NAR: Movement or Myth?with Holly Pivec, Doug Geivett and Michael Brown-The Alisa Childers podcast#19
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
- Listen on iTunes: podcasts.apple...
Book links: www.alisachild...
For all links to Alisa’s recommended reading, podcast studio gear and other items,
please visit the Alisa Childers Amazon Store at www.amazon.com/...
The Passion translation is riddled with a new apostolic reformation language. Although it’s not directly called a NAR bible It most definitely is.
Agreed
It’s a very loose interpretation, can’t call it a proper translation imo
I really encourage believers to investigate the Passion Translation and how it is not a bibical translation. Mike Winger has several hours of video analysis and interviews with well respected bible translators on the NIV and ESV teams, etc. Churches such as Bethel sell it and promote it as a real translation as well as other well known people in the Christian teaching circuit. Please be cautious as to where you see it promoted and used.
I really appreciate you letting Michael Brown talk so much. The more he talked the more confused I got regarding his stance on apostles and other issues. He seemed to talk in circles.
I thought he made perfect sense.
And there's lots of slips of the tongue; "movement", etc.
Welcome to make - it - up - as - you - go theology !
How in the world was he talking in circles? He seemed perfectly coherent to me.
I think one of the issues is that the concept of apostleship is not well understood in most of the church. It would have been helpful if he had given a short summary of the general understanding of what contemporary apostleship means to those who believe in it, instead of him trying to respond and clarify in the moment.
I had no idea what this was called till I watched this. My husbands side of the family is deep into this stuff and goes hand in hand with women pride. I've always felt uncomfortable with the things they would tell me and when I would ask where in the Bible are these things?(Because I really wanted to know) I would get dirty looks and later be told down the grape vine that I was too forward and blunt. I slowly learned to keep my mouth shut for years but now I realized as the Lord has shown me I should never let no one snuff my light out and I've been asking the Lord to bring back that fire I once had to be bold and courageous in Him.
The gentleness and care and kindness demonstrated here is wonderful. The dedication to the truth is beautiful. Thank you
I appreciate how much evidential support Holly gives, and while I'm mid listen, so I can't speak to the whole podcast, so far all I'm hearing from Michael Brown is hearsay and opinion, and haven't heard evidence that one could validate. The truth will reveal itself! Praise God!
Great interview. Just wish it had been longer. Doug and Holly did an amazing job revealing Dr Brown’s belief in modern leading apostles right on his own website - after he’d spent ages saying he didn’t believe that! All that was needed was footage of Dr Brown’s messages and it would have been clear he was part of this movement up to his ears! The movement is full of bad teaching and control- I’ve just left a church that had gone down that track; it’s insidious how it creeps in, like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, teaching a new gospel, so I can’t understand how people like Dr Brown can defend it.
Just as we can tell you have your mind made up. What a shame.
I don't think Michael Brown ever said he didn't believe in apostles, and of course they provide leadership. He doesn't believe they are generally given an inordinate level of authority as Pivek and Gievett seem to think is common.
Dr. Brown is wrong to insinuate that Holly & Doug have to 'be a part' of a ministry in order to critically critique it or stand against it. And when they give proof through direct quotes, Dr. Brown's retort is 'but that's not what they meant'. By Dr. Brown's criteria, he should both stop debating and stop writing. Most of his debates & many of his books are focused on groups he has never been a part of in any way and those groups would tell others that any quote Michael used as a criticism against them was either misquoted or taken out of context. If these rules are allowed, no one can be held to account for anything.
I really enjoyed this interview and thank you to all who participated for a gracious discussion. I enjoyed listening to both sides. It was insightful and beneficial. Thank you Michael, Doug and Holly.
Dr Brown says that he doesn’t know Brian Simmons well however he mentions that Brian would call him while he was writing the passion translation. I’ve noticed that Dr Brown tends to distance himself from a personal friendship level with many people when asked about them during these types of interviews. I like listening to Dr Brown and I pray for him, however when you hold to his type of theology, there is a lot of verbal dancing around that he has to do depending on who is interviewing him.
To give him the benefit of the doubt, Dr Brown is an expert on Semitic languages and he said the “translation” was written using Aramaic version so maybe he was asked professionally regarding his expertise in the area. It doesn’t mean he has a close relationship.
@@HopeBonarcher the problem is that the aramaic manuscripts that we have are much more recent (so less reliable) than the older greek manuscritps which carry more weight, so most bible translators will not treat them as authorative.. and only use them as a secondary source...
Wow! The Apostle of Obfuscation strikes again. Hearing him say he's never heard of an apostle get up and talk about the "apostolic authority to do this or that" they have is hilarious in view of the recent video of Che Ahn telling Michael that HE too is an apostle!
If you call it NAR or not there are several self acclaimed apostles who teach submission to their teaching & new revelation.
Bill Johnson regularly teaches of new revelation outside the word of God, he recently called himself an apostle in a video, everyone at Bethel calls him an apostle.
Che Ahn recently said “as apostles we’re able to make decrees & declarations” in that cringe worthy Gandalf end racism stunt.
I used to respect Dr Brown, but he’s deluded.
I personally know a man, who is a loving and well-shining father, brother, husband with many many friends. He was on the mission field for many years. He returned to the USA, and went to IHOP in Kansas. When I knew him, he always said, "Signs and wonders, signs and wonders." He would only find comfort when he was in a community of tongues and healings, etc. His children are the same. His wife had difficulty and loneliness on the mission field. She had some loving neighbors (a couple) who were conservative Baptists. But they were really the only non-charismatic friends they ever got close to. I love this man, his wife and children. But I feel so sorry for them that they are only comfortable and so engrained in the Azusa Street tradition that I feel it has really stunted their growth in Christ.
