WORD OF WISDOM & WORD OF KNOWLEDGE (PART II)

Did Pentecostalism Invent the Modern Definitions?

By Akin Ojumu

In Part I, we examined Paul’s actual language in 1 Corinthians 12:8.

He speaks of:

λόγος σοφίας — logos Sophias: which translates into a “word,” “message,” or “utterance of wisdom”

and:

λόγος γνώσεως — logos gnōseōs: translated into a “word,” “message,” or “utterance of knowledge.”

Paul names the gifts. But he never provides the elaborate technical definitions commonly heard in modern Charismatic Christianity.

That matters.

Because somewhere between Paul’s first-century letter and the modern Pentecostal platform, these two simple expressions acquired an entire theological system.

In many Pentecostal, Charismatic, Word of Faith, and New Apostolic Reformation Churches, a “Word of Knowledge” commonly means that God supernaturally reveals secret information about another person—information the speaker could not possibly have known naturally.

A preacher may suddenly announce: 

“Someone here has pain on the left side of the neck.”

Or:

“Your mother died when you were twelve years old.”

Or:

“God is showing me somebody named Michael who has been struggling financially.”

This is then identified as the spiritual gift Paul called the Word of Knowledge.

The Word of Wisdom is commonly distinguished from it by saying that God reveals what will happen in the future or what somebody should do next.

The familiar formula therefore becomes:

Word of Knowledge = supernatural revelation concerning facts about the past or present.

Word of Wisdom = supernatural revelation concerning God’s plans, purposes, or events in the future.

Together with discerning of spirits, these are frequently classified as the three “revelation gifts.”

Kenneth Hagin’s ministry, for example, explicitly classifies the Word of Knowledge, Word of Wisdom, and discerning of spirits under that category.

There is only one problem.

Paul never says any of this.

You can search 1 Corinthians 12–14 from beginning to end. 

You will not find Paul saying: “Word of Knowledge deals with the past and present.”

You will not find him saying: “Word of Wisdom deals with the future.”

You will not find him teaching: “A Word of Knowledge is when God tells you somebody’s secret.”

Paul simply writes: logos sophias — word of wisdom

and: logos gnōseōs — word of knowledge.

That is what the text says.

Everything beyond that must be demonstrated rather than assumed.

The modern Pentecostal definitions are not simply the historic Christian interpretation of 1 Corinthians 12:8. Earlier interpreters understood these expressions very differently.

John Chrysostom (347–407 AD) was an important early Church Father, bishop of Constantinople, and a master preacher whose Greek name means “golden-mouthed” because of his powerful eloquence. He associated the “Word of Wisdom” with the kind of wisdom exemplified in men such as Paul and John, while distinguishing it from a “Word of Knowledge” possessed by believers who had genuine knowledge but were not necessarily equally skilled in communicating it.

There is no elaborate system in Chrysostom in which: 

Word of Knowledge = supernatural information about past and present events

while: 

Word of Wisdom = supernatural information about the future.

Thomas Aquinas likewise treated these gifts within the sphere of grace operating through speech—the Spirit enabling people to communicate divine truth effectively for the instruction and benefit of others.

John Wesley understood the “Word of Wisdom” in relation to understanding and explaining divine wisdom in the plan of salvation, and the “Word of Knowledge” in relation to extraordinary understanding of biblical truth, including Old Testament types and prophecies.

Whatever one thinks about every detail of these interpretations, one historical fact remains:

The modern Pentecostal formula is not simply “what Christians have always believed.”

They haven’t.

So where did the modern definitions come from?

The familiar Pentecostal scheme is largely a twentieth-century theological invention. It was developed especially through influential Pentecostal teachers such as Howard Carter and Harold Horton, both founding leaders of the Assembly of God denomination and significant figures in early Pentecostalism. These modern definitions of Word of Knowledge and Word of Wisdom were later popularized internationally through teachers such as Kenneth E. Hagin and John Wimber (founder of the Vineyard movement).

Through sermons, Bible schools, books, conferences, healing meetings, and ministry culture, these definitions became so deeply embedded in Pentecostal vocabulary that many believers today simply assume they came directly from Paul.

But repetition is not exegesis. A definition does not become apostolic merely because it has been repeated from pulpits for generations.

