The problem with Bethel/Redding..

[mikedsjr]

The NARzie movement which is the New Apostolic Reformation was created by Peter C. Wagner back in the 90’s, or more properly, where he took over the leadership of an existing association where he both renamed it and defined its agenda. There are also other NAR type groups out there who are independent of Wagners creation but they all have the same dominionist agenda.

They emphasise the Five-fold ministry model of Eph 4 where they focus on the roles of the prophet but primarily with that of the Apostle who they say is to not only govern the local church but where each “apostle” is supposed to also govern specific regions of the church.

This approach is merely a rehash of the old latter-rain movement which came out of Canada back in 1948 but Wagner was able to make it more palatable where it seems to have a tendency to attract the more narcissistic church leader to its ranks. In either 1948 or 49, the International AoG rightfully deemed the latter-rain movement to be dangerous heresy where for a few generations it existed within the more “cultic” Pentecostal and charismatic congregations, but now it has its tentacles firmly wrapped around many established mainstream congregations.

A good example with the eccentric behaviour that is regularly found in this ‘movement’ was with the horrid Todd Bentley fiasco of a couple years back where the so called NARzie council commissioned Bentley as being the ‘latest and greatest’ thing of God for years, where within only two weeks his life and ministry was shown to be a fraud where almost every form of wickedness was uncovered within both his life and ‘ministry’. This fiasco should have been a wakeup call for all those who are a part of the various NAR groups to realise that it is a ‘movement’ that is built on the ambitions of greedy and misguided individuals.

In summary, it has the potential to completely derail the Church and for those who wish to engage with the poor folks from churchs such as Bethel in Redding, then they will need to come up to speed with this horrid movement and in particular to equip themselves to address them from within a theological framework. Though if the people in the video at the start of this thread are from Bethel, then you might also want to carry a remedy (if there is one) for cookies that might have been laced with some form of psychotropic drug.

How can one tell a NARite from a typical charismatic? Why are NARites heretics?

 

[Wgw]

I think almost any group that claims to have ex officio prophets or aposles sends up a huge red flag.

 

[Biblicist]

How can one tell a NARite from a typical charismatic? Why are NARites heretics?

Where mainstream Pentecostalism differs with the distinctive views of the NARzies is with how they have redefined Eph 5:1 which speaks of the roles of the apostle, prophet, evangelist, shepherd and teacher. They have taken the Offices of the congregational apostle and made it into one that is on par with those who were the Apostles-of-Christ (being the Twelve and Paul) where they state that the apostle is not only to be in charge of each local congregation but that the apostle (or at least their version) is to also be in charge of specific regions of the Church. Another of their many heresies is that they are also dominionist where various US politicians have also jumped onto this bandwagon in an attempt to gain a few votes - but I would definitely not recommend that anyone votes for such a politician.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

The title of this thread is wrong. It should read: The Problems with Bethel/Redding

 

[Biblicist]

I think almost any group that claims to have ex officio prophets or aposles sends up a huge red flag.

I would be more inclined to say that if a congregation did not have a few prophets within their midst that they are probably relying more on man with his substitutes than they are on the Holy Spirit.

 

[Biblicist]

The title of this thread i wrong. It should read: The Problems with Bethel/Redding

I think that the start of your post could be wrong as well; "The title of this thread i wrong." As for the title of the thread, I would have thought that implying that Bethel/Redding is a problem would have been grammatically okay?

 

[jimmyjimmy]

 

[Wgw]

I would be more inclined to say that if a congregation did not have a few prophets within their midst that they are probably relying more on man with his substitutes than they are on the Holy Spirit.

Note if you will, I said ex officio. In the case of the Orthodox I can name a few dozen saints from the past century said to have the gift of prophecy or other gifts; rhere are Orthodox monastics alive who I've met, like Elder Ephraim of Arizona, who are rumoured to have attained prophecy through ascesis.

What I think is rather a red flag is when a group entitles someone a Prophet, and they are said to exercise a prophetic ministry ex officio, that is to say, as a function of their clerical office. For example, the LDS president.

 

[Biblicist]

Note if you will, I said ex officio. In the case of the Orthodox I can name a few dozen saints from the past century said to have the gift of prophecy or other gifts; rhere are Orthodox monastics alive who I've met, like Elder Ephraim of Arizona, who are rumoured to have attained prophecy through ascesis.

What I think is rather a red flag is when a group entitles someone a Prophet, and they are said to exercise a prophetic ministry ex officio, that is to say, as a function of their clerical office. For example, the LDS president.

I could be wrong but it seems that you have established a scenario that is in opposition to itself, where you have expressed your concern (which is your right) that a congregation has recognised someone as being a prophet (where it becomes an Office) but where you have also apparently referred to those who prophesy within the congregation on an ad-hoc basis (ex-officio) where they are not recognised by the congregation as being a prophet, but merely someone who on the odd occassion prophesies - mmmm....maybe that was a bit of a mouthful!

