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!

Abusive Behavior of Rod Parsley Leaked In An Audio Recording (youtube.com)
More abusive behavior of Rod Parsley leaked in a video (youtube.com)

Prophetic News Radio-Rod Parsley Meltdown and his Spiritual Abuse (youtube.com)

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.1 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)

DAVID HIND ONE CHURCH LEICESTER: WOMEN AND LEADERSHIP

Women & Leadership | David Hind (Aug 2024) (youtube.com)

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 - BibleThinker. Winger 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)."4 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)

5. Strong's Greek: 1984. ἐπισκοπή (episkopé) -- a visiting, an overseeing (biblehub.com)
6. Strong's Greek: 4245. πρεσβύτερος (presbuteros) -- elder (biblehub.com)
7. 1 Timothy 3 Meyer's NT Commentary (biblehub.com)
8. 7-The-Egalitarian-Silver-Bullet-Gal-3-28.docx - Microsoft Word Online (live.com)
9. Strong's Greek: 2776. κεφαλή (kephalé) -- the head (biblehub.com)
10. The head of the woman is man? How to understand… | Zondervan Academic

Further Link

If Your Church has a Female "Co-Pastor" Leave NOW...Here's Why! (youtube.com)

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.3   

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!

Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. (Galatians 6:7).

1. AIM Strategy — International Coalition of Apostolic Leaders (icaleaders.com)
2. Bethel Church | Redding, CA
3. Council Members | British Isles Council of Prophets
4. In conversation with a modern-day prophet | Article | Woman Alive

ANDY WOODS "CORRECTION" OF JOHN RICH + TUCKER CARLSON: TAKEDOWN OF PRETRIB RAPTURE

Tucker Carlson and John Rich Tackle the Pre-Trib Rapture! (youtube.com)

Olivier Melnick and Andy Woods have attempted but ultimately failed to prop up the "Holy Grail" of pretribulationalism during their "correction" of John Rich following his recent interview with Tucker Carlson: John Rich: Donald Trump, the Darkness of Eminem’s New Album, and the Song Inspired by God (youtube.com) 

Rich comes from a Christian background and is a country singer. His interview with Carlson came on the back of the success of his song "Revelation", inspired by the prophecies of John the Revelator about the future and the return of Jesus Christ.1 The interview has rattled the pretrib rapture camp and provoked Andy Woods, Olivier Melnick, Lee Brainard, and others to react negatively.2  

Woods: (regarding Tucker Carlson) "..but you start to see a pattern. First you see Munther Isaac.. then a month or two later you see this guy who is trying to trash the pretrib rapture.. Either he or his producer or whoever is intentionally giving platforms to people that are trying to tear down the Zionist dispensational understanding.." Melnick and Woods are expecting too much of Tucker Carlson. As far as I am aware, Carlson is not a Christian, although he is evidently reading the scriptures and exploring different views. We cannot reasonably expect non-Christians to have a theologically sound view of Romans 9. (1 Corinthians 9:12).

The Scofield Bible 

Andy Woods proceeded to "rectify" John Rich's claim that the Scofield Bible was the first study Bible including study notes ever made. Technically Woods is right, but he is splitting hairs. The first full edition of the Geneva Bible (1575) predates the first Scofield Reference Bible (1909) by more than three hundred years. However, the Scofield Reference Bible is generally considered to be innovative. It is described by Got Questions as "..the first of its kind—an annotated Bible designed to aid the reader in understanding the text."3 Wikipedia: "The Scofield Bible had several innovative features. Most important, it printed what amounted to a commentary on the biblical text alongside the Bible instead of in a separate volume, the first to do so in English since the Geneva Bible (1560)."4  I think we can overlook John Rich's peccadillo since the Geneva Bible with its Calvinist slant was controversial and was not well received in the UK, especially by King James, who considered the notes to be subversive due to their political undertones. In contrast, the Scofield Bible was widely accepted and has had a huge impact on modern evangelicalism.

John Nelson Darby

Woods "John Darby was very godly man and he was I believe part of the Plymouth Brethren Movement he started churches really all over the place.. he was a top notch scholar.."  (15:18 mark)  I have no argument with those who assert Darby's intelligence; however his character is an altogether different matter! Much has been written about Darby from varying perspectives, but it is irrefutable that Darby was the cause of much consternation by Bible scholars and leaders of his time and was considered arrogant and self-willed. 