The question remains: 

Where does Paul define these gifts that way?

He doesn’t.

Another problem arises when modern Charismatic terminology is retroactively imposed upon biblical narratives.

Consider Jesus and the Samaritan woman.

Jesus told her:

John 4:18

“You have had five husbands, and the one you now have is not your husband…”

Modern Charismatics frequently describe this as Jesus operating in a “Word of Knowledge.”

But John never calls it that. Not once.

Or consider Peter and Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5.

Peter knew that they had lied concerning the proceeds from the sale of their property.

Again, many modern Charismatics call that a “Word of Knowledge.”

Luke does not. The label is being imported into the narrative from a later theological system.

And notice the circular reasoning:

First, define the Word of Knowledge as supernatural revelation concerning hidden facts. Then find every biblical story involving supernatural knowledge of hidden facts. Then label those stories “Words of Knowledge.” Then point to those newly labeled stories as proof that your original definition was correct.

That proves nothing. You cannot establish a definition from examples that became examples only because you first imposed the definition upon them.

There is another difficulty.

Paul lists prophecy separately.

In 1 Corinthians 12:8–10, he distinguishes:

1. Word of Wisdom

2. Word of Knowledge

3. Faith

4. Gifts of Healing

5. Miracles

6. Prophecy

7. Discerning of Spirits

8. Tongues

9. Interpretation of Tongues

If “Word of Knowledge” simply means receiving supernatural revelation of previously unknown information, the distinction between it and prophecy or revelation becomes increasingly difficult to maintain.

The modern system frequently supplies detailed distinctions. But those distinctions must be demonstrated from Paul’s argument.

Paul never gives us the familiar Pentecostal chart:

REVELATION GIFTS

1. Word of Knowledge — Past/Present

2. Word of Wisdom — Future

3. Discerning of Spirits — Spirit World

You may find that chart in Pentecostal textbooks. You will not find it in 1 Corinthians.

A cautious interpretation should therefore remain close to what Paul actually says. A reasonable working distinction is:

WORD OF KNOWLEDGE

Spirit-enabled understanding and communication of divine truth.

WORD OF WISDOM

Spirit-enabled wisdom in explaining, applying, or directing according to divine truth.

Or even more simply:

Knowledge understands truth. Wisdom knows what to do with truth. 

Even that distinction should be held with humility because Paul himself does not stop in 1 Corinthians 12 to provide technical definitions. What we must never do is transform a debatable theological interpretation into an unquestionable apostolic definition.

We should not confidently announce: “The Word of Knowledge means God tells you somebody’s secret.”

Paul never said that.

We should not insist: “The Word of Wisdom means supernatural revelation about the future.”

Paul never said that either.

And Christians are not under any obligation to accept the modern spectacle of Pentecostal-Charismatic-New Apostolic Reformation preachers announcing symptoms, initials, addresses, family histories, financial problems, phone numbers, or childhood experiences merely because someone has attached the biblical phrase “Word of Knowledge” to the performance.

This becomes especially important when evaluating modern “Word of Knowledge” ministries.

Biblical examples of genuine supernatural knowledge were specific.

Jesus did not tell the Samaritan woman: “I sense that somebody here has experienced relationship problems.”

He told her something concrete.

Peter did not announce: “God is showing me that somebody here has been dishonest about money.”

He confronted Ananias directly.

The claims were specific. They were identifiable. They were verifiable.

That is very different from standing before an audience of thousands and announcing:

“Someone here has back pain.”

Statistically, someone probably does.

Or:

“There is someone here who has been having headaches.”

In a large auditorium, that hardly requires supernatural omniscience.

Or:

“God is showing me somebody who has been struggling financially.”

Welcome to planet Earth.

Calling vague, high-probability statements “Words of Knowledge” does not establish that this is what Paul meant by logos gnōseōs.

Before Christians accept that claim, they have every right to ask one simple question:

Where did Paul define it that way?

And if the answer is that he did not, then we should stop pretending that a twentieth-century Pentecostal theological construction is an explicit apostolic definition.

Believe whatever interpretation you believe can genuinely be established from Scripture. But let Paul say what Paul actually said. And where Paul did not define something, have enough reverence for Scripture not to put words in his mouth.