from a call to accountability, so I do not accept the idea that the self-proclaimed anointed possess a greater exemption.

3. The apostle Paul was not exempt from scrutiny by the Bereans through their application of the Scripture when he brought gospel to them, Acts 17:10-11, and the apostle Peter was not exempt from public condemnation by the apostle Paul in relation to his conduct, Galatians 2:11-14. If you believe that Kenneth Copeland possesses a greater authority that exempts him from the same accountability to doctrine and conduct to which the apostles Peter and Paul were subject, then you need to take a very long look at why you are granting to a human being a position which he assumes for himself and which God has not confirmed.

4. The claim by an individual that they are exempt from scrutiny or criticism denies the reality that the Scripture demands that teachers and prophets conform to the teaching of the Scripture and failure to do so results in penalties, and that can only be done by comparing what they teach and what they do in relation to what the Scripture says. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 is the standard and it can only be applied if a person compares the teaching and conduct of the "anointed" with the Scripture. To the extent that the teaching or conduct of the "anointed" differs from that found in the Scripture reveals the difficulty. If it is said that anyone who claims to be the "anointed" is exempt from scrutiny by the Scripture, then the Scripture is denied the authority granted to it by God and it is denied that there is a method by which false teachers and prophets can be identified, and since God has stated the standard to be applied, the authority of God is denied as well. Either the Scripture is authoritative or it is not. If it is authoritative, then Kenneth Copeland falls under its mandates and must conform to its doctrines. If it is not authoritative, then you can toss it in the trash and make Kenneth Copeland to be the authority and he can write his own Scripture for you to follow, which he is already doing.

Of course the sin of Eve and Adam resulted in their fall, but sin was already in the world prior to their action, because Satan was present in the form of the serpent. So, it is not their sin that "allowed the curse into the earth," because the curse was already stated by God in the prohibition that He gave to them, "The Lord commanded the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die,'" Genesis 2:16-17. Not only were Adam and Eve aware of good, they were also aware that there was evil, as evidenced by the name of the tree given by God. Their sin resulted in the curse being applied to themselves, the creation and to Satan by a direct statement and act of God. Sickness, poverty and death did not enter the universe outside the direct hand and action of God. The curse on Adam was that he would one day die and that he would toil by the sweat of his brow, attempting to cultivate the ground that fought back with thistles and thorns. Eve would be subject to Adam and she would attempt to usurp his position of authority and their son would kill his brother and they would all live outside the perfect confines of the garden, hardly a blessing for one of God's anointed. Do you believe that Adam did wrong, that his conduct was unacceptable, that his actions were the cause of all the misery in the world? Apparently you do, because that is what you have stated, but you should be very careful how you answer, because when you make a statement against Adam (who was a "god" equal to the Creator God according to Kenneth Copeland), then you are "touching one of God's anointed," by your own definition.

Your reference to Genesis 1:28-29 is faulty, because it does not conform to reality. If you believe that every Christian should be healthy, wealthy, have dominion over the earth and live in total peace and tranquility, then you need to deal with the fact that there has never been one Christian since the resurrection who has accomplished that feat, since every Christian has lived and died within the parameters of a fallen creation. Even the apostles were unable to accomplish perfection of existence in this life. If you believe that it is God's will for every Christian to be healed, then why was the apostle Paul not healed, and why did God specifically tell him that he would not be healed? Was the apostle Paul sinful, did he have doubt, did he have fear or did he not know about who he was supposed to be in relation to Word of Faith theology?

Why did the apostle Paul not heal Trophimus, 2 Timothy 4:20, and why did he not heal Timothy, but instead told him to drink a little wine for his stomach trouble, 1 Timothy 5:23? Were they both so far out of touch with the exercise of faith that they did not qualify because of their doubt and fear, and if that was the case, why didn't the apostle Paul instruct them in the proper exercise of their God-given right to health, wealth and happiness? Should I assume he did not do that because he was deficient in that knowledge, since the Word of Faith concept had not been explained to him by God?

Why did Epaphroditus become ill when he was doing the "work of Christ," Philippians 2:25-30?

Why wasn't the apostle Paul rich so that he did not have to make his living making tents while he was preaching the gospel at Corinth, Acts 18:3, 1 Corinthians 9:8?

Why didn't the apostle Paul teach the Macedonians how to become rich so they could supply all the needs of the church at Jerusalem and have riches left over, instead giving out of their deep poverty, 2 Corinthians 8:1-5? A better question is, Why were the Macedonian Christians in such deep poverty in the first place? Were they sinful, afraid or lacking in faith? The apostle Paul didn't seem to understand that to be the case, but what would he know? A greater question is, Why was the church in Jerusalem in poverty, persecuted and required outside help from the Macedonians, Corinthians and other Asian churches when they were led by the apostles including Peter? Apparently, according to Word of Faith doctrine, none of the apostles understood who they were as Christians and so they settled for less than God's best.

