Wednesday, 28 August 2024

ROD PARSLEY AND HIS DAUGHTER ASHTON PARSLEY LEAVE ME SPEECHLESS!

This shocking video is one of the worst examples of spiritual abuse I have ever seen!

Rod Parsley's daughter Ashton Parsley aka "daddy's little ghoul" recently let rip on the congregation of World Harvest Church Columbus Ohio because some said they were considering leaving. This unspeakable outburst should seal their decision!

Rod Parsley's behaviour towards his employees is despicable beyond words!


Rod Parsley Babbling Nonsense at 2022 Dominion Camp (youtube.com)


For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. (Titus 1:7-8).

Sent by 


VLAD SAVCHUK'S DEFENCE OF FALSE PROPHETS

Shocking Prophecies! Trump's Assassination Predicted! (youtube.com)

Demon slayer Vlad Savchuk is one of Benny Hinn's protégés along with Isaiah Salvidor and David Hernandez.Below is Savchuk's defective endorsement of false prophets Brandon Briggs and Kim Clement and his flawed defence of fallible prophecy. 

False prophet Brandon Briggs: "..this bullet flew by his ear and it came so close to his head that it busted his eardrum..  He fell to his knees during this time frame and he started worshipping the Lord. He got radically born again during this time frame.."

This is not an accurate prophecy from Briggs due to the unreliable elements involved. Savchuk and others have attempted to shoehorn this "prophecy" into the factual events, but it does not meet the biblical criteria of prophecy. We know that the bullet actually wounded Trump's ear, and as far as we know his ear drum was not perforated. It was observed that Trump ducked, but there is no evidence that he fell on his knees and started worshipping the Lord, and there is certainly no evidence that Trump was born again during this incident. Briggs continued to "prophesy" about Trump being re-elected and a US economic collapse.2  

Savchuk is also impressed with false prophet Kim Clement (1956-2016) who was famous for his Trump prophesy in 2007. Clement was closely associated with Word of Faith (New Apostolic Reformation) false teachers. He was a self-appointed modern-day prophet who was very outspoken, but a number of his prophecies proved to be false. One such false prophecy was that he claimed that America's Without Walls debt would be cleared by 2012. In 2011, the Without Walls Central Church vacated the Lakeland building, as a result of debts and went into bankruptcy.3 Clement stated "God told him" the debt on the Tampa Christian Center (Paula White) would be cleared by the middle of 2010. By October 2012, the Tampa property was under foreclosure proceedings by the Evangelical Christian Credit Union after failure to pay loans.4 On the surface the Trump prophecy appears quite impressive, but when you investigate further it is problematic. Clement: "I do not believe that you must be born again to obtain salvation". (Doctrinal Statement 2002). (Deuteronomy 18:0).5 

The sons of the prophets 

Savchuk assumes that "the sons of the prophets" referred to in 1 and 2 Kings were "growing in their prophetic ability". In other words, they "experimented" with prophecy. Savchuk: "That suggests to us that these were the people who were growing in their prophetic ability, not at the same level as Elija and Elisha. Therefore some people in the prophetic are growing in the prophetic and we have to give them grace.."  (13:25 mark) 

The phrase "the sons of the prophets" (2 Kings 2:3,5,15 4:1; 1 Kings 20:35) refers to men who were students or disciples of Old Testament prophets, sometimes referred to as "the school of the prophets". The sons of the prophets probably owed their existence to Samuel. (1 Samuel 19:20). These students were devoted to God and served Him under the authority and teachings of Samuel, Elijah, and Elisha. Given that the sons of the prophets followed the teaching and example of three faithful prophets who were 100% accurate and did not compromise, it is inconceivable that they "experimented" with prophecy in the same way that many charlatans do today. Such an obtuse suggestion reflects the absurdity of the NAR movement and the false teachers loosely connected with it.

Then the sons of the prophets at Bethel came out to Elisha and said, “Do you know that the LORD will take your master away from you today?”
“Yes, I know,” he replied. “Do not speak of it.” (2 Kings 2:3).

NAR "prophets" have a terrible track record with their emphasis on dreams, visions, and extra-biblical revelation. Savchuk: "Why would you want to judge a prophecy if the prophets are infallible?" The instruction for other prophets to judge what is said is a safeguard against false prophets so that true believers can mark and avoid them! (1 Corinthians 14:29 cf. Romans 16:17).

