What is the New Apostolic Reformation? part one - by Michelle Lesley

Found here. Our comments in bold.

------------------------

Part one of two.

The NAR is Ms. Lesley's boogie man. They are evil, heretical, and deceptive. She's deathly afraid that people will be drawn in unawares. So she's here to warn us of the dangers about what they believe, but she is unable quote a single primary source.

And in part one of this long article she only manages to quote a single Bible verse and snippets of three others. That's it.

We must consider this Bad Bible Teaching. 

We should mention, we are not here to defend the NAR, but rather to examine Ms. Lesley's flawed presentation. 

--‐--‐------‐---

Have you ever heard the term “New Apostolic Reformation” or “NAR” and have some idea of what it is?

If not, I’m so glad the Lord led you here, because, over the last 20 years or so, the New Apostolic Reformation has become the predominant form of false doctrine in Protestant American evangelicalism, and you’ve probably encountered it in some way, even if you’re just now learning what it’s called.

In my opinion, the NAR is the most dangerous form of false doctrine in the United States today because so many people think it is biblical Christianity and unknowingly import it into reasonably doctrinally sound churches. I mean, I’ve never heard of Anytown Baptist Church teaching (as Christianity) that Mohammed was a prophet or that God lives next door to the planet Kolob, but you’ll certainly see NAR beliefs and practices like dominionism, unbiblical manifestations of the “Holy Spirit” and NAR prayer practices gradually creeping into many average evangelical churches. (We wonder if Ms. Lesley will provide documentation for these accusations.)

And, to our shame, America has so diligently exported this false doctrine to other countries under the banner of “missions,” that in many areas of the world – particularly Africa – the New Apostolic Reformation is the primary representation of so-called “Christianity”.

It is pervasive, it is heretical, it is blasphemous, and it is sending people to Hell at an alarming rate. (Again, we await Ms. Lesley's documentation of these accusations.)

Because this is an article (albeit a long one) rather than a book, I want to give you an overview of a few of the major points of New Apostolic Reformation doctrine, and then I want to focus in on unbiblical NAR practices and experiences so you’ll be able to more easily spot an NAR church*, recognize when a loved one is straying into NAR false doctrine, and keep NAR false doctrine from creeping into your own church.

*New Apostolic Reformation organizations are heretical, which means their organizations are not “churches” and their adherents are not “Christians”. Typically, when I write about the NAR, I use “scare quotes” when referring to NAR “churches” and other Christian terminology the NAR has co-opted. However, because of the volume of this terminology in an article of this length, I felt that attempting to do so would be distracting to the reader and burdensome to the writing process. I have, therefore, left most of them out. But please understand, NAR “churches” are no more real churches than a Mormon “church” or a Jehovah’s Witness “church”.

Because that’s the immediate danger here. You’re not going to go to an NAR “church’s” website, go read their statement of faith page, and see – clearly spelled out for you – the doctrines explained below. But you probably will notice the outward signs and practices. So I do want to give those unbiblical practices and experiences some emphasis.

So let’s start by taking a look at…

Major NAR Doctrines

The first thing you need to understand is that one thing the NAR has in common with the rest of the evangelical world is that there are variations in beliefs and practices from church to church and individual to individual. I mean, I’m Baptist. You ask ten random Baptists what they believe, and you’re going to get ten different answers, even though there will be a lot of similarities.

It’s the same with the NAR. And on top of that, because this is a doctrine of demons, (Undocumented accusation...)

and its leaders disguise themselves as angels of light, (Undocumented accusation...)

some of them will flat out deny right to your face that they believe, teach, and practice some of these things, when you’ve read in their books, and heard in their sermons, and watched in videos of their worship services that they do.

Another thing that leads to variations in beliefs is that the NAR is not an organized denomination like the PCA or the ELCA. There’s no defined structure of leadership or governance. There’s no headquarters building, no national president, no official creed, confession, or statement of beliefs that all its churches hold to, no membership criteria for admitting or dismissing churches, or, indeed, even the concept of “membership” itself, because there’s no denomination for churches to be a member of. (Waaait. Ms. Lesley has already made undocumented accusations regarding the NAR, that they pretend to be churches but they're not, their doctrines are false and heretical and demonic, etc. Remember? But now she tells us that there is no such thing as NAR as a denomination, no creed or doctrinal statement.