As for any LDS President prophesying I would be interested to see a source for this as to my knowledge Mormons do not prophesy; I know that their founder pretended to prophesy but his phoney statements are nothing more than self pretentious ramblings. A lot of people also associate speaking in tongues with Mormons but what they do not realise is that the Mormons consider speaking in tongues to be with how some are supposedly better enabled to learn a language in one of their ministry institutions, their version has nothing to do with how the Holy Spirit prays to the Father on our behalf.

 

[Wgw]

I could be wrong but it seems that you have established a scenario that is in opposition to itself, where you have expressed your concern (which is your right) that a congregation has recognised someone as being a prophet (where it becomes an Office) but where you have also apparently referred to those who prophesy within the congregation on an ad-hoc basis (ex-officio) where they are not recognised by the congregation as being a prophet, but merely someone who on the odd occassion prophesies - mmmm....maybe that was a bit of a mouthful!

As for any LDS President prophesying I would be interested to see a source for this as to my knowledge Mormons do not prophesy; I know that their founder pretended to prophesy but his phoney statements are nothing more than self pretentious ramblings. A lot of people also associate speaking in tongues with Mormons but what they do not realise is that the Mormons consider speaking in tongues to be with how some are supposedly better enabled to learn a language in one of their ministry institutions, their version has nothing to do with how the Holy Spirit prays to the Father on our behalf.

Allow me to clarify. It is my opinion that if we say, let us ordain this man as a Prophet, he will automatically have the gift of prophecy, owing to baptism in the spirit, chriothesia, or any arbitrary cause, we are being presumptious. Certain people are blessed with the gift of prophecy, but this is not the direct result of ordination or appointment to a specific office, and they are not prophets according to clerical title or ecclesiastical rank.

 

[mikedsjr]

Where mainstream Pentecostalism differs with the distinctive views of the NARzies is with how they have redefined Eph 5:1 which speaks of the roles of the apostle, prophet, evangelist, shepherd and teacher. They have taken the Offices of the congregational apostle and made it into one that is on par with those who were the Apostles-of-Christ (being the Twelve and Paul) where they state that the apostle is not only to be in charge of each local congregation but that the apostle (or at least their version) is to also be in charge of specific regions of the Church. Another of their many heresies is that they are also dominionist where various US politicians have also jumped onto this bandwagon in an attempt to gain a few votes - but I would definitely not recommend that anyone votes for such a politician.

You seem to use heresy differently than I would. I only use heresy in relations to deviating from the gospel truth that is essential to salvation. I do believe that is the case with Bethel Church.

Your statement sounds like Bethel is just running improperly.

I'm trying to understand if Pentecostals and NAR type churches are so intermixed they can't be discerned from one another. Do NARite leaders and Pentecostals show up hand in hand at events?

 

[Biblicist]

Allow me to clarify. It is my opinion that if we say, let us ordain this man as a Prophet, he will automatically have the gift of prophecy, owing to baptism in the spirit, chriothesia, or any arbitrary cause, we are being presumptious. Certain people are blessed with the gift of prophecy, but this is not the direct result of ordination or appointment to a specific office, and they are not prophets according to clerical title or ecclesiastical rank.

Okay, now I see your point.
When an individual is recognised as being a prophet, where the congregation deems them to function as a prophet (which by default makes it an Office), this would only occur after a period of time where the individual has demonstrated an ability to prophesy. As you could imagine, they would not be ordained or commissioned into an Office of a prophet (some congregations might choose to do this) but merely that the congregation as a whole recognises that the Holy Spirit speaks through them in prophecy and that their prophecies have been deemed reliable. So you are definitely correct in that ordination/commissioning does not proceede someone being a prophet, it is merely a recognition that the Holy Spirit works through them in prophecy.

 

[Biblicist]

You seem to use heresy differently than I would. I only use heresy in relations to deviating from the gospel truth that is essential to salvation. I do believe that is the case with Bethel Church.

Your statement sounds like Bethel is just running improperly.

When any individual or group of individuals attempts to claim the same authority that Jesus gave to those who were his Apostles-in-Christ and where they attempt to impose this authority onto the Body of Christ, then they are definitely playing with godless fire.

I'm trying to understand if Pentecostals and NAR type churches are so intermixed they can[quot't be discerned from one another. Do NARite leaders and Pentecostals show up hand in hand at events?

That's a tough one to answer. With Bethel/Redding, I do not know if the AoG gave them an ultimatum or if Johnson came to the realisation that his neck was in the noose where he decided to leave before he and his church were sanctioned and even excommunicated. Up until he left the AoG he was undoubtedly involved in various AoG activities and there will be other AoG ministries out there who certainly preceeded Johnson and there will be others who will go down the same pathway as he has in the future.

Whenever we find leaders believing that they have the same authority as those who were Apostles-of-Christ and that they have some authority to impose their power on sections of the Church, then you will always find other eccentric behaviour following close by as well, where one illness will often follow on from another.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Where mainstream Pentecostalism differs with the distinctive views of the NARzies is with how they have redefined Eph 5:1 which speaks of the roles of the apostle, prophet, evangelist, shepherd and teacher. They have taken the Offices of the congregational apostle and made it into one that is on par with those who were the Apostles-of-Christ (being the Twelve and Paul) where they state that the apostle is not only to be in charge of each local congregation but that the apostle (or at least their version) is to also be in charge of specific regions of the Church. Another of their many heresies is that they are also dominionist where various US politicians have also jumped onto this bandwagon in an attempt to gain a few votes - but I would definitely not recommend that anyone votes for such a politician.