Whether or not there is an NAR (I believe there is) these churches encourage excesses....and that is the danger....
Dr. Brown (whom I also follow on YT and have respect for ), made a comment a few times about these antidotes coming from negative/disgruntled experiences. I had no negative experience. It was the Bible and demonic instances (that weren't negative) that pointed out the dangers of what I was doing in allowing some of these teachings and practices. Hindsight and being a good "Berean" warned me not to go further. The NAR teachings seeped into the church for sure. I've seen it with my own eyes and Biblical discernment. It's not just a little yeast; there is a problem.
One of the major issues with the Charismatic movement in general is there is always some type of “interpretation” needed. If it was biblically sound, Dr Brown wouldn’t be in the situation in one instance seeming to confirm certain things that are considered NAR then when confronted with it, saying that it was a misunderstanding.
Michael Brown is a friend and supporter of Sid Roth. That speaks volumes. Sid is a joke.
Sid was into Jewish New Age mysticism before he got saved. He just carried it into the sideshow of guests he brings on his TV show. The guests have all of the far out experiences, visits to heaven, hearing & seeing spectacular things they say are from God or angels. It's nonsense & unbiblical.
People are negatively affected by the abuse of power all over the world. To say that it is just people being "disgruntled " is rubbish. NAR is very real and destructive. We've seen it in a coastal town in Australia. I love your podcasts Alisa but can't listen to the other side as it upsets me to be told I am the problem for questioning.
Michael Brown makes a habit of it. He is hard to pin down. Pastor Chris Rosebrough has his measure. m.ruclips.net/channel/UCa8HxAq1zKxDZaURHxmvZrw
It seems like that camp’s knee jerk reaction to doctrinal concerns, is always to demonize the person with questions. And we know what the Bible says about being quick to anger. But I find it very very interesting that all of them I personally encounter, do this exact thing. And I wonder why? Are they told to be hostile to questions? Or do they just not have a grip on self control? I think it’s fair that you aren’t comfortable hearing them speak, they do cast so much insults... it’s hard to endure for anyone. Sending you a prayer for healing and strength, as we all need that, oh! And wisdom! :)
The NAR is as destructive as Cessionism
Wow Alisa I really admire your interview skills, you are such a great interviewer! Keep it up
So sad to hear Dr. Brown, who has done so much good in many fields (I especially appreciate his work on proving Jesus as Messiah from the OT) so wrong on this issue. This is not the only or worst example of him publicly being either blind or deceptive about this issue, all over misplaced loyalty to sketchy teachers like Bill Johnson or out and out wolves like Sid Roth.
I so agree with you. Lets pray for him. And Daniel Kolenda (Reihaart Bonkhe's prodigee)... ..I think they are basically decent honest folk.
@@JuliexSteadmanprotege
It is quite scary to realize that there are some people that think that the statement of faith on a website is a 100% reliable. You can have a beautiful facade on your church's website and have unbiblical teachings inside the church. You can write anything on your church's website, but what matters is what you actually do and teach in the church.
Too many Churches consider the Pastor the captain of the ship, that he somehow is the final authority on all things church. This too is unbiblical.
Just listened to the podcast version today.
I am surprised that no one pointed out an important distinction:
It is legitimate to talk about a cultural current or trend as a "movement". People and institutions within the current may not even know they are part of something larger, they are just following their leaders and what seems culturally relevant. It is also okay to assign a name to the trend. In this case, the name was already assigned, by a leader within the movement, which seems like a credible and inoffensive source.
The whole accusation of "labeling" individuals and churches as part of the NAR is actually a strawman argument. They were describing a cultural trend, not a specific, structured organization.
You are naively in need of more research about your views, Katherine. Please seek out the many books (readily available on Amazon) which carefully and meticulously document the specific history, structure, and false teachers aligned with the NAR. (I suggest you begin with Holly and Doug's two very scholarly books and Costi Hinn's excellent book "Defining Deception".) You can even find a thorough description of key NAR beliefs and pastors / so-called "apostles and prophets" on Wikipedia!! These pastors are consistently listed in multiple sources and in their OWN books as supporting the same views. This is a very real and specific organization of false teachers. These people constantly hold conferences and fake revivals together all over the U.S. and on television. Wake up. Those of us who know MANY people in this movement have experienced and clearly see its false teachings and its huge damage being done.
I wonder if any stats were used in Holly’s book. What she is doing is describing a condition. At times certain conditions have the same main symptoms but may present in certain manners or be expressed differently by an individual. For example getting the flu - one person may experience fever, chills and cough and an another may experience tiredness, have a sore throat but never experience a fever. In the end they may have had the same strain of flu expresses differently. I think that that is the same with the NAR major tenants of the description can occur at varying degrees but in the end it is the same -manipulation.
The difficulty is in describing the behavior since the description is so elusive. I think Dr. Brown is in denial because acknowledging that this exist as whole would discredit all he has built. He behaves as a NAR leader he displaced the blame on the individual who are asking the questions-he’d say that they had a fall out with the church. They were not spiritually mature... He invalidates the experience because then he’d have to admitted that he was wrong and then he ‘d have to do something about. He’s not going to admit that he’s been building his beliefs on shifting sand. He’d lose his backing. A little bit heresy along a lot of truth is still heresy.
Another thing I think his behavior is gas lighting ... no no that occurs over at that church but not the churches I’m affiliated with.
I couldn't agree more.
Good for Dr. Michael Brown to come on the program that's 3 against 1. I appreciate how civil the discussion is and I believe each person truly wants God glorified. May God's truth be revealed.
To be fair, Dr. Michael Brown is probably the only reputed scholar willing to defend the NAR movement publically 🤷♂️
But I agree, I also appreciate how civil the discussion was! May God’s truth be revealed 😌
It was fair and balanced conversation.