But apparently it's real, dangerous, evil, and it's infiltrating your church. You won't see it in a church's doctrinal statement but you'll be able to tell. They seem like perfectly normal people, but they will deceive and lie to you about what they really believe. Their churches, which don't really exist, are like a vortex, apparently, and it will suck you right in if you're not careful.

We wonder again, will Ms. Lesley document any of her claims?)

So just keep that in mind. If you walk up to your friend NAR Nancy and say, “I heard your church believes X, Y, and Z,” she’s very likely to say either, “No, it doesn’t,” or “I never heard of that,” because NAR “churches” really minimize teaching and doctrine and maximize feelings and experiences. (They teach "doctrines of demons," but they minimize teaching? At the same time?

Will we ever see documentation of these claims?)

But let’s look at some of those doctrines that most NAR churches and those in leadership in the NAR hold in common:

False Doctrine 1:
Restoration of the offices of Apostle and Prophet

Probably the most definitive, stake your claim doctrine of the NAR that separates them from typical, Bible believing Protestant churches, is that they believe God has restored the offices of Apostle and Prophet. “Capital A” Apostle, as in Peter and Paul. “Capital P” Prophet, as in Isaiah and Jeremiah. (Another undocumented claim. Perhaps the NAR does preach "Capital A" and "Capital P," but we want to see the proof.

This church that isn't a church is called NAR, "New Apostolic Reformation," right? Not "New Apostolic Restoration." Reformation, restoration, the two words mean different things. To reform means to get back on course, to change back to the correct way. "Restoration" is to add back something that was lost.)

NAR doctrine holds that the offices of Apostle and Prophet have been restored (!!) to the church, (We have some limited experience with NAR, but we know they do not teach that apostle and prophet have been restored; they believe apostle and prophet have never left, but simply aren't presently recognized.)

and that God places people in those offices today to rule and run the church. The prophets (supposedly) receive new revelations from God and the apostles take that revelation and apply it to govern the church. 

Here’s why that’s unbiblical: Acts 1:21-26 clearly spells out the normative requirements for the office of Apostle: (Let's quote the relevant verses:

Ac. 1:21-22 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.

Now with the text before us, we can examine Ms. Lesley's claims.)

1. He had to have followed Jesus during His entire earthly ministry, from his baptism by John the Baptist to His ascension. And/or (in the case of Paul)… (Waaaait. We shall not allow an "and/or." Either the criteria to which Ms. Lesley appeals is valid and required for every apostle, or it doesn't apply at all. There is no exception for Paul, and he was not with them from the beginning.)

2. He had to have been an eyewitness to the resurrected Christ. (This is not a qualification, it's a duty. The new apostle "must become a witness with us." It's not that he's seen something, but rather he's to tell of what he's seen. 

"Witness" is the Greek word martus, martyr, record, witness. The same word is used here:

Mk. 14:63 The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked.

Witnesses testify to supply evidence. The new apostle's job was to testify of the resurrection, and this is exactly what the apostles did:

Ac. 4:33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all.

Ms. Lesley is totally misreading this.)

3. He had to have been personally appointed to the office by Christ Himself. (Ummmm, no. Jesus was with the eleven for 40 days before ascending to heaven [Ac. 1:3]. Why didn't Jesus personally appoint an apostle while lived among them if it was so important? Why didn't the apostles ask Him about a replacement if Jesus needed to personally appoint one? 

Why did they wait to choose an apostle themselves by lot [Ac. 1:26]?So Matthias wasn't personally chosen by Jesus. 

Ms. Lesley has totally botched this passage.)

Now, NAR apostles will skirt around numbers 2 and 3 by telling you that Jesus appeared to them and personally appointed them in a dream or a vision. (Well, we are not NAR, and had no need to skirt around the issues. We directly demonstrated from the Bible that Ms. Lesley is wrong.)

But even if you give them that, not a single one of them followed Jesus during His earthly ministry, the very first requirement of an Apostle. (Ms. Lesley, having failed to apply this Scripture passage properly, now concedes it has a very specific qualification. Which brings us to her next mishap.)

