back to Theology main page
back to Charismatism main page
An Examination of the Word-faith teachings of Korean 'pastor' David Yonggi Cho
by Daniel Chew
The Word of Faith heresy which originates from the Mind-Science cults of the 19th century and entering visible Christianity through E.W. Kenyon and then Kenneth Hagin, Sr. has been plaguing the church ever since it erupted into the charismatic movement in the early part of the twentieth century. And as Evangelicalism becomes shallower and shallower, the teachings of the Word-faith cult runs rampant through the churches, infecting at will. One major factor which contributes to the ascendancy of the Word-faith movement is that it produces 'results' and converts, and nowhere is this seen in the purportedly "largest church in the world", Yoido Full Gospel church in Seoul, Korea, headed by South Korean pastor David (Paul) Yonggi CHO. Due to the church size, the high number of converts, and the overt piety as seen for example in passionate prayer meetings and sending forth of missionaries, many professing Christians are enamored by David Cho and thus allow his teachings to come in unchallenged. Coming from the Reformation perspective of Sola Scriptura however, this cannot be the case. In fact, due to his influence in mainstream Evangelicalism, it is all the more imperative that his teachings should be analyzed according to the texts of Scripture, and the truth be made known and obeyed. Numbers after all means nothing in Scripture, for numerous times in the Old Testament, many people fell into the worship of Baals and Asheroths. The prophets like Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah and Jeremiah after all did not have many converts compared to the worshippers of Baal and Asheroth, and therefore a large church does not mean anything at all in God's sight.
With this, let us examine the teachings of David Yonggi Cho, as seen particularly in his two books The Fourth Dimension, Vol. 1 and Vol. 2. These two books set forth Cho's beliefs and teachings on the nature and practice of faith especially in terms of prayer and answered prayer, things that are very fundamental of the Christian faith.
Presentation of Cho's beliefs
Cho's view on faith
Cho in his books proposes faith as being akin to a law, and in this case he claims it is a law of the fourth dimension (the first three being the three dimensions of space). He states that God, and the Holy Spirit, belongs to this forth dimension and in creation the Holy Spirit in the fourth dimension broods over the three dimensions in bringing the creation into being. In fact, according to Cho, just as in Genesis the "three spirits [of God] are in the realm of the fourth dimension, so naturally [any] spirit can hover over the material third dimension and exercise creative powers. This form of "hovering" and "brooding" Cho calls incubation of faith, an activity which is supposed to function as like a law instituted by God, who exists in the fourth dimension, in order to influence and change things. This law is furthermore an impersonal law akin to natural law which is accessible to anyone who has the "spiritual know-how" to use it. In Cho's own words:
".... as the second dimension includes and controls the first dimension, and the third dimension includes and controls the second dimension, so the fourth dimension includes and controls the third dimension, producing a creation of order and beauty. The spirit is the fourth dimension. Every human being is a spiritual being as well as a physical being. They have the fourth dimension as well as the third dimension in their hearts." So men, by exploring their spiritual sphere of the fourth dimension through the development of concentrated visions and dreams in their imaginations, can brood over and incubate the third dimension, influencing and changing it. This is what the Holy Spirit taught me.
So naturally these yoga people and Buddhist believers could explore and develop their human fourth dimension, their spiritual sphere; with clear-cut visions and mental pictures of heath they could incubate over their bodies. ... Now unbelievers, by exploring and developing their inner spiritual being in such a way, can carry out dominion upon their third dimension, which includes their physical sicknesses and diseases.
Then the Holy Spirit said to me, "Look at the Sokagakkai. They belong to Satan; the human spirit joins up with the spirit of the evil fourth dimension, and with the spirit of the evil fourth dimension they can carry out dominion over their bodies and circumstances." The Holy Spirit showed me that it was in this manner that the magicians in Egypt carried out dominion over various circumstances, just as Moses did. 