Dr. Brown is purposely ignoring the false teachings that go hand and hand with the NAR movement. And he admits he hangs out in those circles. Bill Johnson is so new age with a Christian label. He is okay with labels and titles. So if people start going around with the title of Messiah but don’t claim to be like Jesus the Messiah but a lesser form I guess he would be okay with that.
@@daveskinner8484 not true, while an assembly of God credentialed minister at Brownsville in florida when their "revival" happened he defended it even though the lies were recorded and publicly refuted and repudiated.
Furthermore, despite general superintendent Thom Trask endorsing "the Brownsville revival" AND "the Toronto blessing" and Dr Brown endorsing and defending them you may go and read the minutes and constitution of the assemblies of God general council meeting of 9/1949. There you'll see on pages 26-27 resolution 7 condemning the latter rain movement:
"RESOLVED, That we disapprove of those extreme teachings and practices which, being unfounded Scripturally, serve only to break fellowship of like precious faith and tend to confusion and division among the members ot the Body of Christ, and be it hereby known that this 23rd General Council disapproves of the so-called “New Order of the Latter Rain,” to wit:
1. The overemphasis relative to imparting, identifying, bestowing or confirming of gifts by the laying on of hands and prophecy.
2. The erroneous teaching that the Church is built on the foundation of presentday apostles and prophets.
3. The extreme teaching as advocated by the “New Order” regarding the confession of sin to man and deliverance as practiced, which claims prerogatives to human agency which belong only to Christ.
4. The erroneous teaching concerning the impartation of the gift of languages as special equipment for missionary service.
5. The extreme and unscriptural practice of imparting or imposing personal leadings by the means of gifts of
6. Such other wrestings and distortions of Scripture interpretations which are in opposition to teachings and practices generally accepted among us. . . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That we recommend following those things which make for peace among us, and those doctrines and practices whereby we may edify one another, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come unto the unity of the faith. The motion was made and seconded that this resolution be adopted. After brief debate it was adopted with an overwhelming majority. The motion was then made, seconded and it was adopted that in order that the entire constituency may have the benefit of this decision, the resolution be printed in THE PENTECOSTAL EVANGEL."
These 2 events (Brownsville and Toronto) were built specifically around points 1, 4, 5, and 6. So what if instead of putting the name NAR on it lets not put any name on it but just define the nar, the Brownsville and Toronto phenomenon, and the Latter rain movement by its practices and not by labels.
Oh wow. When we do that... We. Don't. See a difference... Hmmm.
If it looks like a duck, and swims like a duck, and waddles like a duck, has duck feathers, a ducks beak, webbed feet, and quacks like a duck. Then maybe, just maybe it's a duck... Even if we call it a turkey, or a horse, or a cow....
Like Shakespeare said "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet". This is what we have here. The substance is the same although the packaging, and look is different. The same could be said of much of the shepherding movement which itself had heavy influence from the latter rain with former proponents of the latter rain in the movement (Derek Prince).
Thank you doug for staying on track..
Doug is rambling vs actually engaging in the debate
I know a pastor who called himself an apostle. I watched him state to his Church that his members needed his permission to travel out of the country and to marry. He is currently on his third marriage, having committed adultery with women in his church. He is now a Lodge member.
I had not heard that. That’s pretty heavy accusations too.
I typed "what does God hate" into "www.biblestudytools.com/". The website came with, hope you are sitting down, 1150 search results!! Yikes! I wonder if this "pastor", which essentially means "shepherd" knows about or is even concerned about any of them.
@@jaquirox6579 well I know the pastor. We live on the same island
The same biblestudytools website also has a very detailed section on "Apostle", which as so many words do has a Greek origin. In this case the word is "apostolos" which appears 79 times in the New Testament. An envoy, ambassador, or messenger commissioned to carry out the instructions of the commissioning agent.
Kind of makes me wonder "who" sent him out, and for "what" purpose, if you get my meaning.
@@kevinevans8892 Yikes.... :-/ I wasn’t trying to discredit you or anything. I actually believe you. From what I’ve seen with people in those circles.... sadly it’s just like you say.
Alisa, thanks for your reminder & stance that we seek to glorify God through this all & providing the setting/format.🙏🏼
It boils down to theology and interpretation of scripture because that’s what counts. Sola scriptura
I grew up in the church and I’ve been in it all my life and I’m 62 years old. Since 1980s I have watched And experienced over the last 40 years the Spiritualization and Personalization of the Scriptures. The “I Me My” Gospel has found its way into all corners of the American church.. If God is speaking to us and we believe it so casually is there nothing that we couldn’t believe? Do I believe God speaks to us? Yes of course he does that’s why he gave us his word. We are to read it study it and to love it. It is to be one of our principle of obsessions in life if not the principle of obsession in our life.
It was a good interview I enjoyed all sides and all of the ideas expressed regarding the NAR are “everywhere” in this new pop culture church that now have a personalized adaptation of scriptures. We are thought to add Jesus to our lives not give our lives to Jesus. I think the passion translation is much more popular and relied on that our dear brother Dr. Browne understands.
The problem is that much of what is being taught is that we choose and invited and add Jesus to our life and then to look into the Scriptures and create a fairytale understanding of how God is talking to us. The Scriptures aren’t taught, how to approach the Scriptures inductively and deductively etc. Unfortunately today and the In the post charismatic pop-culture church we are taught that God is speaking to us directly before we know the Scriptures. This is not how Jesus lived, he relied on the Scriptures it’s not how the apostles lived, they quoted the Scriptures, they followed the Scriptures, stuied the scriptures order to know the truth.
I received Counterfeit kingdom for Christmas this past year! It’s an excellent book so far! I know it will be great all the way through!
