Once again, Brown highlights many parts of what makes him so dangerous and problematic. Who we decide to share the stage with and call friend matters. Lou Engle is a ridiculously false prophet. Randy Clark is the same as a false teacher. Both however are made to look like Charles Spurgeon if they stand next to the inane Sid Roth. Brown only names these three, but he has also defended the sneaky squid spirit nonsense and Jennifer LeClaire and referred to both Benny Hinn and Joseph Prince as "good brothers in the Lord", when I was on his radio program. The issue of the gifts is one that Brown likes to focus on but that just muddies the waters. Cessationism is as unsupported biblically as the baby babble version of tongues Brown brags about. There is no doubt about two fundamental truths that are confirmed in scripture. The first is that the gifts were meant for the entire existence of the church and not just the Apostolic Age. Secondly, the current Charismatic manifestations of the gifts are not biblical either.
"Why, then, do I say that the "NAR" of the critics is a fiction? I'll do my best to explain. On December 12, I'm scheduled to interview historian Matthew D. Taylor on my Line of Fire broadcast. Dr. Taylor is one of the hosts of the podcast called "Charismatic Revival Fury: The New Apostolic Reformation," as well as the author of a forthcoming book The Violent Take It by Force: The Christian Movement that Is Threatening Our Democracy. He believes that there is a direct connection between the events of January 6 and the New Apostolic Reformation founded by Dr. Wagner. That's what we'll be focusing on in our interview, and while we definitely have some profound differences, we do share a number of common (and serious) concerns." - Dr. Michael Brown
This is another tried and true strategy from Brown. Find someone he likes to represent the negative opinions of him and use that person as a foil against anyone who might be critical. I do not know Matthew Taylor and do not believe I have even heard of him. Taylor is right that there is a clear through line between the NAR dominionist theology and January 6th. Realize that after storming into the Capital, beating cops half to death, screaming they wanted to hang the Vice President, and defecating in the Well of the Senate, these people stopped to pray thanks to Jesus Christ for their successes that day. It was caught on video. Now, I do not lay that at the feet of Wagner, as I think he was more focused on the apostolic side of things rather than the dominionist forces that usurped his moniker but that is a distinction that does not truly matter at this point.
'Interestingly, in light of his investigative research, which included direct access to Dr. Wagner's archives (including personal emails and much more), Dr. Taylor has come to recognize that I myself am not part of NAR. He also recognizes that men like Randy Clark are not part of NAR. And, like me, he takes issue with the scholarly methodology of some of the principal critics of the wider "NAR," while acknowledging some nuggets of truth in their work, as I also do. In Dr. Taylor's own words, if you search online for NAR: "You'll find websites with literally thousands of names indexed of different Christian leaders who are supposedly part of 'the NAR.' " You will find writing about the New Apostolic Reformation that sounds like stuff out of a bad conspiracy novel - where NAR leaders are spookily manipulating political leaders like some sort of Charismatic Illuminati." He adds: "You will also find people, reputable people, journalists, scholars, people who've done their research, pushing back and say, 'Yes, there is such a thing as the NAR' and they can marshal a lot of evidence, much of it coming from Peter Wagner's writing and associations."' - Dr. Michael Brown
Well, I guess that resolves it. One random guy says X, so X must now be true? What kind of silly logic is that? By the way, as I have said even in this devotional, Dr. Brown does not actively teach NAR theology and if asked about the teachings themselves, he would probably denounce many of them. The problem is he provides credibility and cover for those that do. He is a gatekeeper for the NAR. In all of my writings regarding the NAR, I have never written about Randy Clark. Maybe he is NAR, maybe he is not. Recognize though that Brown mentions him to deflect the correct criticisms of other clearly NAR teachers he does support. While many may mislabel folks as NAR that are just false teachers, that does not remove the existence of the NAR. There is nothing spooky or mystical about the obvious attempts by the NAR to manipulate political leaders! Just look at the Oval Office shots of false teachers like Paula White laying hands on President Trump! Just look at the open bragging from seven mountains heretics about getting Mike Johnson, one of their own, to be Speaker of the House! This is why Dr. Brown is so disingenuous. He is constantly asking you to not believe your own lying eyes.
"It is the former "NAR" whose existence I deny, the NAR that has become the charismatic boogeyman lurking behind every controversial tree, the global network allegedly numbering hundreds of millions of Christians, poised to take over the world. It is the "NAR" that is described so differently by different critics that many of the descriptions are mutually contradictory." - Dr. Michael Brown
Yeah, no Doc. This is exactly what you swore at the start you were not going to do - gaslighting. To mockingly refer to it as "taking over the world," when you know that is the exact definition of the seven mountains mandate. Just ask your buddies like Lance Wallnau! He has no problem admitting it! It is not a boogeyman. It is not mutually contradictory. It is simply a collective of ideas, teachings and theology. It started with C. Peter Wagner. It is characterized today by Charismaniacs who abuse the gifts, the supernatural and a false authority paradigm of apostles and prophets, all of which are self-declared. The primary theological focus beyond this is dominionism, quite possibly the last idol of the church age. Dominionism is simply the mixing of carnal politics with a holy God. There are plenty of false teachers who are not NAR. Joel Osteen, Brian Houston and Joyce Meyer jump to my mind as more word faith hucksters who love the prosperity heresies. Others dance with the NAR but may not be full throated. Finally, others are rabid, such as Brown's boss Steven Strang and the aforementioned Locke and Murillo.
"To cite one example out of many, one critical website claims to offer "The Six Hallmarks of a NAR Church." These are: 1. APOSTLES: "We're in a 'Second Apostolic Age.' There are new Apostles are on the earth today, anointed by the laying of hands to represent and speak for God here on Earth. These 'Super Apostles' are equal to the original Apostles - the ones who witnessed Jesus' life, death and resurrection and were appointed by Christ Himself to the office. Since these new apostles are commissioned by God, their authority may not be questioned."
1
1
1