Cho here states a strange reasoning of successive dimensions controlling the previous dimension (a fact not true physically, and besides, which one of the three dimensions is considered the first, the second and the third? x, y or z?). Regardless, what he states of this law of faith can now be seen to be truly something that functions as dispassionately, unbiasly and absolutely objectively as any physical law of the universe like Newton's laws of motions. They are therefore available for both Christians and non-Christians to exercise "the law of faith" to "influence and change their environment. In this particular case, Cho claims that the Holy Spirit reveals to him that unbelievers are using the "law of faith" to perform their miracles of healing.
Cho therefore sees that faith is a "force" which can be used to effect change in the physical world by anyone who operates according to its rule. But how is such an operation done?
The key to this law of faith is the idea of incubation, in which one prays over and calls forth the reality he so desires, which brings us to the next belief of Cho.
The Creative Power of the Spoken Word
Cho in both of his books devotes at least a chapter each to the theory of the power of the spoken word to effect change. Stating that the Bible says that whoever controls the tongue, controls the whole body, Cho infers therefore that whatever we speak, we are going to get. As an example, he says that if you keep on saying that you are poor, then all of your system conditions itself to attract poverty and you would feel at home in poverty; you would rather be poor. Conversely, if you keep on saying that you are able, that you can achieve success, then all of your body would be bridled to success . Even more than that, Cho claimed that our words actually go out and create reality, and that the Holy Spirit uses our words to create so as to answer prayer. God is said to be only "going to work through your thinking, through your beliefs".
Moving further on, Cho remarks that Jesus and the disciples of Christ "used the spoken word to change and create", unlike the modern day Church who "seems to have become a perennial beggar: begging and begging, afraid to speak forth the words of command". Using a certain interpretation of Gen, 1-3, Cho states that we are to call forth reality just as God calls forth light ('Let there be light') in the Creation account. Furthermore, such a calling forth must be done with a clear objective; a clear and defined faith goal. This idea of praying in definite terms in order to incubate the words of faith to effect them is supposedly shown by God to Cho to be taught in Scripture in Heb. 11:1, in which faith is the substance of things, clear-cut things, hoped for. Cho further sees this teaching of praying in faith as being stated in Rom. 4:17, in which it is stated as "God raises the dead and calls those things which be not as if they were", and therefore Cho should similarly call those things which are not as if they were, as if he already had them.
Using the example of blind Bartimaeus the son of Timaeus (Mk. 10:46-52), Cho said that Jesus did not heal him until Bartimaeus gave a very specific request for Jesus to heal him. As Cho further remarked, "the Lord never welcomes vague prayers".
From here, we can see that Cho believes that the spoken words by Man have the power to create and effect change, similar to how God used words to create the entire universe. But how exactly does Cho handles situations when his principle does not work out, as such situations indeed do emerge?
Logos and Rhema
In Cho's many years of 'ministry', it will be almost inevitable that people will apply the concepts they have learned from him and attempt to speak forth the words of faith to create successes in ministry. Cho is aware that the law of faith does not seem to work all the time, as it can be seen even in his 'church' where one gets healed while another remains ill. Cho even relates a story whereby three Korean girls who claimed scripture regarding the incident of Peter walking on water tried to do the same by speaking forth words of faith, and then drowned in the process. In response to this, Cho claimed that there are two types of the Word of God: one which "gives general knowledge about God", and one which "God uses to impart faith about specific circumstances into a man's heart". He then states that only when a person has this saying word of God can they speak forth God's Word. And this saying word of God he terms rhema, defined by him to be "a specific word to a specific person in a specific situation". Therefore, one cannot just speak forth the words of creation and claim Scripture in doing so because then that would be operating on Logos, but one needs to have a 'personal word from God', rhema, and then such words of creation would be effective.
With this, let us analyze these beliefs and others by Cho according to the Scriptures.