Quit equating numbers with church growth! Michael seems to look only at numbers. C. Peter Wagner was interested only in getting people in the doors, not in their spiritual growth. Thus the phrase 'a mile wide and half an inch deep'!
Yes, I was reminded of the parable of the sower: many seeds sprang up, but only the ones in the good soil took root and thrived. I think a better measure of your effectiveness as a minister is in actual disciples, not in people who quickly fall away.
Also, what was up with the guy who planted 7000 churches?? How do you do that logistically? I am skeptical
@@kirbythsquirrel The Parable of the Sower, blessings! Is it my imagination, or was the Sower one who was Sowing as many seeds as he could to reach as many with the Gospel before "the end of Days"?
Lets not forget the Parable of the Weeds. Angels will do the Harvesting, not Man.
@@kirbythsquirrel 7k defintely seems impossible--it would be nice if they provided the list
What's up with the low number of views? This is what I would consider to be a slate of authoritative sources on the subject and it's such an important subject!
Overall it was helpful to debate about the excesses and practices of concern that are going on in several ministries these days, but where this debate got hung up was in regards to the NAR label and which churches, ministries, and leaders qualify for that label or not. I think this discussion would have been more fruitful if they didn't get hung up on the NAR label but kept to specific beliefs, practices, and teachings of concern. I was disappointed that too many of Dr. Brown's responses were defensive rather than addressing the actual concerns that Holly and the others brought up.
Tough questions always make baloney salesmen sweat .
philipjackson4200 - that exactly what Michael Brown was asking for, because the label is not accurate or helpful.
I went to the house of prayer and yes “ apostle chapel “ was there and that is how they addressed her. I left . Red flags everywhere my spirit was disturbed
Respectfully, what does Dr. Brown think of Bill Johnson saying that Jesus needed to be "born-again" ?
The apostolic office is no longer functioning. It ended with the death of the apostle John at the end of the first century. And I'm a Pentecostal BTW.
What scripture says that?
@@austinp1998 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. (Ephesians 2:20-21) Ephesians is Paul's letter teaching about the Church. If you have a foundation, you don't relay the foundation over and over again. It is obvious from history, and also from the New Testament teaching of the early church that we still have the apostolic teaching today through the entire written New Testament.
@@ghostl1124 thank you
That is so very true about code words .. I am so glad that I saw it within 3 months and left immediately..I pray for the 2 ladies that we all rode together to this church that are heavily into it..😏
..yes if you read John Andrew Collins book, The preacher behind the white hoods, you find that William Branham used similar tactics.. John Colllins was brought up in the Branhamite cult and came out of it in 2012... realising how many lies he had been told when he started to research it..
Ofcourse William Branham helped bring in Dominion theology (latter rain, manifest sons of God, and todays incarnation NAR)... ..and you find the unbiblical thirst for power goes through them all and Im not a cessatioinist...
Personally it's pretty clear from Scripture that the church should operate in the 5 ministries. It is when it's the most fruitful. Those ministries are there to equip the saints. In our church, we see the full works of the evangelists, the teachers, the prophets, the pastors, and the apostles. They do it according to scripture, they are all under the authority of the Holy Spirit. If anyone says anything that contradicts Scripture, they hold each other accountable. There is a humility and respect for the ministry they have and understand that they are co workers in the building of the church, that belongs to Christ.
However, I don't believe that there in our time, we have the Apostles that are inspired to write Scripture anymore, with new revelation.
Our ministry is to continue the work of the Apostles by preaching Christ and Him crucified, not to add or remove from Christ has already inspired.
How does anyone stop acceptance of error in that circle, however?
Dr Brown is part of that movement. I saw a older video where he was participating in the hyper charismatic actions
ruclips.net/video/BzmjEEVxdyg/видео.html you are right. He's been neck deep in it for decades.
He is a charismatic, so ? He isn’t claiming he has special privileges or authority.
Your mistaken.
@@colleenjohnstoncomedy3036 that’s why I don’t like this because I feel like it is basically an attack on he charismatic church by people who don’t agree with it. In that way, I understand Dr Brown’s point.
@@HopeBonarcherI read that Pivec and Givet are continuationists. They're not cessationists like Justin Peters
I am in Québec, Canada (French here!) and I have heard about the weird Passion "Translation". So I don't think that very few people are aware of this so called "translation".
I do love Michael’s desire to serve the Lord. I think he lacks discernment cuz he has such close relationships with these false teachers.
..I couldnt agree more. I am praying for him to see through this... ...he so needs to see what spirit people like Bill Johnson are operating in...
It needs to be exposed
The nature of apologetics is one where defenders of Biblical Christianity need to be armed with not only profound knowledge of Scripture, but also of cult doctrine. Cults get a pass when it comes to truth…that’s why they are cults. I’m not certain what Dr. Brown is receiving from the NAR, but clearly he sees the need to defend it. Finally, assigning oneself the title and authority of Apostle or Prophet is in fact a dangerous decision.
Does Michael really know what he is admitting? 1. By their fruits you shall know them and 2. The will decieve while being deceived. You can be part of something without realising. This why every individual works out their salvation in fear and trembling. Salvation is first individual and then congregational.
Dr Brown really showed us that he earns his nickname, Doc Obfs...being that verbose without saying anything...if that new book doesn't sell, he should consider politics.
I was apart of a "church" for 18 yrs. It's a nar church, nobody I mean nobody knows what nar is. But I absolutely 💯 know they hold to these unhealthy practices.
The entire concept that God is providing special, secret, new, yet incomplete revelations of His truth through current-day dreams, visions, and thoughts is absolutely non-biblical and can only be supported by denying the completeness and inrerrancy of Holy Scripture. The two positions - believing that God is adding inerrant revelation through people today, and that God provided a complete and perfect revelation in the Bible - are completely incompatible.
