For decades the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) have been using the Pentecostal and Charismatic ‘sheep skin’ to take over churches and suppress Christians or Christian groups/churches that have opposed them. In this article, we will re-examine the history of the New Order of the Latter Rain and the NAR movement and see that Michael Brown has been using the Pentecostal and Charismatic sheepskin to further mislead people into thinking he is a legitimate Christian brother in Christ when in fact, he’s an Apostle of the New Apostolic Reformation cult.
This article will expose how the evidence is ‘hiding in plain sight’ in his response to Chris Rosebrough and will also tackle some of the misrepresentations he made about himself and the NAR when attempting to answer Chris Rosebrough’s question on his program. At the end of this article, you will see the transcript of Michael Brown attempting to answer Chris Rosebrough’s question.
Dr Michael Brown might not put ‘apostle’ on his name tag but other NAR Apostles have…
Not long ago, Dr Michael Brown attempted to tackle the New Apostolic Reformation on his ‘Line of Fire’ program. Chris Rosebrough from Fighting for the Faith rang in to ask Michael Brown a question in regards to his definition of ‘Apostle’ and asked Michael Brown if he should submit to his local NARpostle. Listen to the segment here:
What is the NAR? Ask Ps Rosebrough! (Not Dr Brown!)
Before addressing the question, the biggest lie that escaped Dr Brown’s lips was the claim he was a Pentecostal/Charismatic.
“Yes! I myself would be characterized as Charismatic Pentecostal.”
From what we heard on his program, Michael Brown made the claim twice that he was a Charismatic Pentecostal.
The fact is this – you cannot be a Pentecostal and a Charismatic.
This then automatically puts Michael Brown into the camp of a Charismatic. But since the Charismatic movement was a construction of the NAR, Michael Brown is in fact neither Pentecostal or Charismatic but a NARismatic. This is easily proven in his response to Chris Rosebrough on how he DEFENDED his beliefs on modern-day apostles in the church (which we will address below).
Firstly, not only is Michael Brown recognized as an Apostle in the New Apostolic Reformation cult, Brown stated to Chris Rosebrough that even if he was an apostle, he claimed he would not put that title “on my name card.”
So even if Michael Brown was an NAR Apostle, why does he need to be honest about it if he said he wouldn’t put the title on his name card?
We also want to make note of a ‘cult leader’ tactic Brown used to defend his heretical doctrines – they ANTICIPATE and attempt to counter those that oppose their heretical views. And this is EXACTLY what Michael Brown did to Rosebrough – he attempted to counter the Christian apologist’s scripture by referring to the scripture in Revelations 22 that refutes modern-day governing apostles. What did he then do?
Dr Michael Brown deliberately pushes aside all scriptural justification for the ceasing of the apostolic office and rolled out the typical NAR argument, using their favorite combo-pairing of Ephesians 4 with 1 Corinthians 12 after allowing the popular NAR ‘Acts 14:14’ text to govern the scripture. As usual – Dr Brown failed to bring up the context of Ephesians 4 with Ephesians 2 that states,
“So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit.” Ephesians 2:19-22
Argued like the true word-gaming NARpostle Michael Brown is.
“But I’m looking at Acts 14:14, ‘The apostles Barnabas and Paul tore their robes’. There’s others called apostles in the New Testament outside of the twelve. So- are there apostle today? Is that how I understand Ephesians 4? That God has appointed apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers the way I understand 1 Corinthians 12? Yeah.”
Michael Brown – you should be ashamed of attempting to deceive a Christian pastor and Christ’s church in the name of Jesus.
And you have a problem with anonymous “discernment ministries?”
HISTORY OF PENTECOSTALISM AND THE NEW APOSTOLIC REFORMATION
To prove the claim that the Charismatic Renewal Movement (CRM) and the NAR are one and the same, we need to re-examine the history of the New Order of the Latter Rain’s inception and how it birthed the Charismatic Renewal Movement (CRM). At its inception, it appeared the New Order of the Latter (NOLR) intended to destroy or take over Pentecostal churches. This excerpt is written from someone who is PRO NOLR.
“As the message and practices of the New Order were shared, they found other sympathetic followers, particularly among existed Pentecostal congregations. For a time, some Pentecostal churches, primarily in Western Canada, but in parts of the U.S. as well, became battlegrounds between New Order and Pentecostal denominational factions… in the U.S., it was not likely the case that churches were lost to their denominationals, but in at least some cases churches were noticeably weakened by loss of their members to New Order programs. Also, some pastors resigned from their churches to become independent New Order preachers.