Why was the apostle Paul persecuted and martyred, and why was Stephen stoned? Were they lacking in faith and did not understand their position as Christians by which they were exempt from that treatment? Why were the majority of the apostles martyred? Why have Christians been persecuted throughout history and are persecuted and martyred for their faith almost on a daily basis even today in countries throughout the world? Why were the Reformers burned at the stake for their faith? If God wants every Christian to be healthy, wealthy and safe, then why does God allow them to be sick, poor, persecuted and martyred in the first place? Would you say that they are all lacking in faith and understanding about their position as Christians and their entitlement as kings and rulers of this world?

How is it that there is not one Christian since the resurrection who has lived for centuries because they were healed of all their diseases and has lived the life of a king with riches and power at their disposal that would defy description? I have been waiting to meet just one of those people, but they seem to be very reclusive. How is it that Christians with visible diseases, such as missing arms or legs due to cancer or diabetes, eyes destroyed by glaucoma or macular degeneration or quadriplegics or missing fingers due to leprosy, are not miraculously restored in front of TV cameras for the world to see? Why is it that those people are not healed, while those with the invisible diseases claim that they have been healed and even the most insignificant diseases such as cysts and painful belly buttons are eliminated? Is every one of those people deficient in faith? Have they not given their "best seed," so that they can buy the faith necessary to obtain their healing?

The problem is, you wish to live in a perfect world in which there is no sickness, pain, suffering or inequities, but that is not going to happen until you go to heaven and the earth will not be made right again until the earth is recreated anew by God, Revelation 21. The real world is the same in which the apostles did not live like kings as a result of Word Faith teaching, so, you will not either. You live within the confines of a fallen creation, the results of which affect you even though you may be a Christian. Your teacher tells you what you wish to hear, but that is an unreal world of fantasy. Your teacher tells you that everything can be perfect in your life if you only have the faith to make it happen, but that is not what Jesus Christ said,

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to 'Set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household'. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it," Matthew 10:34-39.

"In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome the world," John 16:33.

"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you," Matthew 5:10-12.

"And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope , , ," Romans 5:3-4.

"Consider it all joy, my brethren, when you encounter various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing," James 1:2-4.

"Blessed is a man who perseveres under trial; for once he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him," James 1:12.

Kenneth Copeland claims that God was reproducing himself when He created Adam and Eve, but what you do not realize is that Kenneth Copeland has adopted Mormon doctrine in relation to the origin of Adam and Eve. Mormons hold to the view that the universe, man and God are made of the same substance and therefore, man can become a god since he is of the same material being as god. The God of the Bible is not a created being and is not of the same substance as human beings, because human beings were created by God, not from the substance of Himself but from nothing by His word. Adam and Eve were not created from the same substance as God, so, they were not created as duplicates of God. They were created as beings apart from the substance of God and even lower than the created angels who are not gods,

"What is man that You are mindful of him, and the son of man that You visit him? For you have made him a little lower than the angels, and you have crowned him with glory and honor," Psalm 8:5.

You claim that God gave ownership of the earth to Adam and that Adam, as a result of his sin, transferred that ownership to Satan. The Bible makes no such statement. Kenneth Copeland teaches that to you and you accept it without a biblical foundation to do so. The Scripture says that the earth is owned by God, not by Adam or Satan: Exodus 9:29, Exodus 19:5, Deuteronomy 10:14, 1 Chronicles 29:11, Psalm 24:1-2, Psalm 89:11, Psalm 46, 1 Corinthians 10:26. Ownership of the earth was not an issue regarding the sin of Adam and Eve and there is no Scripture that will support a claim that it was.

God is a sovereign God and He is subject to nothing outside of Himself, especially the claims of human beings living on a speck of a planet somewhere in infinite space, whose lives are but a whisper in time but who are self-proclaimed gods.

"Whatever the Lord pleases, He does, in heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all deeps." Psalm 135:6

"But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases." Psalm 115:3

Kenneth Copeland, with impudent foolishness, says that "God is the biggest failure in the Bible." So, what does God say about His abilities?

"'Listen to Me, O house of Jacob. And all the remnant of the house of Israel, you who have been borne by Me from birth and have been carried from the womb; even to your old age I will be the same. And even to your graying years I will bear you! I have done it, and I will carry you; and I will bear you and I will deliver you. To whom would you liken Me and make Me equal and compare Me, that we would be alike? Those who lavish gold from the purse and weigh silver on the scale hire a goldsmith, and he makes it into a god; they bow down, indeed they worship it. They lift it upon the shoulder and carry it; they set it in its place and it stands there. It does not move from its place though one may cry to it, it cannot answer; it cannot deliver him from his distress. Remember this, and be assured; recall it to mind, you transgressors. Remember the former things long past, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, ""My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure""; calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of My purpose from a far country. Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it. Isaiah 46:3-11.

