As part of the American Gospel series, movie maker Brandon Kimber conducted a couple of roundtable discussions involving NAR gatekeeper Dr. Michael Brown. Originally, Brown claimed to be interested in allowing these to be part of the latest America Gospel movie but then backed out after many hours of taping and effort by Kimber. The first roundtable was with Jim Osman, Justin Peters and on Brown's side, Sam Storms. This was released several months ago and I did a full review then. The second roundtable was just released and is linked above. This one is with Dr. Brown, Dr. Doug Geivett and Holly Pivec. Let me first stipulate that it was almost three and a half hours long but my review stopped around two hours in. I just felt that the points were made by then. Let me also preface this by saying that it is easy for me or anyone to Monday morning quarterback something like this. I have dealt with Holly and Doug's work in the past and they are sincere in their efforts, I have no doubt. I have also appeared twice on Dr. Brown's radio show and I know how difficult it is to deal with him and the fact that he is very skilled at debating. That said, this second roundtable did not go as well as the first. Brown, in my opinion, did as he wished throughout this discussion. He used a lot of his tired old strategies and even had Holly and Doug declaring that they had never called him NAR. A great deal of the problem is Holly and Doug have a very limited view of the NAR, focusing only on the false apostleship paradigm that C. Peter Wagner started decades ago. The NAR has morphed since then however and the version we see today relegates apostleship to a very minor rung on their ladder. So let us reason once more together through the above linked video.
Let's start at the 2:20 mark. Brown starts laying down his strategy for this session. He starts with one of his favorite talking points, which is that there is no such thing as the NAR. He claims that if only the point being made was that there were groups of unrelated people who believe in apostles and prophets there are concerns about what they teach, then Brown would say amen. He wants it broken down to sub arguments because it is easier to deflect that way. He offers that the Internet is one of the evilest things today. He thinks this of course because it is what holds him accountable. It is what holds the NAR accountable. At 2:37 Brown says the NAR is a boogeyman that doesn't exist. He tries to bifurcate concerns from the actual movement. So, in typical Brown fashion, the NAR concerns he acknowledges but refuses to call it NAR. Whatever. It is such an in the weeds argument that should have been shut down but because it was not, he keeps bringing it up. Unfortunately, this would lead to more deception from Brown throughout this session. Holly and Doug were trying so hard to seem reasonable, that specious arguments such as this were allowed to muddy the entire session, which was the goal of Dr. Michael Brown.
At the five-minute mark, Brown tries some good old-fashioned guilt. He tries to make the argument he is only concerned that some might not be willing to hear him on his bible study or Israel teachings because of their NAR concerns. Now, it is true that Brown was once known for his Jewish outreach and for being a bible answer man but recently he has abandoned the "askdrbrown" stuff because he believes fighting the NAR culture wars are far more important. He is now known as a pro-Trump, dominionist gatekeeper of all false NAR teachings. He just hates being called on it. At the 5:40 mark, Brown lists those that label him NAR, which is quite an impressive list. Holly and Doug unfortunately never address how so many people could be so wrong. He also said he didn't know who 828 ministries was but he knows darn well because I have been on his radio program twice. He then tries some misdirection by saying that the charge against him is that he is friends with people who are viewed as NAR leaders - wrong! Some he claims to be close friends but the issue is that he defends them all and gives them cover. He says the other charge people level against him is he didn't call certain things out. But he says it is more broad guilt by association because he is known as a Pentecostal, Charismatic leader. Wrong again. The issue is he pretends to be such a leader but then maligns any criticism of him. Michael Brown has created a perfectly insulated bubble for himself. He openly claims that he welcomes any "constructive" criticism but openly dismisses all real criticism out hand by calling the critics unloving or accuses them of using "unequal weights." Again, whatever.
It is at the 7:30 mark that we run into real trouble. Doug says that he and Holly have not accused Brown of being NAR. This leaves the impression that Brown is right in criticizing all of those discernment ministries and that he really isn't NAR. This is a very poor foundation for this debate and Brown wields it as a weapon throughout the rest of the session. Breaking it down, Brown says that all the discernment ministries that accuse him of being NAR are wrong and suspect and the response from the other side is now officially, well, we haven't said you are NAR. The problem of course is that Brown is NAR and that is the point. That point was conceded just seven minutes into the debate.
At the nine-minute mark, Holly lists people that still use and own the NAR term, destroying Brown's talking point that the NAR does not exist. Brown actually had the nerve to say that she proved his point because it is only a small group of select people that will use this terminology but the rest around the world are fairly unfamiliar with the term which is proven by personal anecdote. Yes, you read that right. One of the favorite talking points Brown uses is that he knows someone, or has talked to someone and that somehow magically debunks what they have actually taught or done. He claims that he has talked to leader after leader that are supposedly the NAR and one of their first questions is what is the NAR. Anecdotes are not proof. Wolves do not say, hey I am a wolf. I might add that while some false teachers have historically supported the notion of NAR, it is not like a denomination. It is a collective of false teachings and beliefs. Espousing those beliefs and teachings is what makes you NAR, not admitting that you are or are not. These are common Brown tactics. First of all, Holly did not list a small list. It was a devastating list including many of Brown's pals, including Joseph Mattera, who he coauthored a declaration pretending the NAR didn't exist! Secondly, he always plays the "we don't know" card and uses third hand anecdotal exchanges that cannot be verified. Unless you are under a rock in the charismatic movement, you know what the NAR is. Thirdly, he acts surprised that no one would openly admit to him that they are NAR. Of course, they wouldn't! Ask Che Ahn if he believes in the office of apostle. Ask Lance Wallnau if he believes in the seven mountains theology. It is what they teach, not what they admit to.
The next disturbing exchange is at 15:50. Doug says they only refer to people as NAR who self-identify as such. I cannot express how that is really wrong. Discernment does not require admission. False teachers do not walk into a church with a "I'm a wolf" sign around their neck. We are to test everything and hold to the good, marking and avoiding that which is false. At the 19-minute mark we see Brown wield anecdotes again regarding whether Mark Chironna is NAR by saying the proof that Chironna is not NAR is that he asked him. We need to stop this kind of stuff. It does not matter that a wolf swears he is not a wolf. Mark Chironna is a wolf. Just do a simple google search. Moving on, at the 23-minute mark they discuss the Passion Translation but Holly and Doug avoid saying that it is not actually a translation. It is a dangerous tool used by many false teachers. The pushback however on using the Passion, was met with typical Brown distortions, claiming 98% people globally would never use the Passion. His goal is to continue to diminish the other side to make it seem like hyperbole. He is very good at it. I seriously doubt that only 2% of people he supports use the Passion as most false teachers love it. At the 28-minute mark Brown defends IHOP (this is before Bicklegate) by saying IHOP says they are not NAR. This pattern continued in this debate because it was allowed to. It is IRRELEVANT what Mike Bickle thought about the NAR. The only thing that matters is if his teaching supported NAR and it did. Brown glossed over Bickle saying IHOP doesn't teach dominionism? I beg to differ greatly. Dominionism was part of the core of that cult. Just ask the people who managed to escape. So, Brown's continued reference to NAR teachers finding the NAR "unrecognizable"; is not proof.