Analysis of Cho's beliefs
On faith and the words of faith
Cho repeatedly claims that there is a law of faith accessible to both believers and non-believers for the working of miracles, and that such a law operates on the fourth dimension. The question to be asked therefore is: Where is that law stated in Scripture? The Scriptures nowhere talks about a so-called fourth dimension, as if God is merely living in some higher plane akin to the 'gods' of paganism. God is utterly transcendent, and there are no rules whatsoever that rule over Him other than His own character. In fact, biblical faith is intricately connected to God and the person of Jesus Christ, and expressed as such. Nowhere in Scripture is faith said to be something that can be exercised by unbelievers contra the absurd statements of Cho to the contrary. In fact, the Scriptures explicitly link the performing of false miracles and lying wonders with the power and activity of Satan (2 Thess. 2:9). It's really astonishing that Cho could not answer that question in the beginning when he faced it but instead have to 'seek guidance about it' and thus come up with this Word-faith theory of the 'law of faith', which is totally unbiblical!
Regarding Cho's 'interpretation' of Gen. 1-3, Cho is wrong even in representing the teachings of Scripture, because it is written that only the Holy Spirit hovers above the water (Gen. 1:2) , not God's "three spirits". Furthermore, since when did the narrative mentioning of the Spirit hovering over the waters equates to some form of incubation? Cho further erred by stating that just because God commanded things to come out of existence, therefore we similarly can command and create things. Such a belief pays no heed to the Creator/ creature distinction, and is in fact based more upon occultic paganism rather than biblical Christianity, as it can be seen that it mirrors the practice of the pagan Eastern religions. Cho further massacres the text of Scripture in his utterly ridiculous interpretation of both Rom. 4:17 and Heb. 11:1. Rom. 4:17 in its context is referring to God so it is not applicable to us. Heb. 11:1 does NOT say that faith must be assurance of 'clear-cut things', but rather of 'things hoped for' (ESV). Furthermore, its context explains what the 'things hoped for' and 'things not seen' are referring to, which is the spiritual hope of Christ's presence and the glories of His Kingdom. The verse therefore has nothing whatsoever to do with Cho's ridiculous eisegesis. Therefore, there is no biblical basis for stating that God will only answer specific prayers and that He "does not welcome vague prayers". The narrative of Bartimaeus is just that: a narrative which cannot draw any conclusions whatsoever about the specificity of prayer. In point of fact, any number of possible reasons could be put forward as to why Jesus asked him that question ranging from 'Jesus wanted him to show his sincerity of heart' etc, so that narrative proves absolutely nothing with regards to this topic.
Now, it must be stated that there are some truths to the statement that what we think do in some sense influence our situation, but that is NOT something profound but based upon basic common sense. For example, a person who thinks he is depressed will probably be depressed. Psychosomatic problems are most definitely related to thoughts, and they can most definitely impact how we behave and thus cause the situation to change. Yet, Cho took this legitimate principle and distort and blows it out of proportion to prop up the heresy that our thoughts are responsible for what happen to us. Positive confession thus arose in South Korea in his teachings, as we are told to speak forth positive words in order to create and carry out dominion over our bodies and circumstances.
Cho's teaching on the 'law of faith' and the 'Creative power of spoken words' thus find absolutely no basis whatsoever in Scripture. On the contrary, they cause massive harm to the doctrine of the transcendent nature of God and the Creator/ creature divide in attempting to usurp for itself what belongs to God alone — the power to create by the spoken Word.
Logos and Rhema
Cho invented this doctrine mainly because of the crises that occur whenever the words of faith seem to fail in its effect. With regards to its 'discovery' therefore, this distinction was not born out of any study of God's Word but because there is a need to salvage his Word-faith nonsense from the reality of its practical failures, thus showing forth that this supposed law of faith principle wasn't working as he had claimed it should be. Out of this flow a totally unfalsifiable teaching which makes Cho's teaching immune to practical proof. For if someone was to indeed speak forth the words of faith as what Cho did and "yield a harvest", that will be considered proof that the principle does work. Yet if there was no harvest of the words of faith (ie they did not come to pass), then Cho can always maintain that that was because you were following 'Logos', not 'rhema'. So heads he win, and tails you lose. The unfalsifiability of this teaching immediately makes it suspect.