I think it’s fair to say that all quote affiliations to the “NAR” don’t practice & believe the same thing. I think the fact that the Apostles & Prophets authority is not a belief in all NAR churches. Representing as so is a misrepresentation. I know a person who pastors a church with similar beliefs, but does not embrace the Apostle & Prophets to be over his church.
My next question, the "new agey" practices in Bethel church, like the Enneagram, etc. ? One should look at their website to check it for themselves.
The enneagram issue is ALL OVER the church. Nowhere near just Bethel or charismatic churches, sadly.
John 6:25-59 is labeled "The Bread of Life" in the NIV. John6:60-71 is labeled "Many Disciples Desert Jesus". One thought that struck me was Jesus did not demand that they stay with him. He even asked the Twelve "You do not want to leave me too, do you?
The general impression I'm getting is that Cult leaders make demands. Dictators do the same.
Jesus called the 12, and others followed. If they chose to walk away, he not stand in their way.
My own experience with people claiming to be apostles actually lines up with what Michael Brown says. I've always experienced them claiming Scripture as sole authority, never claiming people have to submit to their authority because they are apostles, or that they have some new revelation. There probably are people out there that do so. Perhaps even NAR people. But the people I know who believe in the office of apostle, as Michael stated clearly in the beginning, do not do this. Additionally, I did not think Holly and Doug's arguments characterized the very quotations they used correctly. I have listened to Bethel many times, and have Often seem them completely mischaracterized, using quotes.... That's the point Michael is making.
Michael Brown’s argument that because people have never heard of NAR it therefore doesn’t exist is so ridiculous. The reality that people don’t know about NAR only verifies how deceptive this movement of false prophets and false apostles actually is!!!
Hi folks, and Happy New Year! I am posting this Comment on January 2, 2021. I recently received an inquiry that centered around the Branches of Christendom, Christianity. A Comment I posted about a month ago, also contained a remark about the Branches of Christianity. Got me wondering about that topic a little more, so I Googled "Christianity Branches" and "Christianity Tree", Images.
Wow! Mind Boggling! Looks like a Seminary course study all by itself, and perhaps it is. Alisa mentioned, on more than occasion, the Seminary Classes she has attended. I have attended none, but have seen a lot of Christian information over the years.
Best wishes to all!
Anyone notice how Brown talked about Holly but kept talking past her to Geivett about her?
When brother Doug Geivett ask’s brother Michael Brown to comment on the language on his website on the role of apostles and prophets in the establishment of a church that he had not read for 20 years which he says he would proceed to modify, and also says it was written by his colleague Bob and proceeds to describe what Bob meant, I think brother Michael Brown’s statement of what Bob meant might not actually mean what Bob meant and Bob should be asked directly if possible. Also I find the episode of brother Michael Brown stating that he asked a certain pastor NAR related questions and then brother Doug asks brother Michael what were the NAR related questions that he asked his pastor friend, to which he says it was somebody else that asked the question and it was someone else who asked the question, and then proceeds to describe what the nature of or the questions might have been, I find this troubling, because hear it seems to me that he is presuming on the questions that were asked, which may not have been the ones brother Doug or sister Holly may have asked.
I did find brother Michal Brown’s opening statement impressive…. and the accusation may in a general sense partially true, these assertions do not apply to sister Hollyvand brother Doug Geivett, who have footed their research not on anecdotal evidence but statements made in print in my view for the most part.
NAR is not hardly known if at all in the church I attend in FtW, Texas … a conservative, evangelical church…. I learned about NAR from a para-church watch dog type ministry
I discovered your podcast a few months ago, and I just love it. I'm now trying to catch up on everything. :) I listened to both this episode and the previous, with Holly, on the same subject. I have thoroughly enjoyed all 2+ hrs, and gained much insight. As a pentecostal Christian who attends (was born/raised) in a church which was founded on Eph. 4 ("perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"), I was really hoping for some more discussion re: the Biblical case for/against the actual offices of apostle/prophet being for today. I was actually a little disappointed that Dr. Brown didn't directly say that he DOES believe in the offices, so that each could make their case with Biblical standing. I am a member of a church that does believe in five-fold ministry, however my pastors have always encouraged us to weigh anything being said by one person against the Word, and even lately, they've been "protective" to not let anyone come in and tell us what we should be "emphasizing" in our teaching, or what our biggest concerns should be. That is something we've always been warned against (groupthink/undue submission/manipulation/abuse of power, etc). It's easier to do when the church is -60 people ;). I believe there are people with the "gift" (Eph 4:11) of apostleship or prophecy who may not step into an office of this title; maybe most can agree that this good for building up the body. However, I do not see anything unbiblical about allowing someone who has earned a ministerial position, to take on a specific role of apostle/prophet as an office. When I think of apostle, I think of missionary/church planter (someone "sent" by God). If someone does these things and is also an ordained minister within their local church, they might be called an apostle. I do not believe they should have any MORE authority over the congregation than a deacon or an evangelist (outreach pastor??). A deacon may have some role in decision-making/board meetings, and they may have some authority to the extent of keeping order in the church. So, I don't think saying that a prophet or an apostle with some kind of authority is negative, IF they already have an established office within the church. I disagree that the idea of NAR as a movement is, as Dr Brown states, like a conspiracy theory, and I completely understand the concern of abusing the role of apostle/prophet to draw and and give "revelations" that steer followers AWAY from the ability to rely on scripture as foundation for their faith. Even though my home church was founded over 40 yrs ago, I do believe that there has been an undeniable movement of the EXHALTATION of the position of apostle/prophet (above what it should be), if that makes sense. And I believe this has occurred in big and small churches. I am curious to know if Holly & Doug's opinion of the dangers of the movement simply have to do with the belief in an appropriate office of apostle/prophet, or more to do with the exaltation of these offices. I became somewhat discouraged at the end of the last podcast on the subject, when Holly was sharing "things to look out for", and mentioned the term "five-fold ministry" as one of the buzz words. I don't necessarily want people to run away from this idea as soon as they hear it, but rather study out what Paul means when he says, "and he gave some...". I understand how nuanced the word apostle can be, and the difference they are addressing between missionaries and the 12 disciples/Paul who were witnesses of Christ and who wrote things that are in the infallible Word, so with all of this comes the necessity of seeking to understand someone's definition of their position (and ensuring someone is not giving themselves an undue position). I realize how long this is, and how long ago the podcast was, so I don't have an expectation of a response. These are just some of the things I will keep studying out, and I might even connect with my pastors and receive some clarification on their stance, and/or their knowledge of NAR. Thank you, Alisa, as always, for great discussion that always keeps me wanting to seek truth and get right back in to the Word of God for more fun answers. :)
If they ask you for money , they might be trying to hypnotize you with fancy words while they pick your pocket .