New Order leaders sought for and achieved their greatest successes in Western Canada. One worker from that era remembers a leaflet entitled: “How To Take A P.A.O.C. Church” that circulated among New Order groups.” [Source] [Emphasis ours]
In recognition of the destruction and division the “New Order” was causing in American Pentecostalism, the American AOG CONDEMNED the New Order of the Latter Rain movement for holding to the false doctrine that “the church is built upon the foundation of present day apostles and prophets,” the very doctrine Dr Michael Brown gave Chris Rosebrough:
“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 of 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… The erroneous teaching that the church is built upon the foundation of present day apostles and prophets.”
NAR Apostle Bill Hamon has openly taught that the NOLR created the CRM in his book ‘Eternal Church’. However, this time churches were deceived into embracing the NOLR’s governing Apostles and Prophets doctrine – the very doctrine Pentecostalism condemned. When gullible churches embraced the CRM, it was C. Peter Wagner who noticed the rise of these Apostles and Prophets and how they turned traditional churches into what he coined “new wineskins” and then labeled the outcome of the NOLR’s Charismatic Renewal Movement the ‘New Apostolic Reformation’ (NAR).
We have clearly documented this to be the truth by allowing the NOLR/NAR Apostles to speak themselves.
Those pushing the New Order of Apostles and Prophets into the CRM (and are recognized Apostles by the NAR) spoke how this came to pass. We have recorded Apostle Violet Kiteley, Apostle Alan Langstaff, Apostle David Duplessis and Apostle Bill Hamon on our site, talking how the NOLR were essential or helped construct the CRM. Wagner even endorsed the book ‘The Apostolic Revolution’ where the author David Cartledge documented how the NAR gutted and plundered Pentecostalism from the AOG in Australia and ruthlessly (and immorally) installed its governing Apostles and Prophets, starting with Apostle David Yonggi Cho and Apostle Andrew Evans. Cartledge’s work that the fighting intensified between the NOLR/CRM/NAR and the Pentecostal churches of Australia. Sadly, thanks to the criminality of the NAR in Australia (exposed by the work of Henri Sheppard and the decease Philip Powell, the NAR (ruled by the iron fist of the Hillsong monarchy) has essentially obliterated Pentecostalism in Australia.
THE NAR FACE-SWITCHING TACTIC
Although Pentecostalism condemned this movement back in 1948, the face of the NOLR/CRM/NAR have worn various ‘faces’ (aka sheepskins) to convince Christianity they are a legitimate Christian phenomena.
The NAR have done everything in its power to destroy Pentecostalism and redefine it to further its movement. And substantial proof of this comes straight from Michael Brown’s AOG Church in Brownsville. Steve Hill kicked off the so-called “revival” on Father’s Day in 1995. Look at who NAR Apostle Steve Hill was targeting (and notice how Hill claims the NOLR/NAR already achieved unity with Roman Catholics):
“You won’t believe it how the Baptists are coming to our meetings! I am blown away! Catholics are coming out of the wood-works friends!
Methodists are eating it up! I’m going- WHERE ARE THE PENTECOSTALS? Lord have mercy! We were born in this!”
– Steve Hill, The Father’s Day Outpouring 18th June 1995 – Pensacola Brownsville Revival
Pensacola was NOT a revival meeting – it was a call to convert Christians to the New Apostolic Reformation cult. And it was a deliberate attempt to bring the American AOG Pentecostals into its New Apostolic Reformation “revival”. Even
And how have the New Apostolic Reformation gotten away with this for so long?
By claiming they were something when they weren’t: Pentecostal.
We’ve repeated ourselves quite often but we really want to drive this point home: the Pentecostal/Charismatic face-switching tactic Michael Brown is using on his program ‘Line of Fire’ is an old tactic used by the New Apostolic Reformation to deceive people into embracing their false teachings.
FURTHERMORE: Don’t you think a so-called “Doctor” should be able
to tell you the difference between a Pentecostal and a “Charismatic?”
NOTE: It is important to acknowledge that there are Christians who think they are Charismatic, not knowing they are involved in the international New Apostolic Reformation cult. Eventually they will walk away from the faith or find a Christian church.