The interpretation of the word rhema by Cho is a meaning seen within the Word of Faith movement: that of a specific word from God for a specific person in a specific situation. It is thus totally subjective and not subject to criticism. However, is that what the word rhema actually means? It does not! As the late scholar Cordon Clark wrote:
... rheema has the same root as the Latin verbum and the English word; eiroo, to say, speak or tell. It occurs sixty times in the New Testament. Logos has the root legoo: to say, speak or tell. It occurs over twelve hundred times. ... the two roots are almost identical in meaning ... .
John 12:48 identifies the logos with rheemata or words as such. The passage reads, "He who ignores me [or, sets me aside] and does not accept my words (rheemata), has a judge: the logos that I have spoken, that logos will judge him in the last day." Note that the logos is something spoken and naturally therefore consists of words.
In this section on Logos this passage has already been listed as showing the identity of logos and rheemata — explicitly the fact that logos can be a spoken as well as a written word or thought. It is further noteworthy that the logos judges the unbeliever on the last day, "the logos I have spoken." But the Judge on the last day is Christ Himself because "The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son... He has given Him authority to judge because He is the Son of Man" (the Messiah).
Although they are various nuances in meanings between Logos and Rheemata, it is safe to say that they basically have the same meaning and both can refer to the spoken word and the heard word. Cho's attempted differentiation of the Word of God into two therefore is in serious error as it does not even conform to the actual meaning of the words. Instead, Cho just impose his false meaning of these two words in order to serve his failed Word-faith theology.
With this, let us look into the various other heresies that Cho believes in.
The supremacy of Man and the denial of God's sovereignty
Cho states that "God will never bring about any of His great works without coming through your own personal faith", that "God never works anything independently of you that concerns your life". Furthermore, Cho astonishing tells us that Jesus "is bound by your lips and by your words". Apparently, Jesus cannot do anything until we grant Him permission or tell Him to do so. That is terribly blasphemous, to suggest that God's actions are controlled by Man. Also apparently, God is not the Sovereign one who does whatever He pleases (Ps. 115:3) and is He most certainly cannot be the One who forcefully humbles King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. (Dan. 4:28-37). After all, who exercised faith there then? Certainly not proud King Nebuchadnezzar! Going to the New Testament, whose faith was it that brought about the Atonement of Christ? No one's faith, of course! In fact, the wickedness of Man brought it about in crucifying the Lord of Glory, yet God uses this wicked act of crucifixion to bring about the salvation of His people so that whosoever believes in Christ will not perish but have eternal life (Jn. 3:16). Cho here denies the sovereignty of God and molds God into the caricature of the Old 'Santa Claus' Grandfather in the sky who is eagerly waiting for people to ask him for gifts so that He can bestow it to them.
To prop up his theories regarding controlling God's actions, Cho shocking eisegete Mt. 16:19 or 18:18 in which Cho interprets the keys of the Kingdom as a formula to release Christ through your words. In the words of 'almighty' Cho, "If you do not speak the word of faith clearly, Christ can never be released". God it seems in Cho's view is dependent on Man to do His work, instead of the biblical view of God who does as He pleases regardless of what Man thinks or does and even controls the direction of our hearts (cf Ps. 115:3, Prov. 21:1).
The Prosperity aka Health-and-Wealth non-gospel
We have already seen that the law of faith or incubation believed by Cho means that health is freely available to all only if people put into practice the law of faith. Of course, when troubles come because the law does not seem to work always, Cho invented the differentiation between logos and rhema to account for failures. Yet Cho still holds on to his original Word-faith heresy, and health is certainly promised with a few caveats just in case it did not work out.
Cho in his book states, under the subheading It is God's Desire to Give Prosperity and Health:
"Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers" (3 John 2, NKJV). Our souls' condition will affect the conditions of our whole body. God desires for all Christians to prosper in body, soul and spirit. According to John, the key to prosperity is the soul.
And this one eats the cake:
Poverty is a curse from Satan. God desires that all His people prosper and be healthy as their soul prospers (3 John 1:2).