Michael seems to play the victim card. He responds to holly with his own antidotes.
Thank you, Alisa, for this!
By the love, grace & and mercy of Yah·weh I have been saved from these false teachings of the NAR for 2+ yrs now, and my sister recently has come out of it as well.
I wonder if you are aware that NAR teachings also include ASTRO projection to "do spiritual warefare."? ASTRO projection is so demonic.
An NAR pastor taught this lie to my sister. Praise The Most High she has been delivered from this. Amen
God bless you & family!
💖💖💖
I applaud Alisa for hosting this discussion. These are the types of discussions that Christians should have rather than going online and slandering with mudslinging and maligning. I'm a Charismatic and have felt victimized by this false narrative of NAR. Dr Brown correctly points several times to Holly's use of an anecdotal story to describe the so called NAR. He also suggests a better way to address the issues that Holly and Doug have with the so called NAR practices. Dr Brown also correctly points to people who call you a liar when you say there is no NAR and that you're not a part of it. Although Holly and Doug's purpose is not to do that however many of the groupies of NAR have taken on this mission when adressing NAR. As Dr Brown points out the fruit of Holly and Doug's proposition and the extreme division it has created. This discussion is better addressed by breaking down the points of difference and having a discussion. It boils down to Cessationism vs Continuationism and its accompanying doctrines. At the end Holly doubles down on her presentation as though she hadn't heard any of the rebuttal by Dr Brown. She claims there's "data" to back up her assertions but all I heard was anecdotal stories. Perhaps she learn the admonition that Paul gives us to "make every endeavor to preserve the unity of the faith." This is not accomplished by writing books and doing interviews on a mythical movement. Instead its accomplished by an open dialogue between brothers and sisters and listening to what each other has to say. Then leave it in Jesus' hands and let Him build His church.
There actually are Christians, even Protestants, that do believe the apostolic ministry continues, through the ministry of bishops. Anglicans, Methodists, and some Lutherans, for instance.
I was actually disappointed in the arguments presented by both sides in this discussion. What I was looking for was more of a discussion on the biblical basis, or lack there of, NAR as a valid model of ecclesiology. Perhaps they could have looked at Peter Wagoner's teachings on this as a source document, compared that to God's Word, and then looked at the fruit of how it was bearing out in different factions of the Charismatic movement. The discussion started to move that way at one point when Dr. Brown mentioned "solo pastora" and the structure of the Catholic and EO Churches, but that was really it. Based on this discussion, I couldn't tell you much about why either side believes the bible supports their position. Both arguments were very much from emotion, and neither had that anchor point of God's word. With that said, I actually had a very bad experience with NAR, as it seems the "offices" don't seem to recognize their limitations in the lives of others. However, I have friends who had similar experiences in more Fundamentalist churches and homeschool movements (IFBC, and ATI, etc) that have a heavy authoritarian structure, but different than NAR, as well. I just think it would have been helpful to look at this in light of God's word, and not just the back and forth about anecdotes and making judgements. There was a measure of objectivity that was missing here.
I think that's because the debate was simply about whether or not it is actually a movement.
Agreed. Why don't we do more exegesis on this issue?
The truth is a lion it will defend itself. This “Christian man” gets angry and has to defend stuff that doesn’t make sense. If it was truthful, he wouldn’t have to defend these people and churches.
Why are we soooooo concerned about what they call themselves, I'm concerned about some of the unbiblical activities which stem from some of these churches. If we preach the tatality of the Bible, that is all that matters. The Bible, plus nothing, minus nothing!
I agree- the label is irrelevant, it is either biblical or not biblical. And that is why we have to read the bible personally as independent individuals--yes its good to be taught, but ultimately-we need to practice relying on God's spirit and truly humbling ourselves unto him and everything he is
My experience is that people that gravitate towards NAR and/or Charismatic positions are careful not to utilize titles and terms that they teach. I liken it to when you have people knock on your on your door and claim to be Christian’s then you use a term and you think you are coming to agreement. However, in instant they redefine the term. Search out videos with former elders of Bethel or the funding funneling into the pockets at the top. Dr. Brown is willfully ignorant to the trickle down effects and impact.
It seems like holly and Douge struggle to actually lay out what the teachings are that are so dangerous and false.
They talk about ‘apostles and prophets’ taking abusive authority over the people, they are against the passion translation, and they talk about ‘apostles and prophets’ acting like they are needed to bring ‘new/ special revelations’.
But as someone who is apparently going to one of these ‘NAR’ churches… I have never heard or experienced any of the above. And when Dr Brown was trying to nail down with them what these issues are… and they talk in confusing circles and can’t give any clear and consistent answers. They change their answer when Dr brown explains a quote or something taken from a book in misunderstanding.