MICHAEL BROWN’S CALLING AS A…. NARPOSTLE?
Christ is sometimes portrayed by the NAR as a Revolutionary. What is fascinating with the NAR is that it refuses to be the church Christ has instituted and insists on being a movement, its Apostles are its Generals/Revolutionaries and they see it as their call to rally God’s Army. This is why there have been events like ‘The Call’, ‘Azuza Now’ and other weird revivals that are crossovers between ‘Awakenings’ and war-like events. If you can’t recognize an apostle by title, you can by what they claim God is calling them to be and how they are attempting to lead Christians.
For example, Brian Houston doesn’t call himself an Apostle (even though he officially is). However, his Hillsong Conference is a rally to draw thousands of Christians around the world to see ‘revival’ or God move in people’s lives. The entire event is a guise to further the Kingdom of God by offering courses throughout the week on how to influence the seven mountains of culture (this is a false commission peddled by the NAR known as the Seven Mountain Mandate or Seven Pillars/Spheres of Society). Brian Houston’s actions demonstrate that he is trying to revolutionize Australia and the world by rallying Christians to his events, to have them equipped and empowered. This means many in his movement see him more than just a pastor but someone that is bucking the trends, challenging the church to change with the culture and bring change to the culture through whatever means. In other words, he deliberately downplays his role as a pastor (which we have documented at HillsongChurchWatch).
Michael Brown offers a FASCINATING definition of Apostle according to… well… the average NARpostle. He states,
“But if someone can recognize that their calling is not just traditional pastor, traditional teacher or traditional evangelist, that they are supposed to plant new things and pioneer new things and maybe reintroduce things in scripture that people have lost sight of, and maybe have a certain regional authority (or like Timothy – we call him a bishop. But he was the leader over the congregations in Ephesus). I do believe God raises people up like that. And I think recognizing that and understanding that is important. Will I put that on my name card? No.”
According to Michael Brown, this is an apostle. Do you know who fits that description of apostle, PERFECTLY?
Dr.Michael L. Brown.
Listen to Chris Rosebrough give this sermon review where Dr Michael Brown preaches how amazing he is (see some of his apostolic buzz-phrases below):
Rosebrough exposes Dr Brown as a NARpostle at Isi De Gersigny’s circus church?
“Jesus changes us we can change the world. Revolution has been a major theme in my life.”
Claims God said to him: “You will be in the midst of a revival that will touch the whole world.”
“… God moving me to write my first book on revival.”
“The Holy Spirit began to birth in me the theme of revolution.”
“But God’s raised me up internationally on this platform.”
And Michael Brown sounds so traditional not to be a NARpostle right?
NOTE: ‘Apostle’ Brown has assisted, along with Apostle Peter Wagner, Apostle Che Ahn and Prophet Lou Engle with ‘TheCall’ rallies since 1999.
MICHAEL BROWN CONFESSES TO WORKING WITH TOP NARPOSTLES?
As we’ve been observing these last few years with other NARpostles, when Michael Brown started to be recognized as one, their titles disappeared and the distancing from the NAR started. In fact, when the NAR started getting bad press from about 2005 onward (‘Kill the Gays’ Bill, Mercy Ministries, Jesus Camp, Sarah Palin, Rick Perry), even their highest organisations started shape-shifting.
One noticeable shift within one of NAR’s leading organizations (International Coalition of Apostles), was their name-change to ‘International Coalition of Apostolic Leaders’ (ICAL). This organization specifically states that the reason they started was because a group of apostles “discussed how God could use the combined efforts of global apostolic leadership to advance the Kingdom of God more rapidly and effectively.”
Previously called ‘International Coalition of Apostles’
If Brown’s classic NAR talk, tactics and a defense for the NAR didn’t convince you he is one of their NARpostles, this should. In his response to Pastor Rosebrough, Brown even highlighted the fact that has even worked for the most influential NAR Organisation, ‘The International Coalition of Apostles’. Brown states,
“And I’ve worked with others that used to be called ‘The Coalition of Apostles’ but they didn’t like the way that sounded. They’ve changed it to Coalition of Apostolic Leaders. And I’m more at home with that terminology cos it’s easier to understand.”
By Brown dropping this pearl of insight, he has revealed that he WORKS with ICAL who claim they want to work with “the combined efforts of global apostolic leadership to advance the Kingdom of God more rapidly and effectively.”