You accept Kenneth Copeland as your teacher, because he elevates himself and you to godhood, but he also brings God down to the level of fallen human beings as a failure and denies the very words that God states about Himself in Isaiah 46. Kenneth Copeland makes Jesus Christ to be a sinner, denying His sinless purity, claiming that Jesus Christ took on Himself the nature of Satan. So Jesus Christ became a sinner no different from Satan and required a Savior Himself before He could die for the sins of the world, so who accomplished the atonement for Him?

It escapes your understanding just how deep is the blasphemy that Kenneth Copeland speaks by claiming that God is a failure, because in that claim he is also stating that God is a liar in relation to Isaiah 46.

It escapes your understanding just how serious is Kenneth Copeland's claim that he could have taken the place of Jesus Christ on the cross, because he denies the necessity of the incarnation and the reality that only the God/Man Jesus Christ could have paid the price for the sins of the world through His death on the cross, not His mythical torture in hell by Satan. Of course, Kenneth Copeland claims that he is a god, so that must justify his claim?

It escapes your understanding that there could not even be a born again human being without the incarnation and death of Jesus Christ on the cross, and what Kenneth Copeland is saying is that Jesus Christ Himself had to be born again, because he says that Jesus Christ was a born again man. Where is the teaching about a born again Jesus Christ found in the Scripture?

It escapes your understanding that Kenneth Copeland claims that the death of Jesus Christ on the cross accomplished nothing in relation to salvation:

"Now it wasn't the physical death on the cross that paid the price for sin, because if it had of been any prophet of God that had died for the last couple of thousand years before that could have paid that price. It wasn't physical death anybody could do that." -- Kenneth Copeland

"But He was pierced through for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well-being fell upon Him, and by His scourging we are healed," Isaiah 53:5

"Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Philippians 2:8-11.

I will issue a challenge to you in three parts:
1. Search the Scripture and find any verse that indicates that Jesus Christ was tortured in hell by Satan.
2. Search the Scripture and find any verse that states that payment for sin was accomplished by Jesus Christ in hell.
3. Search the Scripture and find any verse that will confirm Kenneth Copeland's claim that the penalty and payment for sin was paid to Satan in order for Jesus Christ to atone for the sins of the world.

It escapes your understanding that Kenneth Copeland is closer to Mormon theology than he is to Christian Orthodox belief, because he has adopted Mormon exaltation theology, which states that:
1. God was once a man who has been exalted to godhood.
2. God is a personage of tabernacle, a person with a body the same size as an average man with flesh and bones and is not a spirit.
3. Jesus Christ was once a man and has been exalted to godhood.
4. Jesus Christ is a personage of tabernacle, a person with a body of flesh and bones and is not a spirit.
5. God is not a trinity. Every Mormon has the potential to be a god, although not everyone will become a god. There are an infinite number of gods.
6. God lives on a planet.

It escapes your understanding that by his claim to be a god, Kenneth Copeland also usurps the place of God and claims for himself the ability to accomplish only what God can do and blasphemes God by worshipping himself when he says that Jesus Christ told him,

"'Pray to yourself, because I'm in your self and you're in My self. We are one Spirit,' saith the Lord."

"On the following day he entered Caesarea. Now Cornelius was waiting for them and had called together his relatives and close friends. When Peter entered. Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him. But Peter raised him up, saying, 'Stand up; I too am just a man,'"
Acts 10:24-26.

"When the crowds saw what Paul had done, they raised their voice, saying in the Lycaonian language, 'The gods have become like men and have come down to us.' And they began calling Barnabas, Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker. The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, and wanted to offer sacrifice with the crowds. But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, 'Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them. . . Even saying these things, with difficulty they restrained the crowds from offering sacrifice to them," Acts 14:11-15, 18.

"Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has see, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind . .," Colossians 2:18.

"Then I fell at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, 'Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy,'" Revelation 19:10. "But he said to me, 'Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God,'" Revelation 22:9.

""Behold, I am against the prophets," declares the Lord, "who use their tongues and declare, 'The Lord declares.' Behold, I am against those who have prophesied false dreams," declares the Lord, "and related them and led My people astray by their falsehoods and reckless boasting; yet I did not send them or command them, nor do they furnish this people the slightest benefit," declares the Lord." ""For you will no longer remember the oracle of the Lord, because every man's own word will become the oracle, and you have perverted the words of the living God, and the Lord of hosts, our God."" Jeremiah 23:31-32, 36 (NAS)

You have not considered the logical conclusion of Kenneth Copeland's doctrines, so you do not know what he is actually saying and you do not know the Scripture in relation to what he is teaching. If you think Kenneth Copeland's teachings are "Word backed & not of opinion," then present your case from the Scripture and not from the lips of Kenneth Copeland.