And the LORD said to me: “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I did not send them, nor did I command them or speak to them. They are prophesying to you a lying vision, worthless divination, and the deceit of their own minds. (Jeremiah 14:14).

I did not send the prophets, yet they ran; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied. (Jeremiah 23:21).

1. Generational Gap - Pastor Vlad on Benny Hinn Monday Service (youtube.com)
2. WATCH: The moment Trump was shot in right ear at rally (youtube.com)
3. Without Walls Central Church - Wikipedia
4. Paula White - Wikipedia
5. False Prophet Kim Clement Endorsed by Paula White! (youtube.com)

Tuesday, 20 August 2024

DAVID HIND ONE CHURCH LEICESTER: WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP


The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him. (Proverbs 18:17).

This post challenges David Hind's recent attempt to defend the role of women in church leadership. Hind has a vested interest in egalitarianism since he and his wife Susan are joint senior leaders of One Church in Leicester which is an AG Pentecostal Church with strong New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) associations.

Firstly, it is important to understand that this subject has nothing to do with women reaching their "full potential" and similar emotive arguments based on human standards. (2 Corinthians 10:4; Galatians 1:11). These kinds of arguments focus on ourselves e.g. "your best life now" as often articulated by false teacher Joel Osteen. (Philippians 2:3). Furthermore, arguments should not be based on culture. Biblical wisdom and worldly wisdom are antithetical. (1 Corinthians 3:19; 2 Corinthians 1:12). As Christians, our focus should be on God's will regardless of worldly considerations. (Matthew 6:10). Our concern should be: What is God's blueprint for church leadership?          

Christians should not be too quick to jump on the egalitarian bandwagon in this critical debate since it has huge implications for marriage and church life. The reality that men and women are equal in value and dignity and yet different in function and role is strongly asserted in the scriptures. Just because there have been/are abuses by ungodly male leaders does not invalidate God's Word. (Ephesians 5:25; Colossians 3:19).  

The main debate on the subject of women in ministry focuses on two positions: egalitarian and complementarian. Egalitarians reject the historic and literal reading of the scriptures that demonstrate distinct roles and purposes for men and women from creation. I recommend Mike Winger's series for those who want to look further into this subject: Women In Ministry Archives - BibleThinkerWinger is what is described as a "soft complementarian". In other words, he views the biblical role of "elder" to be prohibitive for women, but he rejects other restrictions placed on women as unnecessarily restrictive and biased. Winger demonstrates that in many cases, egalitarian scholars/teachers fall woefully short of sound hermeneutic standards and use arguments that are unsustainable biblically. The onus on Christians is to be Bereans if we are to avoid accepting views based on insufficient evidence, poor reasoning, inconsistency, and eisegesis. (Acts 17:11). 

Jesus' attitude toward women was groundbreaking in that he showed honour and respect towards women unknown in the culture of His time. This post does not challenge the view that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are available to men and women. Nor does it dispute evidence that in the early church women were evangelists*, prophetesses, and deaconesses, and that these roles are legitimate for women today.  

* The term "evangelist" or "apostle" is often overstated to include single instances of women conveying a specific message to men. (Matthew 28:7; John 4:1-42).  These instances do not demonstrate that women held ongoing positions of authority over men within the church. 

I will work through Hind's points below. 

* Women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they wish to inquire about something, they are to ask their own husbands at home; for it is dishonorable for a woman to speak in the church. (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).

Most teachers explain these verses in terms of problems specific to the Corinthian Church which faced challenges relating to cultural norms, immorality, division, and the misuse of spiritual gifts. Since Paul acknowledged that women were "praying and prophesying" in 1 Corinthians 11:5, these verses cannot be taken outside their specific context without creating an internal contradiction within Paul's writings.

* Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. (1 Timothy 2:11-14).

This passage is transcultural. The plain reading of the text is unmistakable. Paul is careful to maintain gender roles as ordained by God in the creation. (Genesis 2:20). Paul follows the ruling with two reasons. 1. The order of creation and the pre-fall reality - Adam was formed first; 2. The post-fall reality - Eve was deceived and became a transgressor before Adam. 

* Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’” Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”—and that he had said these things to her. (John 20:17-18 cf. Matthew 28:7-8).

Hind mentions that Jesus' resurrection was witnessed by a woman and claims that she was an "evangelist" to the disciples. Mary was extremely privileged to be the first person to see Jesus following His resurrection. However, it should be noted that this did not make her an "apostle to the apostles" as some claim and she did not later become a church leader.            

* Give my greetings to the brothers at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house (Colossians 4:6). Egalitarians base their argument on the presumption that Nympha was an elder simply because the church met at her house. 

* For I brought you up from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. (Micah 6:4).    

It is a mistake to class Miriam as a leader of Israel. Do we build a doctrine on single verses of scripture? There is no indication that Miriam had any authority over the men of Israel. Apart from this single reference in Micah 6, it is always Moses and Aaron who are referred to jointly, never Moses Aaron and Miriam. (Exodus 4:10-17,7:10). When Aaron and Miriam opposed Moses, it was Miriam, not Aaron, who became leprous due to the Lord's anger. (Numbers 12:1-16). Moses followed his father-in-law's advice and appointed men as judges over the people."..look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. And let them judge the people at all times. (Exodus 18:17-27). 

Pulpit Commentary: "Miriam, the prophetess, who led the praises of the people at their great deliverance (Exodus 15:20), and who probably was charged with some special mission to the women of Israel (see Numbers 12:1, 2)."1

Matthew Poole: "Miriam; a prophetess, to be assistant to her brothers last mentioned, to be example and counsellor to the women: God furnished them with magistrate, priest, and prophet."1

Barnes: "Moses, Aaron, and Miriam together, are Lawgiver, to deliver and instruct; Priest, to atone; and prophetess Exodus 15:20 to praise God; and the name of Miriam at once recalled the mighty works at the Red Sea and how they then thanked God."1 
 
* When Priscilla and Aquila heard (Apollos), they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately. (Acts 18:26).
Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, (Romans 16:3).  

Christian Research Institute: "Complementarians see Priscilla as one of numerous women who were fellow workers with men in the early church. Yet their prominence does not undermine the essential principle of male authority."2 

* Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me. (Romans 16:7).  

The phrase ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις "men of note among the apostles" is an ambiguous expression that can be legitimately translated in two ways: they were well known to the apostles (ESV), or, they were among the apostles (NIV). The Greek text leans in favor of the ESV translation. Apart from Romans 16:7, Junia is not mentioned either in the New Testament or in the extra-biblical writings of the time. Got Questions: "Later writings are conflicting and inconclusive in determining the true identity of this individual. With the existing information, the syntax of the Greek language provides the best means of understanding what Paul meant when he wrote that Junia was outstanding (or 'well known') among the apostles."3 John Chrysostom was a fourth-century church father who referred to Junia as a female apostle. There is some debate about the name Junia/Junias, and it is by no means conclusive that Junias was a woman. Bible Hub: "Paul's kinsman and fellow-prisoner: Romans 16:7 ((here A. V. Junia (a woman's name) which is possible)."Apart from this issue, Paul's use of the term "apostle" is fluid. An apostle could be one of the original twelve. (Galatians 1:17-19). In Paul's case, he was appointed as an apostle by Jesus Christ post-resurrection. (1 Corinthians 15:7). The generic use of the term "apostle" refers to individuals who were sent out to be messengers/ambassadors of Jesus Christ. Given that this is the only albeit ambiguous reference to a possible female apostle in the New Testament it would be over-ambitious, even presumptuous, to make a case for women apostles in the sense of authoritative apostles where no female apostles are mentioned elsewhere.

*  Hind challenges the complementarian view that the apostles chosen by Jesus were all men. He claims that this is a pre-resurrection situation and that post-resurrection roles have expanded to include Gentile men and women who are now allegedly released into leadership. There is no evidence to support this theory. Paul's explicit instructions about appointing male elders negate Hind's claim.

This is a trustworthy saying: If anyone aspires to be an overseer, he desires a noble task. An overseer (episkope), then, must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not dependent on wine, not violent but gentle, peaceable, and free of the love of money.. (1 Timothy 3:1-4).