Remember it is NAR Apostles/Generals who “advance the Kingdom.”
If ICAL, as a leading organisation of the NAR, have changed the NAR doctrine on governing apostles, Michael Brown is practicing what they’re peddling. He can disagree with their old doctrine that they no longer hold to NAR theology and revelation is progressive – just like Dr Brown’s theology and revelation.
That’s the problem when you are dealing with cult leaders in the New Apostolic Reformation. Just like the serpent himself, it is hard to grasp or pick up exactly what his servants believe and practice when they play fast and loose with the truth and distort people’s perceptions.
The ‘political word games’ from Michael Brown need to stop. Christians are called to defend the faith and to speak the truth. Michael Brown has shown again and again that he does neither. In addition, a lot of false teachers claim to be Christians because they see the BENEFITS of Christianity. Michael Brown is in danger of being seen to be in this camp in that he does hold to a very hyper-spiritual, moralistic and legalistic version of Christianity, which should make people appreciate his work on topics such as homosexuality. But this is the problem with false teachers – you can’t have a good tree with bad fruit or a bad tree with good fruit. Jesus makes this VERY clear in Matthew 7.
Finally, we want to highlight some important words that Chris Rosebrough brought up in his thoughtful response to Brown (which Brown did not refute as error), and the NAR terminology that rolled off NARpostle Brown’s tongue. (A General, Pioneer, Moulder, Revolutionary, Strategist, Change Agents are code words for ‘apostle’ in the NAR.)
Here is Apostle Michael Brown attempting to answer the first question from Chris Rosebrough:
Rosebrough: “I’ve got a question. I mean, the topic today is ‘What is the New Apostolic Reformation’. I still don’t think I’m getting a clear answer to what that is. But having read C. Peter Wagner’s book on ‘Apostles Today’, it’s very clear that he believes that since the year 2001 that the charismatic apo-prophets predicted and confirmed that we’ve entered the second apostolic age and that God has restored apostles on the earth. And there’s all kinds of different apostles. And apparently this is supposedly so the church can receive marching orders in order to fulfill its mandate. He likens them to the Generals who have been missing from the army of Christ since the death of The Apostles. He does this in his book-
[Dr Brown Interrupts: “By the way, you just provided more clarity for our listeners in one minute than I have in the first eighty minutes because I’ve been taking calls in dealing with other issues. So thank you. Perfect. This is EXACTLY what I want to talk about. But go ahead. Continue please.]
Rosebrough: “So my question is, I’m a pastor of a small Lutheran church in Oslo Minnesota. And I’ve been told by charismatics in my area that I need to submit myself and submit my congregation under the umbrella- under the apostolic umbrella – of a female apostle who is not too far from me. Is there any reason to believe that what they are saying is actually what God would have me do?”
Brown: Uuggggh! Ugh! NO! No! No! NO! No! No! NO!
Just in case anyone’s unclear at where I stand. Alright Chris, let me- let me interact briefly with what you described in the teaching of Peter Wagner. Okay? Where I disagree and where I agree. And then let’s get back to your specific situation. Alright?
This was one of the calls I was waiting for, wanting to be able to respond to. So – perfect. Thank you.
Okay. Um. I have no question based on scripture definition that there were the twelve apostles and that they’re others called apostles. Remember, it was not a spooky unusual term. It’s an emissary, it’s a sent one. In Hebrew, shali’ah is just a emissary, a messenger, someone sent on a mission. Ok? So there’s nothing – the term has become ‘The Apostles’. And I know we’ve got the Twelve Apostles on the new foundation stones of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 22. But I’m looking at Acts 14:14, ‘The apostles Barnabas and Paul tore their robes’. There’s others called apostles in the New Testament outside of the twelve. So – are there apostle today? Is that how I understand Ephesians 4? That God has appointed apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers the way I understand 1 Corinthians 12? Yeah.
I believe that there are people who have that pioneering foundation-laying, divinely backed apostolic ministry today. One of my best examples is my friend in India, [name indecipherable], who is an untouchable communist, alcoholic atheist; a violent man. Jesus appeared to him and saved him in his mid twenties. And he’s been stoned for his faith. He has planted probably over 8000 churches in tribal areas. Just completely revamped a whole areas for as the gospel getting where it’s never gone. Uh – he’s now pioneering works to several different nations. He’s the ultimate servant you’ll ever meet. The power of God is on his life. I look at him as a modern-day apostle. He never uses the title.
