There's wisdom and Grace and mercy on what Greg said here .

Thank God that Jesus treated us with patients and Mercy, much more then we treat each other with.

Dispelling the Myths About NAR - Michael Brown

https://thelineoffire.org/article/dispelling-the-myths-about-nar-the-new-apostolic-reformation

_________________
Mike

I remember during the Brownsville revival someone asked David Wilkerson about Steve Hill being a phony, and David Wilkerson who knew Steve Hill, said Steve Hill is not a phony or fake. That’s not his exact words, but that’s what was implied. Steve Hill was a powerful evangelist with a heart for souls who preached repentance , and every night, the conviction of the Holy Spirit was there at Brownsville and you had literally hundreds of people running to the altar to repent and receive Jesus ,and over the course of that revival thousands of people got saved. Many backsliders returned to the Lord.

The Brownsville revival wasn’t perfect, but there was strong leadership there, John Kilpatrick was a godly pastor, and there were other mature leaders there such as Michael Brown.

I know many godly men that are involved in the new apostolic reformation, and most of the stuff that I’ve heard concerning that from critics is false, it’s not even true. I also have many friends that were involved with the Vineyard. I have known pastors that are Vineyard pastors, godly men, that preach the Word of God . One of these pastors would go into the Federal Detention Center with me to minister to men from countries all over the world. He loved God and loved people, and made many trips to Pensacola to be refreshed by the presence of the Lord.

I don’t agree with a lot of what is being taught in the Word of faith movement. I went through that movement, and there were some that got in error over a false prosperity message that was preached., but I also know that men like Kenneth Hagan were true servants of the Lord and preached a balanced message. I did not agree with everything that he taught but he wasn’t a false teacher. He even tried to bring correction to the teachers that went to the extremes on the prosperity message. When people judge a man or a movement or a revival by the extremes, most of the time they end up throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The devil wants to derail every true man of God, every true revival, every true movement, and some men of God that were mightily used by God have experienced moral failures or got into error. Some have had true repentance and have been restored.

_________________
Mike

Greg (and anyone who subscribes to his opinion),

The mere fact that the "church" is resorting to spiritual pragmatism is a sure sign that we are in fact smack in the middle of the greatest time of apostasy the world will ever see.

Nothing has changed since Jesus resurrection, and if your message doesn't work anymore, than whether you like it or not, it was never true in the first place.

The idea that we should overlook things that are blatantly false is so foreign to the new testament I can't even believe we try to justify that...

And again, sentiment for men takes precedence over the Bible.

This may seem harsh, but the epistle of James makes this look tame.

New Thought, which originated in the early 19th century with people like Phineas Quimby, and has its origins in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Gnosticism, among others, split into two camps: the New Age movement, and the prosperity gospel. The father of the prosperity gospel, E. W. Kenyon, openly admitted to taking ideas from Quimby and Mary Baker Eddy (and others) to formulate his theology. This spread to men like Kenneth Hagin and Kenneth Copeland in the second generation of the prosperity movement, and like leaven, is worming its way into much of Western christianity.

Like the example you gave, Travis, the theology is built on isolated scriptures interpolated with foreign meanings. You wouldn't get prosperity theology from a plain reading of the scriptures; you only get it after hearing certain "teachers" force the meaning into the scriptures they quote.

Greg, as far as Leonard Ravenhill endorsing the NAR/prosperity movement, that just isn't so. He openly condemned prosperity theology. True, he knew men like John Wimber, but he didn't have perfect discernment. If he were here today, and saw all the emotionalism, false prophecies, sham converts, and all the rest of it, he would have unsparingly condemned it. As I've said before, repeatedly, I'm sure there are people in these movements who are genuine christians, but the atmosphere false teaching creates is not conducive to making strong, genuine disciples of Jesus.

_________________
Nigel Holland

Thank you, Travis, for all your posts in this thread.

Our commitment is to the Lord Jesus and His Word alone. Everyone has a duty to carefully discern things with the Scriptures and the Spirit of Truth, thus forging true Christian unity.

Anything else is from the flesh, and ultimately harms both ourselves and others.

