Yes Dr. Brown, you finally spoke some truth, albeit from another website. The supernatural signs you speak of are nonsense. They are gemstones and gold dust. They are glory clouds and angel feathers. All of which are held beliefs of Bethel and IHOP by the way. The Latter Rain heresy was marked as such going back to the 1950s. Joel's Army and the Seven Mountains are entirely dominionist! The churches are not being gobbled up but are willingly being converted into these teachings.
So, if you enjoy Hillsong worship songs, you're part of NAR, and you are apostate. (Surprise!) If you believe God confirms His Word with signs, wonders, and miracles, you're part of NAR, and you have fallen away. (Yes, surprise again!) If you believe the Church should make a positive impact on the culture through the gospel, you're part of NAR, even if you repudiate dominionism. (Sorry, but that's what the critics say!) And if your church hosts 24-7 prayer, you're NAR. (Holly's website lists this as a tell-tale sign.)." -- Dr. Michael Brown
No Dr. Brown. Hillsong has written some theologically appropriate songs but they are mixed in with some that are horrifically bad. We are not against signs and wonders just unbiblical signs and wonders that make no scriptural sense. It is not through the Gospel that you seek to affect culture. It is through conquering seven cultural mountains and demanding our faith through legislation. Repudiating dominionism is irrelevant if your writings and teachings all support it! The 24-7 prayer referred to here must be in reference to IHOP, who employs cultish behaviors, eastern mysticism and heretical things like soaking prayers. The overall point is that if you attend a church that is actively teaching these things they are pulling you away from doctrine and even admit it brazenly like Bill Johnson does!
"In short, what the critics have basically done is take whatever trends they differ with in the worldwide Pentecostal-Charismatic movement, group them all together, and put them under the heading of NAR -- even though this is not what NAR has ever meant. So, they have a taken a term that had a specific meaning for years, put their own definition on it, and then decided who is part of it, regardless of how the facts line up." -- Dr. Michael Brown
Yeah, no. All of the planks discussed here in the platform of the NAR came from the original teachings. Granted places like Bethel have placed these teachings on steroids but we had nothing to do with that Dr. Brown. We do not decide who is NAR -- they do by what they teach. It's called discernment.
'The truth be told, the reason I and others have taken time to clarify issues is out of love for the Body of Christ as a whole. The critics are not my concern. Their attacks fuel my fire and encourage me all the more to stand for what is right. I simply feel bad for them personally and grieve over any confusion they cause in the Church. But again, that's why I've taken time to try to clarify issues: I'm concerned about the unity of the Church, and I see the work of these critics as being divisive and destructive, more harmful than helpful. As for those who think I want to look the other way and ignore abuses, may I remind you that my most recent book, Playing with Holy Fire, is devoted entirely to addressing abuses in our house -- meaning, in the Pentecostal-Charismatic Church? If you've read the book, you can attest that I pull no punches. You'll also know that I critique some aspects of contemporary "apostolic ministry."' -- Dr. Michael Brown
If you stood for what is right you would get back to the Gospel and stop writing about Donald Trump all the time. You would call out false teachers as you are commanded to in the bible. Romans teaches us that division is brought into the church by false doctrine, not those who say it is false. The problem is you are willing to unify with anyone who can correctly spell Jesus. I agree that some of your writing is wholly correct in calling out teachings but the problem is you refuse to call out those who teach it. The perfect example is your book on hyper grace was spot on but you refuse to call the king of hyper grace, Joseph Prince, a false teacher. That renders your writings meaningless.
"First, get rid of the extreme rhetoric ("not Christian"; "aberrant movement"; etc.). You're slandering your brothers and sisters. Second, drop the general term NAR. It's ambiguous at best and misleading at worst and should only be used with reference to the organization once led by Peter Wagner. Third, don't put widely disparate groups under the same heading. That only leads to confusion. Fourth, identify the beliefs or practices you question, be sure you rightly understand them from an insider perspective, then respond to them based on Scripture and fruit. Fifth, recognize the wonderful things the Spirit is doing around the world today. This way, rather than scaring people with false accusations of a conspiratorial, worldwide, demonic movement, you can engage in constructive, fruitful interaction. That way, you can build up more than tear down. Isn't that the goal we all share?" -- Dr. Michael Brown