Wouldn’t even think of it. Umm- but, all that to say, I believe like someone like Hudson Taylor or William Booth, I believe these were apostolic men. They were pioneers. They were planting new things. They were foundation layers and builders. They had a certain mantle of authority, even if they wouldn’t have seen themselves like that. So some if it to me, is semantics. Okay?
But if someone can recognize that their calling is not just traditional pastor, traditional teacher or traditional evangelist, that they are supposed to plant new things and pioneer new things and maybe reintroduce things in scripture that people have lost sight of, and maybe have a certain regional authority (or like Timothy – we call him a bishop. But he was the leader over the congregations in Ephesus). I do believe God raises people up like that. And I think recognizing that and understanding that is important. Will I put that on my name card? No.
And I’ve worked with others that used to be called ‘The Coalition of Apostles’ but they didn’t like the way that sounded. They’ve changed it to Coalition of Apostolic Leaders. And I’m more at home with that terminology cos it’s easier to understand. Alright. So I agree with that
I disagree that there are all these people now all over the place – you know – apostles in the workplace – and apostles here that then everybody comes an apostle. And Chris, if you – it’s been a standard in-house charismatic joke of ours for years. Once you start a second church, you’re an apostle. You know? Or just change your name from pastor to apostle because they’ve got that kind of apostolic anointing, meaning they are backed to go on this mission and to establish new things. And sometimes they are speaking to government leaders. And sometimes they’re in the business world. They can be in all different settings. But they’re doing this extraordinary ministry work. All I- I- I believe it’s helpful.
Can I pinpoint the time when some of this understanding happened. Peter Wagner says he could. I don’t know. I’ve never looked at it like that. I’m not one to see times and trends in that way. So if it happened, I am not aware of it but I am not discounting it. What I am saying is wrong, is that people associate being apostolic with accumulating churches and ministries under your domain or command. I call that apostle by acquisition. By naming everybody and their brother apostle by putting that now on your name-card, as part of your title, I don’t agree with doing that. And I think it’s unhelpful.
Do I believe there are truly apostolic people alive today? Absolutely. And I have the privelege and joy of working with them. Do I believe I am an apostle? No. To clarify that.
Uh- Do I believe that anyone telling you that you need to come under their authority is out of order? Yes. You’re part of the Lutheran Church. You have denominational structure. That’s your accountability structure. If you met with a group of leaders in your city and there was someone recognized as a city father, that everyone- ‘Hey! We honour you.’- wonderful! Let that be. But no one comes to you and tells you that you need to be submitted to this one or that one. That’s out of order. And that is a serious abuse- in my view.”
Categories: Line of Fire, New Apostolic Reformation (NAR)
If a church has a guest NAR pastor speak or preach on Sunday morning, should we assume that church is part of the NAR?
It’s a good assumption to have. There’s probably a very high chance that church is of the NAR.
But assumption is never the best way to discern something to be true. Look at the language, mantras or verses they use. Is this god always doing a new thing?
Are they espousing “touch not Gods anointed”, “deep calls unto deep,” mantras or abusing scriptures by spouting “judge not”, “he who hasn’t sinned”, ‘your kingdom come”?
Do they use language that is unusual? (Spheres, pillars, portals, glory bomb, manifest presence, etc.)
The church’s book store can help you identify a church’s associations with the NAR.
“The fact is this – you cannot be a Pentecostal and a Charismatic.”
Uh, what? Sorry, but this really confuses me. Pentecostalism is of the same substance as the charismatic movement, as is the NAR. The latter two waves have only washed further down the beach. Those who remain pentecostals and don’t buy into the NAR simply just do not follow their doctrinal distinctives to their logical conclusion, either because they don’t dare to (because they smell a rat), or because they’re being inconsistent. But at the end of the day pentecostals are only “half-way there.”
I get what you mean, when you say Michael Brown isn’t a pentecostal in the AOG sense, since AOG has repudiated the latter rain doctrine, but I can’t say I agree with that though. If he says he is a pentecostal, he is one. And pentecostals ARE charismatics. He just rebels against the AOG in one particular area, that’s all.