Brethren leaders George Müller, Anthony Groves, and Benjamin Newton suffered intensely at the hands of Darby, who would broker no opposition to his sectarian views. Darby would not even tolerate anyone who wished to remain neutral. Darby's response to ANY opposition was to simply annihilate it. Those who disagreed with him were excommunicated. Why? - Because according to Darby, the Lord had personally revealed dispensational hermeneutics to him directly. In his own eyes, this made him 'right' and gave him liberty to butcher the body of Christ. It is difficult to argue against anyone with such obvious forcefulness, intelligence and powers of intimidation.5 

Charles Spurgeon: "Mr. Darby is, to all intents and purposes a thorough Pope, though under a Protestant name. He will never admit that he is in error; and therefore very naturally declines to argue with those who controvert the soundness of his views. How, indeed, could it be otherwise? If Mr. Darby holds, which he does, with a firm grasp, the principle that whatever conclusions he and those acting in conjunction with him may come to, express beyond all question the mind of the Spirit; and if those Darbyites who gather together in London, can go so far as to exclude all other denominations, even the most godly among them, 'believing themselves to be the one or only, assembly of God in London,' how need we feel surprised that Mr. Darby, as the 'prophet, priest, and king' of the party, should exercise a perfect despotism within the domains of Darbyism?"6 

George Müller: "Scripture declares plainly that the Lord Jesus will not come until the Apostasy shall have taken place, and the man of sin shall have been revealed..."7 

Borivali Assembly: "He (Anthony Groves) became increasingly concerned with the drift of the Plymouth Brethren towards sectarianism under the leadership of Darby and aligned himself with George Müller when the brethren split in 1848 to form the Open Brethren and Exclusive Brethren."8

The secret rapture

Woods further "correction" of Rich for using the term "secret rapture" is illegitimate.

Woods: "When someone uses the expression 'secret rapture' it shows me that they are really not doing original research. They are just sort of reading what someone else said. I think that's what Mr Rich did in that video. I think he has hooked into certain.. anti-dispensational authors. Because when you take the Bible at face value there is nothing secretive about it.."   (22:00 mark)

The expression "secret rapture" was employed by Darby and was a common expression within the "Left Behind" (Tim LaHaye) pretrib camp. It is only relatively recently that the pretrib camp have backtracked and no longer use this expression for the obvious reason that it is false. It is illegitimate to accuse Rich of doing poor research or using anti-dispensational material for his information as Woods suggested.

To quote one of Woods heroes Thomas Ice: "Darby introduced the concept of a secret rapture to take place ‘at any moment’, a belief which subsequently became one of the chief hallmarks of Brethren eschatology.. Ernest Sandeen tells us: Darby’s view of the premillennial advent contrasted with that held by the historicist millenarian school in two ways. First, Darby taught that the second advent would be secret, an event sensible only to those who participated in it. . . . There were, in effect, two 'second comings' in Darby’s eschatology. The church is first taken from the earth secretly and then, at a later time, Christ returns in a public second advent as described in Matthew 24.9 

Alan Kurschner: An older expression in pretribulational literature—and can still be used occasionally today—is secret coming or secret rapture. From my exposure to older pretrib and non-pretrib literature, it seemed to be used synonymous with the expressions signless coming or signless rapture, in contrast to an announced coming or announced rapture."10

The term "rapture"

Woods: "This idea that the word 'rapture' is not in the Bible. I mean that's just so silly; I can't believe people even use that argument anymore."

It is important to note that Rich described the prewrath rapture of the church, he did not deny the rapture. Rich did his best to articulate the difficult subject of eschatology to a mixed audience, including those who were perhaps unfamiliar with the term "rapture". Woods seemed to make the assumption that everyone in Carlson's audience was familiar with Christianese.

Rich: "..the word 'rapture' is nowhere in the Bible. It talks about us being caught up with him and pulled out of here, and then the ultimate wrath is poured out on this planet. That's what we call the rapture, but that's not in debate. The question is what happens leading up to that? It's a good question to ask right? For some reason nobody ever preaches that. They don't want to talk about what happens prior to it.. "11 

The myth that the pretrib rapture was taught prior to Darby    

   

Woods and other pretrib teachers are determined to propagate the myth that Darby's rapture teaching predates the 1800s. Frankly, they should abandon the idea of inventing fallacious "evidence" which is repeatedly debunked. Darby himself claimed that the Lord had personally revealed dispensational hermeneutics to him directly. The resulting furore from Darby's peers is testimony that the pretrib rapture had not been previously articulated.

Darby: "..what God has with infinite graciousness revealed to me concerning His dealing with the Church... it was in this the Lord was pleased, without man's teaching, first to open my eyes on this subject, that I might learn His will concerning it throughout."12

Woods: "To my knowledge there are probably around forty discovered pre-Darby pretribulation rapture statements.. I do remember the Pseudo Ephraem discovery.."