As it can be seen, Cho distorts the Word of God by making 3 John 1:2, a greeting to a friend, into an imperative by God. The whole verse is wrenched out of its context and mutilated to support a false gospel. As it can be seen, it is simply untrue that poverty is a curse from Satan but it is just part of our fallen world (cf Gen. 3:17, Deut. 15:11). Most certainly, oppression and wickedness can cause greater poverty, but poverty per se is not a curse from Satan but a reality of the Fall.
Cho make many more errors, such as promoting the heresy of Positive thinking ala Norman Vincent Peale. Speaking of the 'school of Andrew', Cho states that in the feeding of the five thousand (Jn. 6:1-9), Andrew had positive thinking because he brought food to Jesus (the two loaves and five fishes) although he doubted, something totally not found in the text itself. Is it any wonder then that his first book is endorsed by the heretic Robert H. Schuller, who endorses Positive thinking, on its front cover?
Another error made by Cho is his idea that speaking in another tongue is the initial sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, again without any arguments from Scripture except a leap of faith argument from the premise that our word molds our lives, and therefore the Holy Spirit must control our speech in order to control our lives. This type of argumentation is too ridiculous that it is just plain self-refuting. For the premises are all wrong, and the argument is just plain invalid also since Cho here assumes a certain expectation of what it means for the Holy Spirit to control our speech.
A rather serious error that Cho makes is his seemingly Modalistic or Unitarian tendencies. Cho states that God the Father and God the Son dwelt right in him. This is blatantly untrue. God the Son dwell with us and the Holy Spirit dwells in us, and God the Father does not dwell with us until we reach our heavenly home. Elsewhere, Cho's indication of the "three spirits of God" hints at a somewhat heterodox understanding of the Godhead at the very least. This most definitely should make us wary of Cho's beliefs as it undermines the doctrine of God.
Cho makes a very common error in his second volume which show forth his Arminianism/ semi-Pelagianism. Cho states that "God will never require His people to do anything which they are incapable of doing". This is a humanistic belief which is nowhere stated in Scripture. For example, God commands all believers to be perfectly holy as God is holy (1 Peter 1: 16) yet is perfect holiness attainable ever in this life? In the Old Testament, God commands through the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah for Israel to repent, yet passages like Is. 6:9-10 indicate that not only was Israel not able to repent, God is judicially punishing Israel by not granting them repentance but instead made their hearts even harder and not allowing them to be healed until they are destroyed (Is. 6:11-13). God therefore commands things of all people including believers to do what they are incapable of doing.
Cho's errors in argumentation
Eisegesis and various logical fallacies
Cho in various places massacres the texts of Scripture and misinterpret it, in which we have looked at a few above already. In fact, the whole book is simply almost bereft of Scripture, and the few there are there are quoted out of context and used to prooftext his aberrant doctrines. One ridiculous example is his reading of Jacob's creating a wall out of spotted and speckled tree rods besides the cattle's drinking trough as stating that this would cause the cattle to think spotted and speckled therefore guaranteeing spotted and speckled offspring for him, which is nowhere stated in the text. He similarly makes lots of logical fallacies like his attempted proof of tongues being the initial sign of the baptism of the Holy Spirit above.
Stories upon stories upon more stories were written by Cho in his two books especially the first one, and they are utilized to show how he came to certain doctrines as he responded to certain questions raised by the situation and "sought God for the answers". Yet all these stories are all anecdotal evidences which prove absolutely nothing of truth value except that the facts in such stories do happen. Most of them commit the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc in assuming that just because something is done (ie some novel doctrinal practice of Cho), which resulted in some good to the party (ie healing or 'miraculous provision'), therefore the novel doctrine is correct. For example, Cho recounted the story of how he counseled a mother of a daughter who is sleeping around like a prostitute and thus bringing reproach to her family. Cho told her to stop visualizing her daughter as a prostitute and submitting that "kind of mental blueprint" to God, which is the reason why she always will behave like a prostitute. Cho calls her to redraw her image of her daughter as a changed person who has been cleansed by Jesus in her mind and submit that to Jesus in order for her daughter to be changed. After she has done this, her daughter did indeed come back and repented of her sins. In fact, Cho states that she is now "one of the foremost home cell unit leaders in my church" and "is a burning evangelist". "All this happened because her mother changed her vision and dream, applying the law of the fourth dimension". Such anecdotal evidence seems convincing, yet it commits the specific fallacy of affirming the consequent, and thus nothing can be proven at all whether Cho's occultic law actually is the reason for the change or rather that God just decided to change the daughter's heart after her mother's prayer to God about it then.