What I see in my own country, which is Finland, is that the NAR is slowly seeping into traditional pentecostalism, but not because the pentecostals see it as something new and shiny, but because it reminds them of the OLD TIMES and their hero preacher / spirit-slayer Niilo Yli-Vainio of the 70’s. They want the old times back and therefore grope at anything that could potentially bring them “revival”. Finland has basically two major evangelical forces: the lutheran state church and the “free denominations”, which consists of the pentecostal movement (which is sort of divided into two because of a church organization structure controversy), the free church of Finland, the methodists and the baptists. All these “free denominations” are basically doctrinally pentecostal and are susceptible to the errors of the broader Charismatic movement and the NAR.
Charismatisism and NAR are just pentecostalism and then some. Start stripping away stuff NAR and at some point you have classic pentecostalism. Strip away further stuff and you have methodism. That’s basically it.
If you look at the way NAR leaders write about history, they read everything through their NARcissistic lenses. This is how they have been able to dupe many Pentecostal churches. Furthermore, when you look at true prophets and false prophets, their retellihg of Jewish history is a sign they are a true or false prophet. Steven and Paul showed they were legitimate be rightly handling Jewish history- which is why they were received at first as prophets/teachers. When you look at the NAR, they rewrite history from the Apostles and reformers to early Pentecostalism.
Sure they do, but don’t classic pentecostals too? I’m reading a book right now, written by a finnish classic pentecostal, about the prevailing conditions that enabled the modern pentecostal movement to emerge. He found records from as early as the 18th century, of charismatic phenomena that could be straight out of Toronto! What he says, is basically: “See? That’s us!” going back all the way to the montanists, and totally bypassing any doctrinal criticism aimed at the groups among which such manifestations occurred. Most pentecostals didn’t want anything to do with Toronto either.
If Azusa street was the first wave, Van Nuys, California 1967 the second and Vineyard in 1980’s the third wave, NAR is nothing more or less than the 4th wave. And it was C. Peter Wagner himself, who spoke in those terms. In these groups we simply see the evolution of charismatic doctrine. The common denominator remains and that is the belief in the continuation of the miraculous spiritual gifts. It is what ties all of them together. The NAR is nothing but the logical next step in a long line of charismaticism. That’s why you can’t “fix” charismatic christianity and why there is no such thing as “sound” charismaticism.
By the way, you make too much of this quote from Steve Hill: “WHERE ARE THE PENTECOSTALS?”
He doesn’t “blow his cover” there as if he weren’t a pentecostal. I listened to that sermon review by Chris Rosebrough. Steve Hill was just amazed that his own denomination was so slow to pick up and join the so-called revival. These people are not some double agents who have some secret evil agenda that can be discerned by catching a word or a phrase here or there. They are just simple charismatic believers who so much want to believe in the continuation of the charismatic gifts that anything goes. They don’t want their paradigm to be broken; NOBODY does regarding ANY issue, because It hurts! I think you are doing a good thing in keeping watch on these “churches” and false teachers, but I’ve got to criticize you about this: you are resorting to conspiracy theories here. I do not think it is helpful. Please, stick to irrefutable facts and biblical doctrine. Now, it seems to me, this is a debate about semantics. I think we should assume the best of even those we think are in error.
The reason why Dr. Brown defends Bill Johnson is the common denominator, as I’ve explained. He seems to refuse to believe in counterfeit spiritual practice. In his mind, it seems, the manifestation of what classic pentecostals see as the biblical spiritual gifts, trumps any other signs of a true work of the Spirit. I myself have a hard time making the point with my pentecostal friends that there can be such a thing as a false believer. They simply refuse to believe it. Even if somebody goes totally apostate and “lose their salvation”, so to speak, they maintain that they WERE TRULY saved, because they at some point spoke in tongues. Also, I have been a part (practically a member) of a church that was birthed straight out of the Toronto blessing – we even had Rodney Howard-Browne himself come and preach there and do a full tour across Finland! I have many memories from that time period and at that time really believed that God was at work. That’s what fuels dr. Brown as well, I believe, those sweet golden memories. And where ever he sees something even remotely similar, his guard is immediately off. Because, if he were to question the legitimacy of other people’s experience, he would have to question his own, too. And that he isn’t willing to do. That’s a classic pentecostal mindset for you.
