Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. - 2Timothy 3:12-13 (ESV)
Let me preface this by saying a few things for the record. I am not defending the maker of the American Gospel series. In fairness, I have not watched them. I know plenty of people who have and who enjoy them as properly exposing false teaching that has distorted the true gospel of Jesus Christ. The primary speakers do tend to the Cessationist and Calvinist bent, and I am sure this stands out for those in charismatic circles as problematic. As much as I disagree with the NAR abuses within charismania, I equally disagree with Calvinist theology and cessationism as the bible simply does not support either. That said, some of the better theological voices seem to come from the Calvinist crowd and some of the worst from Charismatic circles.
When it comes to Dr. Michael Brown my record has been completely clear. I had a great deal of respect for him, as he presented as a knowledgeable and learned theologian. The more I watched his involvement with the first Trump run for president however, the more concerned I became. He clearly was promoting politics more than the gospel and although he tries to present now as being reformed from this, he is clearly still NAR dominionist through and through, especially considering his close involvement with Charisma News, the preeminent dominionist proponent on the Internet. Equally disturbing was his penchant for refusing to call out false teachers. He appeared on Benny Hinn's program for a week and defended it by defending the heretic, calling him a good brother in the Lord. He has done the same for Bill Johnson, who he vehemently defends, and Joseph Prince, despite writing and entire book against Prince's theology of antinomianism. The episode that led to my referring to Brown as a NAR gatekeeper however was after Jennifer LeClaire made her absurdly stupid "sneaky squid prophecy", Brown gave her his radio show as a platform to defend it. It appears Brown is stuck in a quagmire of his own making. He knows full well that Charismania is producing all sorts of false theology, but he cannot bring himself to critique his direct peers.
With this as the backdrop it appears there is a new kerfuffle involving Dr. Brown and Brandon Kimber, who makes the American Gospel docuseries. Kimber decided for the third installment, he would have opposing viewpoints, such as Dr. Brown and Daniel Kolenda. Kimber and Brown appeared to have a genial arrangement which allowed Brown to back out and it appears Brown has done so AFTER, filming hours and hours of material. One of the responses from Dr. Brown in a Facebook thread he started tells us quite a bit about the false piety and disingenuousness he traffics in:
"Brandon Kimber Brandon, I made a major personal sacrifice to help your project and to speak into your life personally, but you rejected my most important input and did not exhibit integrity. I had no plans to make this public, but your post has let loose a flood of horrific personal attacks, coupled with honest questions. I ignore the attacks and pray for the critics, but I will answer the questions fairly and accurately. I have no desire to make you look bad, but I fear God and will not be party to deception." - Dr. Michael Brown
This was a docuseries that criticizes a great deal of error on the charismatic side so asking for Dr. Brown's involvement does not strike me as "doing Kimber a favor" but rather providing Brown an opportunity to argue his side. It further appears that Kimber did not (and probably should not) have even tried to involve Brown at all. Also, I am relatively sure Kimber did not need nor ask for Dr. Brown, who he obviously disagrees with, to "speak into his life." The "most important" input Brown is referring to is his disagreement with the usage of the term NAR. Now, Brown objects to the NAR because he is always associated with it, quite correctly I might add. He initially tried to pretend the NAR didn't exist, but he soon found out that no one was accepting that nonsense so now he simply downplays it or erects silly strawmen arguments to ignore discussing the merits of it and his involvement. What is interesting is Kimber asserts that the actual objection was in the labeling of other ministries and ministers as NAR. This is fully in line with Dr. Brown's usual behavior where he refuses to listen to any correct critique of false teachers and simply dismisses them piously by pretending that God somehow would not be pleased in pointing out that sneaky squid spirits do not exist. In the aforementioned Facebook thread, Brown deleted all criticizing comments about other ministers and ministries and even proudly admitted to such in the thread, because you know, Jesus. He then infers that Kimber somehow was wrong for making this issue public, but everyone already knew Brown was involved, so he would have to answer to why he was no longer involved. As for the assertion that this unleashed a flood of personal attacks, here is a direct quote from Kimber's announcement regarding Brown's departure:
"If you're a charismatic or cessationist and are disappointed in his decision (and I know that many are, and will be), I would advise you not to attack him on social media. He will only see that as further proof that he was right to remove himself from the project. I am thankful for the time that Dr. Brown and Daniel Kolenda gave me, and have great respect for their passion and willingness to help me understand their perspectives, but I am very disappointed in how this all concluded." - Brandon Kimber