Half truths and lies
We have already seen how Cho stretches the evidences of science and distorts it to his teachings, as in utilizing science and common sense to prop up his theory of the creative power of words. Cho quotes some findings by a neuroscientist on the role of the brain and of words/ thought in controlling the body. However, all of this is merely psychosomatic control, and while important, it does not say anything about the physical and spiritual realms. Cho therefore uses this fact as a half-truth in fallaciously using a normal physical phenomenon and extrapolate that into the physical and spiritual realm outside of the area it operates in, thus giving his argument for the theory of the creative power of words a veneer of scientific respectability.
Becoming more orthodox?
We have seen how heretical Cho's beliefs actually are as they conform to the heresies of the Word-faith cult, even bordering on the occult. Yet has there been a change in Cho's beliefs? Certainly, if one were to read his volume 2, it seems to be the case that Cho has matured more and seem to be more orthodox. Quoting Berkhof, talking about Schleiermacher and Kierkegaard, Cho seems to be more knowledgeable now. Yet what we have not noticed is any repudiation of his former doctrines. In fact, they are still mentioned in this book, together with a few of his anecdotes. And as we have analyzed his beliefs, it can be seen that some of the heretical doctrines are outlined in his volume 2, although more is seen volume 1. It seems rather that Volume 2 was written more for Western intellectuals and contains many more true doctrines with reasonable exegesis on various subjects. Cho, rather than repudiating his heresies, seem to be diluting them with other sound doctrines in an effort to make them more palatable to comparatively more biblically literate people.
Therefore, gone is the wild conjectures and the plethora of story-telling in the first volume, replaced instead with sociological, philosophical and theological analysis which sound more orthodox and some are indeed more orthodox. But the main points and stories still stand, like the misinterpretation of Gen. 1-3, the theory of incubation with some familiar anecdotes phrased slightly differently in his first volume. As it can be seen, Cho still believes the same heresies as before, and is just applying cosmetics and adding other biblical orthodox doctrines to it in order to make his teachings sound more orthodox.
So therefore, in conclusion, it can be seen that David Yonggi Cho is a heretic who believes in the occultic teaching of creative words, and of faith as a force operating as a law within the fourth dimension. Cho also believes in the prosperity, health-and-wealth non-gospel and believes in a subjective Word of God which he terms rhema. On a related note, since Cho states repeatedly in his books that 'God told me so and so', and such teachings are most definitely not from God since they contradict God's Word, Cho is guilty of blasphemy against God and using His name in vain (violating the Third Commandment). We would do well to avoid this heretic and his blasphemous teachings. Although he seems to be the pastor of the largest church in the world, it is in fact not so but rather the leader of a false church with a false gospel and worshipping a false Christ. May God help us to mark this person and avoid him as the heretic he truly is.
If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain. (1 Tim. 6:3-5)
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. (Rom. 16:17)
So let us avoid the false teacher and heretic David Yonggi Cho and his damnable teachings, and instead cleave unto God and Christ Jesus our Lord alone. Amen.