Hind's incompetent interpretation of Biblical Greek is on par with his other teaching skills! 

Hind "The word here for an elder is a masculine word in Greek, 'presbuteros'." (19:00 mark)

The noun overseer in 1 Timothy 3:1-2 is episkope it is not presbuteros. 

Strongs: "επισκοπης noun - genitive singular feminine
episkope ep-is-kop-ay': inspection (for relief); by implication, superintendence; specially, the Christian episcopate -- the office of a bishop, bishoprick, visitation."5

Titus 1:5 has the noun presbuteros. Strongs: "4245 presbýteros – properly, a mature man having seasoned judgment (experience); an elder. The NT specifies elders are men. (The feminine singular, presbytera, never occurs in the Bible.) [The feminine plural, presbyteras, occurs in 1 Tim 5:2. It refers to aged women, i.e. not women with an official church office or title.]"6  

My question: How do we get a gender-neutral definition from "the husband of one wife"? 

Polygamy is an unlikely explanation for the phrase "husband of one wife". Meyer: "μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα] This expression cannot here be properly referred to polygamy; for, although polygamy might at that time be still found among the civilised heathen, and even among the Jews (comp. Justin Martyr, Dialog. c. Tryph.; Chrysostom on the passage; Josephus, Antiq. vii. 2), it was as a rare exception. Besides, there is an argument against such an interpretation in the phrase ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή, 1 Timothy 5:9; for similarly such a phrase ought to refer to polyandry, which absolutely never occurred.."7  

* There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28).

Galatians 3:28 is typically used by egalitarian scholars to control the meaning of other passages. As Winger puts it, this verse is their "silver bullet".

Significantly, the Greek conjunction kai (male and female) is used in this verse, whereas the adverb οὐδὲ is used for "Jew nor Greek.. slave nor free". Scholars generally agree that "male and female" refers back to Genesis 1:27. Some egalitarians (Stendahl) argue that Paul obliterates the gender distinctions in Genesis 1:27 in this verse by making a distinction between original creation and "new creation". However, this argument fails since others (Witherington) have noted that Paul upholds gender distinctions elsewhere. (e.g. 1 Timothy 2:9-11; Ephesians 5:22-33; Colossians 3:18-19). This verse does not obliterate gender roles; rather it confirms the inclusion of the three groups cited into one people in Christ. 

Sonship status defined by Paul

Paul's inclusive definition of "sonship" (males and females) has four specific applications:

1. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.
You are a son, you are also an heir. (Galatians 3:29).
2. You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
Full participation as sons "in Christ". (Galatians 3:26).
3. So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 
Justified by faith. (Galatians 3:24). 
4.  And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!” So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, you are also an heir through God.
A true internal relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. (Galatians 4:6-7).

We cannot legitimately stretch Paul's definition of "sonship" to include function and roles. Those who do so go outside the context and create a new category from 'status in relationship to God and the kingdom' to 'status in relationship to one another in every aspect of the church'. This is a huge departure from the context of the passage and ignores other passages that do talk about functions relating to gender.8

* But I want you to understand that the head (kephalē) of every man is Christ, the head (kephalē) of a wife is her husband, and the head (kephalē) of Christ is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3).

Strongs: "kephalé - Usage: (a) the head, (b) met: a corner stone, uniting two walls; head, ruler, lord."9

Hind argues for "source" as the definition of kephalē rather than "head". It should be noted that "source" is not acknowledged as a possible interpretation of kephalē in any major lexicon. The definition "source" originated with a short article by Stephen Bedale in 1954. His definition attracted a firestorm of criticism from scholars which continues to this day. Interestingly Bedale's definition of kephalē did not remove the connotation of "authority over". Arguments regarding "source" as a nonauthoritative definition are based on ignorance.

Bedale: “That is to say, the male is κεφαλή [head] in the sense of ἀρχή [beginning] relatively (sic) to the female; and, in St Paul’s view, the female in consequence is ‘subordinate.’ . . . But this principle of subordination which he finds in human relationships rests upon the order of creation, and includes the ‘sonship’ of the Christ himself . . . while the word κεφαλή . . . unquestionably carries with it the idea of ‘authority’, such authority in social relationships derives from a relative priority (causal rather than merely temporal) in the order of being.”