Sincerely,

You do not need to think that I was upset by your note, since I am rarely personally offended by what anyone writes. Individuals who write simply to be offensive don't receive a reply.

In relation to those who opposed Moses, their statements against him had nothing to do with his doctrine or his teaching in relation to the Scripture, but were based on the desire of the people to extend their personal comfort zone by whining about their claims of inadequate food, water and safety, and presuming that God would not provide those things in spite of the fact that He had provided in the past and was continually providing for their needs but not necessarily for their wants, Exodus 15; 16; 17, Numbers 11; 12; 14; 16; 20; 21. The statements of Korah, Numbers 16, were an attempt to seize political and religious power by means of a rebellion, and the statements against Moses by Miriam and Aaron were attempts to claim that they had authority that was as great as Moses because they claimed that they had received prophecies from God that they had not, Numbers 12. The grumblings by the people, Korah's rebellion and Miriam's and Aaron's statements were actually accusations against God who was physically present and had provided every benefit to them, which they ignored because of their selfish preoccupation with their own temporal desires.

Moses had credentials that verified his position as a prophet, because the Lord appeared as the Shekinah, the cloud by day and pillar of fire by night, and also at the Tent of Meeting in which His presence validated the anointing and authority of Moses and in which He verified that Moses spoke the very words of God, Numbers 12:7-8. In addition, Moses' position and claims were also validated by numerous supernatural miracles of which he was a part. None of those credentials are possessed by Kenneth Copeland. He claims that early in his ministry a tree died that he planted in his yard, and that he spoke to the tree and it eventually came back to life. So, he claims that he has the power to give life, a claim which he cannot verify or demonstrate at any level of reality. He claims the office of a prophet, yet he prophesies falsely. So, in reality, according to the Scripture, Deuteronomy 18:20-22, he is not a prophet and not anointed.

I went back through my reply and found that I had presented 17 claims by Kenneth Copeland which are not supported in the Scripture. In addition, I challenged you to provide biblical support for three additional claims that he had made, so there were actually 20 claims by Kenneth Copeland which are not supported in the Scripture. You state that Kenneth Copeland's teachings are biblically based, so I presumed, in relation to the three claims, that you believed that you could present a biblical foundation that I deny exists, and I wondered what that foundation might be. Unfortunately, you have chosen not to deal with any of those issues and simply use Kenneth Copeland's statements as your foundation. You attempt to invalidate all the issues by going back to the "don't touch my anointed" defense. But that is the very issue; is Kenneth Copeland the anointed? You claim that he is, but you cannot support his teachings from the Scripture, and the Scripture denies his claim, so you believe and accept his teachings without a biblical foundation to do so.

You might be interested to know that I have never attended a seminary, even a lifeless one. I have been in a seminary building and used a seminary library, but I have never taken a seminary class or been in a seminary lecture or even heard part of a seminary lecture. But I do know that the Scripture says the following:

"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth," 2 Timothy 2:15.

"But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work," 2 Timothy 3:13-17.

You base your beliefs on how you feel about what you hear, and what you hear from Kenneth Copeland confirms what you wish to be reality, because his statements make you feel good and are your validation of what you wish to believe about yourself and your spiritual abilities and powers. Your positive feelings toward Kenneth Copeland are the validating factors that allow you to believe that he is a true prophet and miracle worker, even in the face of biblical and practical evidence to the contrary. You say that I have been left with "(useless misinterpretations of ) information," but you have not checked the biblical references that I quoted to see if what I stated was true or whether I had misrepresented what the Scripture says and you provided no biblical support for what you claim are the misinterpretations that I have expressed. The biblical doctrines that confirm or deny Kenneth Copeland's teachings are not used by you, because they are the content of theology and doctrine, and express truth that exists outside the parameters of the subjective judgments of your feelings and emotions. You do have a theology based on Gnosticism, in which you believe that there is some type of intuitive knowing that bypasses the intellect and doctrine, and its validation as truth is through your emotions, because when it feels right or seems like it should be right, you then believe that it is right. The Scripture says that what may seem right based on human judgment, may be in fact terribly wrong, Proverbs 14:12. On the other hand, you reject the application of the intellect in relation to Scriptural doctrine as being in error because it is from the natural man, so you also reject a seminary training as being a hindrance to the application of what you believe to be a superior knowing through a higher level of spiritual revelation. However, the Scripture does not teach that view, because the Christian has a different mind, one that is a product of the influence of the Holy Spirit,

"And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect," Romans 12:2.

Sincerely,