"Our commitment is to the Lord Jesus and His Word alone." Yuehan

Now in dealing with this statement in love and respect as I should have with all brethren in Christ my Lord. Our Lords greatest Words, or commandments to us is to, presentence love God firstly, and then to love our neighbors as ourselves. However, Christ Words lift up love in action towards the brethren, (John 13:34-35) above our neighbors, and we know very well what the beloved Apostle John stated concerning love for the brethren! This passage is just a snippet (1 John 3:14-16) There is a balance to be had here and the word says, "Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins." (1 Pet 4:8) Also, our Apostle Paul through the Spirit gave us (1 Cor 13), which is again love in action. I'm thankful this brother's message did come against sins that are rampant right now! "For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy, mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:13) Again, this is in love, but there is a balance though and our dependency is truly on the Holy Spirit within us to keep us in check, as we stay in step with Him dear brethren, we know the fruit He alone produces within our lives. (Gal 5:22-23) This is Christ our Lord, the Apostle John, the Apostle Peter, and the Apostle Paul speaking to us and James. However, we each get to decide the path we choose to follow. Let us prayfuly consider the path we decide to choose. However, whoever has perfect doctrine should keep throwing stones, we will each stand before Christ sooner then we think!

_________________
Billy Witt

"Dead fundamentalism or just theology won't suffice in our day."

Dead fundamentalism has never been sufficient.
Everything changed in Saul's live when he met the risen Lord.
From then on all he ever wanted was to proclaim Christ and spread the Gospel to advance the Kingdom of God.
After his conversion Paul did not run from one experience to another.
He could worship the Lord even in prison, in the most difficult situations.
He only boasted in the cross and in his weakness.
He warned the believers with tears about the false and counterfeit.

Only the true Christ and growing in Him, with undivided devotion to Him, can give us true and everlasting peace.

May the Lord help us to give us a deeper understanding of Christ and the Gospel.

Markus

The fact that there is a stark division amongst the commenters on John Kirkpatrick and the diversity of criteria used to evaluate his preaching or the man himself as to whether he is anointed and appointed by God to speak for Him, is intriguing yet also concerning.

I wasn't going to post on this clear demonstration of a lack of coherency and/or consistency in the body in discerning the false. I haven't figured it out yet as to why all the differences if this is a site of mature Christians and supposedly we are all led by the same Spirit much of the time.
Perhaps that is where the problem is, in the base assumption ? Not sure.

Nonetheless, I wasn't going to post a general question about what is the generally applied Biblical criteria for discernment or is it purely a matter of personal criteria and personal conclusion?

I'm posting now, though, because I listened to this very short personal testimony about someone who has arrived at a conclusion that IHOP had some serious issues after being very involved in their ministry and teaching. It's worth a listen as this person had a faith and spiritual crisis that is unrelated to the Mike Bickle situation. I post it to generate some thought as to what criteria each of us uses to discern what is from God and what is not and why it is important, maybe even a matter of life or death.

Here's the extremely interesting 5 minute interview touching on things I never knew or had exposure or opinion about:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caQkgQy6mN0


From what I've read on these posts, different criteria are being employed to discern whether someone is speaking for God.

Some have pointed to the past life of the speaker and how he was 'used" by God in revivals.

Some point to the character of his life.

Some point to the "fruit" of his ministry which means a combination of things like repentance, conversions, changed lives, etc.

Some point solely to whether "Jesus" is preached by the speaker. We know of course that there are many different Jesus' that can be preached.

Some point to whether the "Gospel" is preached as their sole criteria.

Some have said, I was at such and such an event where such and such person spoke and I felt this or "my experience" was xyz.

Some have pointed to the testimony of famous speakers who "supported" this speaker as either someone with giftings or someone who "truly loves Jesus". Or, in like manner, they point to people acknowledged in the "prophetic movement" (whatever that is) and their view or commendation of the speaker.

Some have pointed to the speakers' healings or words of knowledge as "signs" of their confirmation as prophets.

Some emphasize how many people hitch their spiritual wagon to this or that speaker or how many people attend an event.

Some have pointed to how they "felt" when they heard a speaker preach.

Some have pointed to doctrinal deficiencies or errors.

Some just point to discerning and testing the spirits but without a real baseline for how to do that or a way of discerning whether my discerning of the spirits is actually Spirit led.

Some say you shouldn't criticize anyone who speaks unless they deny Christ as the seemingly only valid criteria.


The forgoing criteria have all been stated as primary within this forum on various posts on the same subject.


Seems strange and at odds with the critical importance of the issue in the NT. Again, I'm struck that the Spirit seems so divided or even confused as to who He is speaking through.

How would you guys (gender neutral) instruct your own children as to who to listen to and who to follow and why ? How would you instruct the immature Christian as to who to listen to and what criteria to use? I actually get asked this question all the time from immature believers about what I think about this or that speaker, preacher, prophet and whether they are a good source of spiritual guidance. Again, this is sometimes a matter of spiritual life or death for those who would listen to and follow the false.

_________________
Robert