This has convinced me that previous concerns about NAR were foundation-less.
It’s funny that brown says to throw out anecdotal evidence. He is the kind of “I know the guy” or “my son in law knows the guy” rules for you but not for me.
Che Ahn told @Michael Brown he was an apostle and Michael Brown didn’t do anything other than agree and smile.
Is there any footage of this event in 2003 that Holly mentioned in her opening statement ...
I did want to see the documentation for that story. Maybe not the best choice... But it did seem to get under Dr Browns collar
Thx for the interview/debate. It was insightful on both sides.
Aren’t we all as believers to make Jesus known ?
Absolutely! (assuming we are referring to the same Jesus :)
Greetings Bri.
I would suggest reading Matthew Chapter 7 which concludes the Sermon on the Mount, that begins in Ch5. The New International Version, NIV, breaks Ch 7 into 6 sections:
Judging Others
Ask, Seek, Knock
The Narrow and Wide Gates
True and False Prophets
True and False Disciples
The Wise and Foolish Builders
Verses 28 & 29 contrast Jesus with "their teachers of the law".
Amen! Through our lives as living testimonies to the goodness and love of God bestowed upon us all
It’s obvious that trying to have this discussion about the NAR with Michael brown is pointless, he has a fairly passive aggressive bias towards its key players.
LOL 😆 Like Holly even when confronted with evidence, you still hold to your conspiracy theories
I just listened to this. I appreciated Doug and Holly’s kindness and thoroughness. I completely trust their position. Dr Brown not so much.ihop and bethel are dangerous.
Is it just me or did Michael Brown give no good arguments for his side? Saying that it's "nonsense" and "people from the outside labeling" aren't good arguments. I was hoping to hear from someone that was allegedly NAR give good solid reasoning.
I'm very sympathetic to Michael Brown's frustration. I have familiarity with groups like IHOP-KC and other charismatics who believe in the offices of apostle and prophet, and I've NEVER heard them claim some inordinate level of authority for those leaders - quite the contrary. And it seems bizarre that IHOP has explicit denials on their webpage that Doug and Holly refuse to believe. That tends to make me a little skeptical of their entire project.
It also bothers me that they insist on using a label that has a very specific meaning - Peter Wagner's organization - in a rather different way. That is guaranteed to cause confusion.
..ihop claim they dont teach dominion theology (NAR) on their statement of faith on their web site but they actually do teach it in their bible school. The videos are available on line...
I've heard from their mouths that they believe NAR stuff. Dr. Brown is a true NAR apologist
Is it just me, or does Michael Brown come across really rude, and arrogant here? Where as Holly and Doug come across very humble, and gentle. Just me?? I think character is being cleanly displayed here. Just my opinion though.
I didn't sense rudeness (expect maybe when he passively-aggressively addressed the typing noise). I think he may have been somewhat defensive and definitely displayed passion re: his defense (which makes total sense in a debate-style format). But I don't think that is the same as being rude.
@@hannahm5651 Maybe whether he seemed rude or not, will be different for each person. But I definitely found him to be heavily arrogant, and way unnecessarily defensive. But he’s like that in all the videos I see him in. And these two were so calm, and kind, and honestly gentle with how they spoke with him, and responded to him. I think this was the one time where he could have taken the opportunity of his opponents being kinder, and came up to their level. But he stayed in the same frame he’s always in. Snapping, interrupting, defensive, dismissive... and all of those together, I personally think is quite rude. IMO of course.
Ihave seen the videos of the abuses, check out Justin Peterson & Chris Rosebeoughs RUclips. Thanks for doing this , his circular responses lead me to believe he is hiding something.
@@iw9338 I’m glad to see someone else noticed the same thing. Justin Peters, and Chris R, both have great ministries on RUclips. And I believe both of them have done more recent videos concerning Michael Brown’s theological issues. Those 2 teachers are great at verbalizing exactly why it’s wrong and incorrect Biblically, and that really helps me learn about things in a fact based way.
Definitely just your interpretation.
Defining abuse needs to be clarified. Is it abuse for someone to use their title to tell others what to do in the name (or even maybe the voice) of the LORD? I think so.
Great discussion. It was clear after listening that there is no NAR movement. I have listened to many different teachers over the years, some were mentioned here and some not. Eat the meat and spit out the bones. Strengthen yourself in The Lord and you will be less likely to be deceived. But we all have deception to some degree. Maybe a book on how to avoid deception would be better than a book accusing the brethren.
The International House of Prayer, IHOP, was mentioned early on this Podcast. "IHOP" is "new", only dating back to its founding on May 7, 1999.
so…
Thx, Richard.
Thx, Richard.
Maybe it would've been more helpful to guide the interview to actually talking about scripture and systemic theological thinking and understanding the bible and Church history. The "debate" basically was about opinions and experiences and not about what is biblical and what is not... Then the listeners would have learned something helpful instead of confused or more convinced of theri person bias from the get go. Also, half the comments just say that they think Dr Michael Brown is a shady character who is deceitful and lying (personal attacks) instead of substantive thoughts or analysis. Hope that these guys get another chance to debate this again one day!
God's plan is the five fold ministry, you can change paths if you want to. There will be a spotless bride for Jesus to come back to.
