"WE REJECT the belief that contemporary prophets have the exact same function or carry the exact same authority as did Old Testament prophets. WE REJECT the belief that every church must be submitted to apostles and prophets to be in right order before the Lord. WE FURTHER OPPOSE the possible abuse of ecclesial titles that manifests itself in self-proclaimed apostles and prophets claiming territorial authority over pastors in a community, city, or nation." - Dr. Michael Brown and Joseph Mattera
So, "Bishop" Mattera rejects the abuse of ecclesial titles? Just wanted to make sure I got that right. Ok, so we come to the great swerve. Mattera and Brown are actually rejecting the bible then. There is nothing in scripture that indicates God changed the rules for New Testament prophets versus Old Testament prophets. None. They have to reject this idea because the silly prophets they support are disqualified and shown to be false by the standards of the bible. By God's standards. Most of the people they pretend are prophets will tell you that being 65% accurate makes you a solid prophet. Think about the abject foolishness of that statement. So, people who claim to hear directly from God, can be wrong about what they hear 35% of the time. Peoples lives and faith shipwrecked, 35% of the time. Does God stutter? Is He speaking only in hushed tones? Is He willfully deceptive? The bible does recall stories of when God placed a lying spirit in the mouths of false prophets, so maybe? Realize this is at minimum a multi-million-dollar industrial complex. As for rejecting self-proclaimed apostles and prophets realize this is only a matter of power and control. If the people are willing to bow the knee to their hierarchy, they can gain the benefits therein but if they dare to be on their own, watch out. Mark Driscoll had to learn that lesson by apologizing to Osteen and Brian Houston before being allowed to come back into flock fleecing activities following his midnight run from Mars Hill. Same for Greg Locke recently who had to break bread with Benny Hinn for writing a disparaging book about him years before. So, before you think about giving them kudos for their pseudo-piety remember their objection is not to the falseness of the persons but rather that they choose to operate without their blessing.
"WE REJECT the belief that "new revelation" is essential for the life and growth of the Church or that contemporary apostles or prophets are the only ones privy to such "new revelation." WE AFFIRM the full sufficiency of Scripture for the health and mission of the Church. WE AFFIRM that the spirit of true apostles and prophets should exemplify the attitude and lifestyle of Jesus (Philippians 2:4-12), coming alongside other church and workplace leaders to serve them, not replace them." - Dr. Michael Brown and Joseph Mattera
Once again, it is a matter of control. They reject this because it happens all the time. Wannabe apostles and prophets claim that only they are hearing directly from God. So does Joseph Prince however and Benny Hinn yet Brown routinely defends both. Mike Bickle was considered one of the "Kansas City Prophets" yet do the new revelations about decades of clergy sexual abuse show a lifestyle of Jesus? Yet Brown and people like his boss at Charisma News defend Bickle. Steven Strang recently declared that Bickle had been "exonerated" when no such thing happened. Now that they have addressed the false theological underpinnings of Charismania, we start to get into the NAR, which this document was supposed to be about.
1
1
1