Furthermore, if God wanted Apostles and Prophets running the church today, why doesn’t He say in the New Testament that He wants Apostles and Prophets running the church? ("Running the church" is an undocumented claim previously made by Ms. Lesley. At this point we are not willing to accept that the NAR teaches that apostles or prophets do this. 

As far as what apostles and prophets do, well, the NT actually does tell us that they have a role in the church:

Ep. 4:11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up...

1Co. 12:28 And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers...

We can certainly debate if this means apostles and prophets ought to be "running a church" or not, but clearly there is a purpose for them to build up the body into maturity.)

There is no mention whatsoever of the office of Prophet in the New Testament, or any qualifications a man must meet if he wants to hold the office of Prophet in the church. (Isn't that interesting? We cited two passages that speak to this very point, but Ms. Lesley denies their existence. She further denies that there are qualifications for apostle or prophet. 

So we offer our rejoinder: Where in the NT are the duties for pastor listed? Where does the Bible say that the pastor presides over the local church as the highest authority? Where does Scripture tell us that the pastor preaches sermons? Where is there any information at all in the Word that describes the things that contemporary pastors do?)

And none of the original Apostles in Acts were replaced when they died. (??? Of course, there were the original 12:

"These are the names of the twelve apostles: first, Simon (who is called Peter) and his brother Andrew; James son of Zebedee, and his brother John; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him." Mt. 10:2-4 

Then Judas committed suicide and was replaced by Mathias (#13). Then there were others:

Acts 14:14 But when the apostles Barnabas (#14) and Paul (#15) heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: "Men, why are you doing this?"

Ph. 2:25 But I think it is necessary to send back to you Epaphroditus (#16), my brother, fellow-worker and fellow-soldier, who is also your messenger (apostolos), whom you sent to take care of my needs. 

Ga. 1:19 I saw none of the other apostles — only James (#17), the Lord’s brother.   

Romans 16:7 Greet Andranicus #18) and Junias (#19), my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

19 named apostles. In addition, we shall note that others, unnamed, also were apostles:

2Co. 8:23 As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow-worker among you; as for our brothers, they are representatives (apostolos) of the churches and an honor to Christ. 

2Pe. 3:2 I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles (apostolos).

It certainly appears that Paul was telling the Corinthian church that every church had an apostle.

And Peter, why would he use the phrase "your apostles," rather than "the apostles?" Or, since was an apostle,  himself? 

It seems clear that there were apostles in every church, ministering to the local body as builders, planters, and encouragers. They might not even have been identified as apostles, but that was the role they played.)

We have the pastoral epistles – 1&2 Timothy and Titus. (Though called "pastoral epistles," they are not. Timothy and Titus were not pastors, they were sent by Paul on assignment to these churches.)

These are the policy and procedure manuals for the church. (No, they are not. These epistles are the instructions given to Timothy and Titus by Paul to set these churches in order. 

Paul sent Timothy ahead to Ephesus to correct false doctrine [1Ti. 1:3] in this church until he was able to arrive [1Ti. 4:13]. Paul directly told Timothy who was to direct the local church, the elders [1Ti. 5:17]. Not pastors.

Titus was also sent by Paul. He was sent to Crete to fix things [Tit. 1:5] and appoint the actual leaders of the local church, the elders. He didn't appoint pastors.

Titus wasn't a pastor either.)

You’ve read them (and if you haven’t you can stop right now and read all three of them in 30-40 minutes). Do they say anything about Apostles and Prophets running the church? ("Running the church." Ms. Lesley continues to rely on her own undocumented caricature of NAR beliefs. We cited two passages above about apostolic ministry. "Ministry" in the church and "running the church" are not synonymous.)

No, they don’t. (Do these epistles say anything about pastors running the church?)

The Apostle Paul, an actual Apostle – under the divine, theopneustos inspiration of the Holy Spirit, writes these words to Titus, who’s getting a bunch of new churches up and running… (Which of these churches was he the pastor?)

For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you. Titus 1:5 (Our first actual Bible verse! But, but... We thought Titus was a pastor in charge of a church? Remember, "pastoral epistles?")

Not Apostles. Not Prophets. (...not pastors.)