Zondervan Academic: "Whether or not one accepts the argument about the word’s meaning, at no time did Bedale imply that his interpretation removed the metaphorical connotation of 'authority over'. Given how prominent his article has become in some circles, it is strange how rarely his actual exegesis of 11:3 is recounted."10 

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. (1Corinthians 11:2-16).

This passage appears to be a cultural situation. However, the principle of male headship has not changed. I recommend Alan Parr's short video on this subject: Do Christian Women Have to Wear Head Coverings Today? (youtube.com)

* Hind also mentioned "leaders like Esther". Esther was prominent, but she definitely came under the male authority of Mordecai! 

A common practice of false teachers is that they take verses out of context and/or they read more into a text than it actually says i.e. they go beyond what is written. (1 Corinthians 4:6; Proverbs 30:6). One of the qualifications for teachers is that they can rightly divide the word of truth. (1 Timothy 2:15). The subject of women in leadership is not just an interesting discussion, it is a weighty subject with far-reaching implications that can set the course of the church on an opposing trajectory to God's revealed will. Those who decide to do their own thing and flaunt God's blueprint for marriage and church leadership are abusing their positions and are on a collision course with God Himself. (Matthew 12:36; Galatians 6:7; James 3:1).     

There is much more research on this subject which goes beyond the scope of this post. Winger's series is comprehensive and he exposes many more egalitarian inconsistencies.

1. Micah 6:4 Commentaries: "Indeed, I brought you up from the land of Egypt And ransomed you from the house of slavery, And I sent before you Moses, Aaron and Miriam. (biblehub.com)
2. A Woman’s Place: The Evangelical Debate over the Role of Women in the Church - Christian Research Institute (equip.org)
3. Was Junia/Junias a female apostle? | GotQuestions.org
4. Strong's Greek: 2458. Ἰουνιᾶς (Iounias) -- Junias, a kinsman of Paul (biblehub.com)

Tuesday, 13 August 2024

MICHAEL BROWN: DESPERATE TO DITCH THE NAR LABEL!

NAR: Myth or Movement? - AG Roundtable (youtube.com)

Michael Brown's false accusation against Holly Pivec and Doug Geivett is that they have caused an unnecessary division within the body of Christ due to their widespread deployment of the NAR label. According to Brown, they have falsely identified people who are not necessarily associated with the movement with their "broad brush approach". Brown's incredible complaint is that they have damaged reputations and demonized and exaggerated the activities of innocent people.

Brown: "I will have people who will not go near my ministry, whatever good we could give or however we could help them because 'I am part of NAR' it is this boogeyman.. it is this thing that has been created that I don't believe exists.. In one way or another, it has come out in an alarmist way and thus an exaggerated way that people that are really not related are put in one group that the worst construction on certain things is put extreme examples are used.. This NAR thing that's been created I don't believe exists..  to see how we can help the body discern better without demonizing, without exaggerating, that's the concern.. "

The reality   

In reality, there is overwhelming evidence that the NAR label is ubiquitous within and without the movement. C Peter Wagner coined the term "New Apostolic Reformation" and became the "Presiding Apostle" of the International Coalition of Apostles (ICA). Ché Ahn used the label in his book Modern Day Apostles which had the endorsement of Bill Johnson, James Goll, Shawn Bolz, Patricia King, Cindy Jacobs, and Lou Engle. The International Coalition of Apostolic Leaders (ICAL)  also uses the label: "This is why it is vital that existing members of ICAL find ways of creating National Coalitions in nations, regions and cities around the world. The AIM Strategy can help make this happen as we endeavor to bring legitimacy to the New Apostolic Reformation."1 Bethel Church in Redding: "Watch as Kris Vallotton and Dann Farrelly discuss the five-fold ministry, denominationalism, mentorship, the New Apostolic Reformation, and much more."2  

In the UK Emma Stark is the Core Leader of the British Isles Council of Prophets (BICP). The BICP are unmistakably NAR having associations with many US NAR "prophets". Simon Braker claims to be an "ordained prophet" and is also part of the BICP. Braker attended the Wagner Leadership Institute.  

The core teaching of the NAR is that the church must be governed by present-day apostles and prophets. Chris Vallotton (Bethel Church Redding) is one of the worst offenders. He falsely claims that if believers are not under apostolic authority then God will not answer their prayers. 