 D.R. McConnell (1988, 1995, 2007), A Different Gospel (Updated Edition): A bold and revealing look at the biblical and historical basis of the Word of Faith movement (Hendrikson Publishers, Peabody, MA, USA)
 One major reason for the acceptance of the Word-faith movement is the environment of pragmatism and revivalism prevalent at that time, continuing the deadly legacy of the revivalists in the early-mid 19th century. The beginning of this zeitgeist and of their uprising and defeat of the older true Evangelical and Protestant paradigm on revival can be read in Iain H. Murray (1994), Revival and Revivalism: The Making and Marring of American Evangelicalism 1750-1858 (Banner of Truth Trust, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, USA)
 David Yonggi Cho (1979), The Fourth Dimension (Vol. 1): Discovering A New World of Answered Prayer (Bridge-Logos, Alachua, FL, USA)
 David Yonggi Cho (1983), The Fourth Dimension (Vol. 2): More Secrets for a Successful Faith Life (Bridge-Logos, Alachua, FL, USA)
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, Chapter 2, p. 50. In Vol. 2, Cho clarifies that if time is taken as a dimension, then what he is talking about is the fifth dimension (p viii.) In other words, what he believes is that God functions and works in a "supernatural dimension" of reality over and above our own, yet accessible to us
 Ibid., p. 27
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 2, p. 38
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, p. 28. Bold added
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, Chapter 3 — The Creative Power of the Spoken Word, & Vol. 2, Chapter 4 — The Creative Ability of Your Words.
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, p. 54
 Ibid., p. 54
 Ibid., p. 20
 Ibid., p. 12
 Ibid., p. 63
 Ibid., p. 63
 Ibid., p. 57
 Ibid., p. 2
 Ibid., p. 4
 Ibid., p. 5
 Ibid., p. 8
 Ibid., p. 71
 Ibid., p. 73
 Ibid., p. 72
 Ibid., p. 72-73
 Ibid., p. 8
 Gordon H. Clark (1972, 1989 2nd Ed.), The Johannine Logos (Trinity Foundation, Jefferson, Maryland, USA)
 Ibid., p. 46
 Ibid., p. 51
 Ibid., p. 57
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, p. 1. Bold added
 Ibid., p. 12
 Ibid., p. 65
 Ibid., p. 64
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 2, p. 73
 Ibid., p. 137
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, p. 104-105
 Ibid., p. 67
 Ibid., p. 132
 See footnote 7
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 2, p. 155
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, p. 38-40
 Anyway who knows a bit about genetics can understand this: the pure bred cattle could probably have separate genotypes (ie AAgg and aaGG), which can be crossed to form the F1 genotypes AaGg, which can then interbreed to form the F2 genotypes AAGG, AAGg, AAgg, AaGG, AaGg, Aagg, aaGG, aaGg and aagg in the Mendelian ratio of 1:2:1:2:4:2:1:2:1 , and the ratio of those which are homozygous on both alleles compare to those who are heterozygous on one or both alleles is 4:12 . Assuming incomplete dominance of the A and G allele, all the different genotypes in the following F2 genotypes would have different coat color or pattern; different phenotypes, and the ratio of offspring with pure color coat (denoted by homozygosity in both alleles in the genotype ie AAGG or AAgg) to that of mixed color coat would be 4:12 or 1:3. So therefore, it is no wonder that Jacob's flock would increase in numbers. A larger variety of genes would also increase the genetic vitality of Jacob's flock, thus making his flock stronger.
Another factor which plays to his advantage is probably the presence of Barr bodies which would contribute to the spotted or speckled coat color in heterozygous females. Assuming that one coat color gene is located on the X chromosome, heterozygous females would have the genotype XBXW for example To avoid overexpression of the X chromosome, females cells typically silence one of their two X chromosomes in an entirely random manner, therefore approximately one half would silence the XB chromosome, while the other half would silence the XW chromosome. The coat cells which silence the XB chromosome would express the coat color coded by the XW chromosome and vice versa, thus explaining the spotted or speckled coats of the female cattle. That Jacob choses these heterozygous animals means that he would chose those with higher genetic variety and hence vitality.
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 1, p. 44-47
 Ibid., p. 52-53
 Cho, The Fourth Dimension Vol. 2, p. 17
 An (in)famous story Cho never fails to recounts is his initial introduction to the law of specific prayer. Cho was then without a desk, a chair and a motorcycle which he requires and thus asked God for it. Yet it didn't come. When Cho cried before the Lord, God supposedly told him that he did not receive them because the requests were too vague. After being specific in his prayers, Cho finally received the items almost exactly as he had ordered them. See Cho, Vol. 1, p. 2-8 & Vol. 2, p. 20-25