Hi Alisa. I love your show. Although I do not agree with everything, I do find it informative and edifying. I don’t agree with to the stance on the music though. I do believe we do have to trust believers and church/ worship leadership to use discernment. The song your guest mentioned, To Good To Not Believe, is not really a song that I would imagine congregations would sing in church. Also, I have listened to the song many times and I didn’t ever read into it what the guest was reading into it. That’s why I feel like it’s a bit of a slippery slope and they are possibly falsely accusing some believers (not all, but definitely some) of doing things that they may not intend to or believe they are doing. Also, if you agree these churches are fellow believers, why would we want to disenfranchise whole cross sections of our same body. A house divided cannot stand. I understand the heart behind this I guess but so many of the people accused of being NAR clearly state that they are not. So is it godly to continue to accuse and even slander them? I also listened to the debate with Dr Brown. Thank you for also doing that. My worry is that this is more of an attack on charismatic/ Pentecostal beliefs from sections of the church that are not Pentecostal/ charismatic. I know there are sections of the church who believe that the charismatic side on its own is unchristian so that worries and concerns me and I would hope that people know that you can be a charismatic believer in Christ and still be living by scripture and that doesn’t make you NAR.
Dr. Brown is right. I think it is dangerous to start writing books about heresy, because you can see this behind every bush if you don’t know the whole story. Yes, C. Peter Wagner was totally off base, but I’m afraid the real problem here is that controversy sells. Let’s find our common ground in Christ and build on that. 28:44
I am Pentecostal although I don't believe the Apostolic office is for today. Wagner obviously did. Wagner's promotion of the apostolic office seems to be one of the Major issues his critics have against him. That said, about 24 years ago I was reading one of his books on spiritual gifts or church growth in which he erroneously claimed that God favors the poor. Knowing that Wagner did missionary outreach in Latin America I am left to wonder if he had embraced elements of Liberation theology or Marxism. Both systems are very anti-rich and pro-poor. Just a thought
So is Bible salvation saying a sinners prayer? Or is it repentance ,baptism in Jesus name for the remission of sins and infilling of the holy ghost ? Also did the apostles disobey Jesus,s command to baptise in the name of the father and of the son and of the holy ghost ? There apostles over and over again baptised in the name of Jesus. This is clearly seen in the book of acts so how ? Is this not biblical ?
I know firsthand how evil NAR is, and it is everywhere. Dr. Brown presented so poorly, really confirming how off base Dr Brown is.
*So is Holly & Doug’s basic premise that if you believe there are prophets and apostles today, you are automatically NAR? That’s a pretty rubbish argument.*
As one sympathetic to their cause I wholeheartedly agree with you. They really need to sharpen their arguments against NAR
Alisa, I am a regular viewer of your videos which I find very theologically solid.
On this specific issue of NAR, is it possible to solicit the view of say, Ps John MacArthur or Dr Lawson, in a similar interview with Dr Brown or someone like him. It would be very enlightening.
I doubt MacArthur would sit down with an opposing side to flesh this out
🤣 Brown says he doesn’t know anyone that would consider themselves Apostles and then goes on to talk about the people who are considered Apostles. Classic Brown
It is sad people dismiss anecdotals as if a person's experiences means nothing. In some situations anecdotals have more merit than what any other study. It is also sad people throw out words like conspiracy. They are not only gaslighting the truth. They show how insecure and unable to think critically. In conclusion, it seems Michael is in plausible denialism or willful ignorance just because he cannot see his friends would be acting the way they are or worse would hide their support of NAR teachings and ideas.
If they are wrong, God will correct them. If not, God will correct you. I wouldn't want to be in your shoes.
Anyone who teaches that the bible says, the requirement to be an Apostle, had to have walked with Jesus Christ, is a "False Teacher!!"
That was the requirement, for the person to replace Judas, as an Apostle!! The Apostle Paul did not walk with Jesus Christ prior to becoming an Apostle!!
But he was verified by the men who did in Acts. Been almost 2000 years since john the last apostle died
..there were others outside the 12 who were called apostles anyway.. ...so the role of apostle should not have gone away... ..however dominion theology (latter rain, manifest sons of God, NAR) have an understanding of apostle that goes way beyond the biblical one as these super apostles have to bring in Jesus kingdom BEFORE Jesus returns.
So typically they have all sought more power (than scripture speaks about) to be able to achieve this, from praying to angels (idolatory) (God may send an angel in answer to a prayer but we are not to pray to them) to laying on graves to get mantles.. etc etc Bethel's, The Physics of Heaven is a good book if you want to bring the occult into the church...
@@stephenwells9224you're missing one important criteria Paul met in order to be an apostle: according to 1 Corinthians 9 he saw the resurrected Jesus Christ in Acts 9
I love Mike Brown, but he is dodging. There truly is an NAR.
No he’s not! LOL
Dan Juster of Tikkun calls himself Apostle with capital "A".
Brown is a known documented liar. Look up Steve Kozar, fighting for the faith and Justin Peters.
Amen, the three outstanding, reliable Biblical apologists you reference (Steven Kozar, Fighting for the Faith, and Justin Peters) are excellent! They KNOW the Bible and skillfully lead people to rightly read, divide, and discern God's Truth versus counterfeits. They have thoroughly exposed the rotten history, doctrines, and teachings of the NAR. Advice to all of us who seek God's Truth: RUN from Bethel Church, Hillsong music, every "teacher" on TBN television shows with hucksters such as Sid Roth, Paul Crouch; and run from all of the hundreds of self-proclaimed "apostles" and "prophets" throughout the U.S. and worldwide. This movement has been described as growing much faster than Islam!
1:30:58 Yes, how heretical of Mike Bickle to start a 24-hour prayer and worship ministry based on such a faulty understanding of that verse… It’s really sad to see believers picking other believers apart to criticize them no matter how “nice” their tone sounds while doing it.
This has done nothing but confuse the issue more 😂
From most of the comments... the God I've came to know seems to be a petty, unforgiving and cynical character. Because He lives in you... I can't afford to have that right now... Surely the truth is not represented by these comments right? Please tell me this isn't the heart of god..
Sorry, but Michael Brown did a lot of backpedalling and what I think was double talk and a strawman. Michael went the abusive route but that goes on in the NAR. SMH