Correct me if I am wrong, but they believe that these apostles are over ALL CHURCHES in a region or will be after their theocracy is put into place.

That means that churches will no longer self govern, but will be under a local prophet and regional prophet and then the main ones.

 

[fhansen]

A common Christological error, not unique to Bethel or NAR but frequently found in a lot of contemporary Evangelical (and occasionally even among other Protestants) teaching is Hyper-Kenoticism. The term comes from the Greek word κένωσις (kenosis) meaning "to empty" and is taken from St. Paul's Christological hymn in Philippians 2,

"Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself (ἐκένωσεν - ekenosen), taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death--even death on a cross." - Philippians 2:5-8

It wrongly interprets this passage to be about Christ divesting, emptying Himself, or otherwise "turning off" certain aspects of His divinity. That though God He acted in some sense less than God, or did not express Himself as God, etc. It is a deeply heterodox understanding of the Incarnation that results in a fundamental failure to understand what the Incarnation was about and also can result in failing to understand how the Incarnation presents and reveals God to us. Christ was not God acting like a man, but was God and man together acting as Himself; in Christ we do not see a man who points us to God like a prophet but instead we see God. For He is the image of the invisible God, the Icon of God, "whoever has seen me has seen the Father", "no one has ever seen God, but the only-begotten Son/God, who is in the bosom of the Father, has made Him known", "In Him the fullness of Deity dwelt in bodily form".

We are not seeing a weakened likeness of God, but we are seeing God Himself as God truly is, which we would otherwise never be able to for He, being invisible and dwelling in "inapproachable light" who "no man can see and live" would otherwise remain hidden from us, as though behind a veil of terrible glory. But we see in Christ the Revealed God.

A great quote on this comes from Herbert McCabe's book, God Still Matters:

"Jesus is God's Word, God's idea of God, how God understands himself. He is how-God-understands-himself become a part of our human history, become human, become the first really thoroughly human part of our history - and therefore, of course, the one hated, despised, and destroyed by the rest of us, who wouldn't mind being divine but are very frightened of being human." - Fr. Herbert McCabe, God Still Matters, p. 104

-CryptoLutheran

Great quote from McCabe. In any case, though, wasn't there a "divesting" of sorts-or limiting-of godhood with the Incarnation? Jesus was fully God, and did nothing in opposition to that (He did not sin), and yet we're told in Luke 2:52 that, like a human might do, He "grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man".

 

[fhansen]

I would be more inclined to say that if a congregation did not have a few prophets within their midst that they are probably relying more on man with his substitutes than they are on the Holy Spirit.

In the Pentecostal church I used to belong to, I finally concluded that their "prophets" were exactly that-men substituting for the Holy Spirit.

 

[fhansen]

I noticed the mockery too.

Did it seem to you like the younger lady was 'high' on something?

I doubt if she was high. I tend to think that neither drugs nor bad theology are the primary culprits here, but rather the desire for holiness -plain old human pride at work in one more of its variants; "neo-phariseeism" to coin a phrase, crudely disguised as the Holy Spirit in action. Phoniness to put it another way, self-delusion driven by the desire to be holy-and/or make money in some cases.

 

[simonthezealot]

The title of this thread is wrong. It should read: The Problems with Bethel/Redding

Exactly, it's an endless messy list.

 

[mikedsjr]

When any individual or group of individuals attempts to claim the same authority that Jesus gave to those who were his Apostles-in-Christ and where they attempt to impose this authority onto the Body of Christ, then they are definitely playing with godless fire.


That's a tough one to answer. With Bethel/Redding, I do not know if the AoG gave them an ultimatum or if Johnson came to the realisation that his neck was in the noose where he decided to leave before he and his church were sanctioned and even excommunicated. Up until he left the AoG he was undoubtedly involved in various AoG activities and there will be other AoG ministries out there who certainly preceeded Johnson and there will be others who will go down the same pathway as he has in the future.

Whenever we find leaders believing that they have the same authority as those who were Apostles-of-Christ and that they have some authority to impose their power on sections of the Church, then you will always find other eccentric behaviour following close by as well, where one illness will often follow on from another.

Thanks for answering my questions. Is Patricia King independent of Pentecostal denoms too?

 

[ViaCrucis]

Great quote from McCabe. In any case, though, wasn't there a "divesting" of sorts-or limiting-of godhood with the Incarnation? Jesus was fully God, and did nothing in opposition to that (He did not sin), and yet we're told in Luke 2:52 that, like a human might do, He "grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man".

I think that's just part of the Mystery of the Incarnation. He who knows all things grew in wisdom, did not know the timing of His own coming, yet knew the hearts of men. He who, being God, and immortal and impassible both suffered and died. He is both God and man, thus all that is properly Divine is His and all that is properly human is His. He is both the Eternal and Almighty and the helpless babe wrapped in swaddling cradled and nursed in Mary's arms.

-CryptoLutheran