Brown admits that such claims are abusive, but he does not reject or condemn Bethel Church or any other ministry outright. He suggests that the leaders involved in these ministries may need to revise their language or they may need correction, but in his eyes, they are bona fide leaders within the body of Christ. Brown claims that many leaders associated with the NAR do not use the term "office" to describe alleged present-day apostles and prophets and he relegates this as "old language". He now prefers the term "ministry functions" as more appropriate language. I view this as damage control rather than a genuine concern about the inevitable damage these people inflict upon their followers. 

A number of false teachers claim "the office of the prophet" to maneuver themselves into positions of authority by alleging they are directly commissioned by Jesus Christ. Biblically there is no such thing as "the office of the prophet". Prophecy is identified as a gift of the Spirit in the New Testament. (1 Corinthians 12:7-11).  

Emma Stark: The office of the prophet is a gift from Jesus, not the Spirit, mainly listed in Ephesians, 2 and 4, and is part of the governmental structure of the Church. It is more responsible for words that steward leadership, nations, tribes, regions, which are about correction, direction and understanding seasons of time.”4

The assumption that believers can direct decrees and declarations towards situations or circumstances is not how Jesus taught His disciples to pray. The New Testament teaches petitionary prayer. (Matthew 6:7-13; John 16:24; Philippians 4:6; Ephesians 6:18; 1 Timothy 2:1 etc.)

The paradox of "prophets" who make proclamations and declarations or give prophetic utterances in the first person of the Lord while at the same time admitting that they are fallible typifies the reductio ad absurdum of the entire movement. By definition, if someone speaks in the first person of the Lord, they claim to speak the very words of God Himself who is infallible. (Deuteronomy 18:22; Jeremiah 28:9).

Geivett: ".. it's puzzling to me when a prophet says.. 'Thus sayeth the Lord but maybe not' and I'm concerned about that. I'm concerned about the effect that has on the church, and it is prolific.."

The critical question (2:32 mark)

Brown: "So you've quoted Che Ahn, you've quoted Chris Valloton,  one known as an apostle, one known as a prophet. In your view would you use the term 'false apostle' like Paul does in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15  'such are false apostles' and he says they are 'servants of Satan', or Matthew 7 where Jesus says 'beware of false prophets they are wolves in sheep's clothing'. Would you consider these men to be true believers who are falsely called apostles and prophets, or would you say in your mind they are false apostles, false prophets?"

Geivett: "..what's needed is a deep fundamental restructuring of the underlying theology that's what we're proposing"   

I was rather surprised by Geivett's response to this question. While he affirmed that the track record of "prophets" is so poor that they are not to be believed, he stopped short of saying that they are "servants of Satan" or "wolves in sheep's clothing".

Geivett's corrective solution i.e. the fundamental restructuring of the underlying theology is rather puzzling. How can you restructure something rotten to the core? Can a bad tree bear good fruit? (Matthew 7:19). The NAR false prophets and apostles do not handle the scriptures correctly, they have disqualified themselves and they have ruined their own reputations. (2 Timothy 2:15 Titus 1:9). 

I admire the work of Pivec and Geivett and I have found their work to be very accurate and thorough. However, I differ with Geivett's assessment of false prophets. The biblical language used about false apostles, prophets, and teachers unquestionably identifies them as "wolves" and "ministers of Satan" in the same sentence in some instances. I am perplexed by Geivett's view that we need special discernment to identify false apostles and prophets in these terms.  
  
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.(Matthew 7:15).
I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves will arise men speaking twisted things, to draw away the disciples after them.. (Acts 20:29-30).
For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).

Brown either doesn't understand or deliberately downplays the danger of this nefarious movement by suggesting "a minor terminological adjustment" due to what he describes as "the tremendous fallout, division coming to the body, good people being hurt other ministries being misunderstood.."  Brown is very concerned about his associates' reputations, but he does not seem overly concerned about the tremendous damage inflicted upon the body of Christ by NAR false prophets and apostles. 

Ironically, the very slogan they once boasted about has come back to bite them and has become a byword! The term New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) is here to stay and like it or not their leaders are stuck with it! Praise the Lord!