For the umpteenth time, there are no early sources prior to 1830 that articulate a pretrib rapture. Pseudo Ephraem has been repeatedly debunked as a pretrib document by reliable Bible scholars. The author of Pseudo Ephraem placed the rapture event after the Antichrist's arrival. I have added some links that demonstrate this at the end of the post. When you are dealing with dishonest scholarship there is no hope of meaningful discussion.   

Andy Woods: "Even if John Rich is right on 1830, who cares. The rapture doctrine is found in the Bible."

The rapture doctrine is found in the Bible; the pretrib rapture doctrine is not found in the Bible!

Melnick and Woods' pettiness paid off in one respect ~ they managed to catch Rich out in one error to their obvious delight. Rich was in error when he said that the word "Antichrist" does not exist within the Bible. The word Antichrist can be found in 1 John 2:18, 224:3 2 John 1:7. (35:00 mark) This is the only legitimate criticism they have against Rich.  

Woods: "Lets just pretend that Scofield and Darby were just horrible people. All the mud about them and slander about them is true. Well that doesn't change the fact that the pretrib rapture is wrong. Because you can't demolish an idea by trying to link it to a source and discrediting the source when the truth of it is found in God's Word." 

The character of church leaders and teachers is critically important biblically. (1 Timothy 3:1-7). We should have learned throughout the murky history of the church age that when anyone presents a novel doctrine caution is advised. (1 John 4:1). Both Darby and Scofield were very dark characters. Scofield's history is shocking. Wikipedia: "During the early 1890s, Scofield began styling himself Rev. C. I. Scofield, D.D.; but there are no extant records of any academic institution having granted him the honorary Doctor of Divinity degree.13 Furthermore Scofield was a self-confessed heavy drinker and he abandoned his wife and two daughters and married another woman. He faced criminal charges of fraud and embezzlement between 1877 and 1879, even after his alleged conversion, and he served at least one jail sentence.14 In short, Scofield had no business setting himself up as a Bible scholar/teacher! (1 Timothy 3:2,7; Acts 6:3; 2 Timothy 2:15; James 3:1). Woods' claim that pretrib rapture is found in God's Word is unreliable and highly disputed. There is not one clear verse in the scriptures that backs up a pretrib rapture! 

The lie of pretribulationism is one of the greatest scandals within Western Evangelicalism of our time. Pretrib leaders have accepted the lie and are sticking to it no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented to them. (Thessalonians 2:11). Woods' obfuscations and half-truths are worthy of any blatant false teacher and his Pharisaic attack upon Rich tells us more about Woods than Rich. 

The tactics of pretrib leaders: "..never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it."15  

Not only does Woods knowingly persist in promoting the false pretrib rapture doctrine despite its defects, he does not believe in repentance as it relates to salvation, and he also promotes the false doctrine of once saved always saved (OSAS). These are very serious errors that put both him and his followers in a very precarious position before Jesus Christ. 

  . 

1. John Rich - Revelation (feat Sonya Isaacs) (youtube.com)
2. Tucker Carlson, John Rich, and the Rapture (youtube.com)
3. What is the Scofield Reference Bible? | GotQuestions.org
4. Scofield Reference Bible - Wikipedia
5. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: berean call conference 2015: paul wilkinson's divisive pre-tribulation delusion!!! (bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com)
6. http://spurgeon.org/s_and_t/dbreth.htm
7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_M%C3%BCller
8. Anthony Norris Groves - Borivali Assembly
9. Ice-2-PTRC 2011 (pre-trib.org)
10. The Meaning of 'Secret' in the Pretribulational Rapture Expression 'the Secret Coming of Christ' | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES (alankurschner.com)
11. John Rich: Donald Trump, the Darkness of Eminem’s New Album, and the Song Inspired by God (youtube.com)

12. Reflections Upon The Prophetic Inquiry And The Views Advanced In It | Plymouth Brethren Writings
13. C. I. Scofield - Wikipedia
14. Scofield, Cyrus Ingerson (tshaonline.org)
15. Joseph Goebbels On the “Big Lie” (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)

Further Links

Writings & Arguments Against Actions and Doctrines of John Darby – The TRUTH SOURCE
Pseudo-Ephraem Is NOT a Pretribulation Document | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES (alankurschner.com)
Pseudo-Ephraem.pdf (alankurschner.com)
WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: PSEUDO-EPHRAEM TAUGHT PRETRIB - NOT! BY DAVE MACPHERSON (bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com)

PARIS OLYMPICS 2024

And when the hour came, he reclined at table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves. For I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed!” And they began to question one another, which of them it could be who was going to do this. (Luke 22:14-23)

BILLY CRONE: WILL THE PRETRIB RAPTURE BE PASSED OFF AS A MASS ALIEN ABDUCTION?