I attended Brown’s Fire School of Ministry for two semesters. Brown is being disingenuous when confronted about his affiliations and his own allegiance to the movement. Firstly, his very own school of ministry is headed up by an “apostolic” team of 5 men. That’s what they call it, an “apostolic” team. Brown, of course, oversees them as the head of the pyramid scheme/ministry. It would follow that an “apostolic” team must be overseen by another apostle.
Additionally, there are two primary tracks of study at Fire School of Ministry: Five-fold Ministry and Worship. For those who are familiar with the movement, they will recognize these terms are merely code-words for “apostolic” and “prophetic” respectively.
Five-fold is in reference to the Ephesians gifts of apostle, prophet, evangelist, teacher, and pastor mentioned in chapter 4 of the book. In NAR circles, five-folders are apostles. They actually believe that these people are God’s gift to the world, and are given global authority and can function in every one of the five roles referenced. Some of them boldly claim the title of apostle, others, like Brown, are more quiet about the matter or use the title of evangelist or pastor. Make no mistake, however, these people all presume they are apostles.
Moreover, the movement believes that apostles can essentially create other apostles by discipling them and eventually laying hands on them to pass on what Paul termed a “deposit” in 2 Timothy 1:14. Through years of rigorous demands of deep submission, the disciple can prove himself to the apostle (testing the apostle ala Rev. 2:2).
This idea is known as “multiplication” as these imposter apostles “father” these deeply submitted “sons” and “daughters” until it’s time to “release” them into the world to do their own “apostolic” ministry. Of course, this means the pyramid scheme expands as those underlings begin to heap up their own followers who faithfully tithe up the chain of command (not unlike the Amway model for money-making).
What really is happening is what Jesus rebuked the first century Pharisees for in Matthew 23:
1 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them. 4 “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. 5 “But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments. 6 “They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, 7 and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. 8 “But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 “Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. 10 “Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. 11 “But the greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 “Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.
13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.
14 [“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense you make long prayers; therefore you will receive greater condemnation.]
15 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.
This last verse says it all about this demonic “apostolic fathering” doctrine and practice. The sons and daughters who have been trained by the apostle are like clones of the apostle. They act, talk, and pray just like their father. They essentially become a “mini-me” of the so-called apostle. It’s startling how much so, and obviously quite cultic and demented.
Also, everyone in the movement knows that worship = prophetic. In other words, all those worship leaders in churches are prophets. Prophetic worship leaders are there to help “usher” people into the presence of God during the service. They’re the ones who help lead the congregation into these “worship experiences” which are nothing more than demonic/fleshly manifestations such as being drunk in the spirit. Smaller churches will have a pastor (apostle) and a prophet (worship leader) to lead the congregation. Bigger churches, like Bethel, may have a pastor (apostle) and a sidekick prophet who is also considered a five-fold apostle, but works with the head apostle to lead. The worship ministry is still prophetic, but takes a supporting role under the pair.
So it is plain to see that Fire School of Ministry’s two primary tracks of study specialize in developing apostles and prophets, just like any NAR school of ministry does.
Moreover, when I attended Fire School of Ministry, I worked in their little library. That place was jammed with every big-name apostle and prophet in the New Apostolic Reformation. It was literally brimming with books that were penned by all the big name NAR leaders such as C. Peter Wagner, Bill Johnson, Heidi Baker, Bill Hamon, Rick Joyner, Mike Bickle, Reinhard Bonnke, Lou Engle, Cindy Jacobs, etc, etc… I could go on, but you get the idea.
So Brown oversees an “apostolic” team, his school of ministry trains apostles and prophets, his pyramid scheme model for ministry is exactly like other NAR ministries, and his school library is jammed with the heretical demonic doctrines of the movement, but he’s not an apostle or affiliated with the New Apostolic Reformation? Right…
The truth is Brown’s radio ministry is the conservative front of the New Apostolic Reformation. The movement works on worldly models to effect ministry, and demographics are a key component of that. Bethel Redding is for the new-age fruits and nuts, Jesus Culture and Hillsong are pied pipers of the movement permeating and subverting denominations outside of the movement with their music, IHOP Kansas City is for all those young worship musicians from these cross-denominational churches infected by the praise and worship music, Morningstar Ministry is a haven for oddball prophetic types, and Brown’s Line of Fire is a trap for anyone who has strong convictions about following God’s word.
The problem with presuming Brown is an authority on scripture and blindly following him as a legitimate teacher can be seen in Jesus’ warning about blind guides:
Matthew 15:14b
“… they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.”