 Their Plan to Hide the Rapture | Billy Crone (youtube.com)

Billy Crone has done some good research on witchcraft and the occult, but unfortunately, when it comes to the rapture he is unreliable. Both Billy Crone and Mondo Gonzalez reject the influential but inaccurate "Left Behind" version of the rapture promoted by Tim LaHaye and Jerry B Jenkins. This misleading interpretation of the rapture portrays believers' instantaneous disappearance with just their clothes remaining.

The departure from "Left Behind" is long overdue within the pre-trib camp, but there are serious issues in that they still fail to connect with the scriptures. In the above video, Crone and Gonzalez refer to Jesus' visible ascension in the clouds.

After He had said this, they watched as He was taken up, and a cloud hid Him from their sight. They were looking intently into the sky as He was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven.” (Acts 1:9-11).

The pretrib view of the rapture is so embedded within the Western church that teachers of this error will resort to almost any interpretation other than the correct one. Crone has omitted the critical information that everyone will actually see the Son of Man coming on the clouds i.e. no one will be in any doubt about what is happening when the rapture occurs. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. (Mark 13:26 cf. Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7,24:30,6:15-17).

Billy Crone's fantastical red herring

Crone: "We go up, they show up".  In other words, those left behind after the rapture will be deceived into believing that aliens have abducted millions of people.

Crone: "The ultimate excuse is to explain away the rapture.. ..you should see the government going from denial to admittance including the admittance of aliens.. it has slowly methodically foisted on us. It started 150 years ago or more with the lie of evolution/Charles Darwin, moving forward just to get that mindset, to lead to the next mindset, now that there are aliens/evolution out there and then you can explain this away. But as soon as that happens, here comes spaceships in whatever form right maybe they land on the White House lawn or whatever and other places around the world.. people will fall for it just like that.."

Crone's claim that UFOlogy has become the new world religion and that the rapture will be passed off with the rationale that Mother Earth is cleansing herself is extremely problematic biblically. No doubt these speculations sell books and DVDs, but that is not what we need; Christians need truth! (John 8:32). Incredibly, Crone and Gonzalez would rather resort to fantastical and unverifiable speculation instead of simply reading the scriptures. There is no information in the bible that people will believe that the rapture is an alien abduction. The only instance of a mass invasion of the demonic is when Satan and his angels are thrown down. (Revelation 12:7-9). This event is generally understood to be the ultimate expulsion of Satan from heaven rather than his original expulsion. (Daniel 12:1). Satan's expulsion from heaven precedes the abomination of desolation event at the midpoint of the 70th week of Daniel. No doubt things will get very weird at that point, and there will be unprecedented deception, but there is no indication that the Antichrist will pose as an alien, rather he will claim to be God. (2 Thessalonians 2:4). In any event, the pre-trib camp claims that the rapture will precede the 70th week of Daniel. No other event in the scriptures describes Crone's fantastical scenario. (1 John 4:1).

Pretribbers have been indoctrinated with the falsehood that Matthew 24-25 does not apply to the church but to the Jews, and that Matthew 24 refers to the regathering of Israel. There are a number of problems with this assumption. In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus addresses his followers i.e. the future church. When Jesus says "Therefore when you see.." (Matthew 24:15) he expands on his response to the disciples' original question about the destruction of the temple and the sign of his coming and the end of the age. (Matthew 24:3). The sum of the scriptures confirms a prewrath rapture between the 6th and 7th seals of Revelation. (Matthew 24:31; 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52). A straightforward reading of the text exposes the folly of a pre-70th-week rapture. It is inexplicable that pretrib teachers fail to acknowledge the relevance of the Olivet Discourse to the church, especially considering its potentially devastating repercussions for themselves and their followers. (Matthew 23:36,24:10). I recommend Alan Kurschner's article below for a detailed exegesis of the Olivet Discourse as it relates to this subject.* 

Immediately after the tribulation of those days:‘The sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. He will send out His angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. (Matthew 24:29-31 cf. Isaiah 13:10,34:4; Joel 2:10; Daniel 7:13-14).

Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen. (Revelation 1:7).

Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven. (Matthew 26:64).

 

* The Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24–25) is for the Church, Not the Jews (alankurschner.com)