Elders. And then he goes on in verses 6-9 (and in 1 Timothy 3:1-7) to list the qualifications of elders, or overseers, or pastors, (Pastors are not mentioned.)

not Prophets and Apostles. If God wanted Prophets and Apostles running the church He would have said so right here. And He doesn’t. ("If God wanted Prophets and Apostles [pastors] running the church He would have said so right here." 

She repeats herself, adding no new information.)

False Doctrine 2:
Dominionism and the 7 Mountain Mandate

The NAR believes that the biblical gospel isn’t good enough. You know the gospel, right? If not, or if you’re not sure, click here. That’s the gospel. That is the complete gospel. We don’t add to it or take away from it.

But the NAR says that’s not the complete gospel. (They do? Documentation, evidence, quotes?)

They have what they call the Kingdom Gospel, which is the gospel plus the idea that Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection made it possible for NAR “Christians” to take dominion of the earth, and gave them a mandate to do so. (Sigh... We have just about reached the end of our patience. If indeed the NAR teaches dominionism [we will not accept Ms. Lesley's word on this matter], then that's a separate doctrine, not a part of the doctrine of salvation at all. In other words, ask an NAR, "How do you get saved?" We guarantee he will not say something about taking over the world for Christ.

Otherwise, we would feel justified in randomly picking out one of Ms. Lesley's other doctrinal beliefs and claim she also preaches "The Gospel" plus that something.)

Now, this is not your Genesis 1:28 dominion where God tells Adam to take dominion over the fish and the birds and every living creature. This is also not the idea of sharing the gospel and being salt and light – being a godly influence on the world – like Scripture tells us to.

This is the idea of the NAR taking over every institution and government of every nation, and eventually, literally ruling the world in order to usher in the second coming of Christ. That’s dominionism. (Again with the undocumented claims. In our occasional brushes with the NAR we have never run across any advocate who could be thought of as a dominionist.)

They even have a plan for doing this called the 7 Mountain Mandate, which basically breaks society down into seven different categories or “mountains” to move – government, media, family, business & finance, education, church & religion, and arts & entertainment. (Ironically, the link is to a gotquestions answer, not any NAR advocate, which concedes there is overlap between the "mandate" and the simple matter of sharing the gospel everywhere. As such, we are unable to discern any substantial difference between the NAR generically and the doctrine of evangelism, despite Ms. Lesley's emphatic claims.)

The NAR twists two main Scriptures to teach this.

The Great Commission- Matthew 28:19 says, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations…”. (Second quoted Scripture.)

What does that mean? It means “as you go,” as you walk through life each day, share the gospel with people and disciple them if they become Believers. Send out missionaries. That’s what the Great Commission means.

The NAR teaches that “make disciples of all the nations,” means make every nation disciples. (This seems more accurate than Ms. Lesley's interpretation, since it is literally what the verse says.)

Infiltrate (Pejorative term.)

every corner of every nation and make that nation NAR. (Christian. There, fixed it.)

The other Scripture they twist is in the Lord’s Prayer. Matthew 6:10: “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” Does that mean we’re supposed to literally take over the world and establish God’s kingdom on earth by force or by stealth? Of course not. But that’s what the NAR believes and teaches. (Ms. Lesley is just about at the end of the leash. We are tired of these continual undocumented claims.)

“Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” What does that mean? It’s similar to “Maranatha: come Lord Jesus”. It is our prayer that Christ will come soon to rule and reign over all the earth. (Ms. Lesley makes a bare claim. We will simply respond, "is not.")

 
False Doctrine 3:
Strategic Level Spiritual Warfare

This is not the biblical spiritual warfare we find in Ephesians 6 with the full armor of God – standing firm in Christ with prayer, study of the Word, righteousness, truth, and so on.

This is more like something out of a scary Hollywood movie. The NAR believes that there are powerful, high ranking demons and evil spirits that control various geographical regions or territories as well as those 7 mountains in the 7 Mountain Mandate. (Probably true. Or does Ms. Lesley have some evidence that this is false?)

These evil spirits have to be driven out before the NAR can take dominion of all of the seven mountains, and, thus, each nation.

You’ve read your New Testament. Does the Bible teach this? Of course not. Say it loud. Say it convictionally. Say it fearlessly and without shame:

THE BIBLE DOESN’T TEACH THAT.

That is spiritual warfare. Stand firm against the schemes of the devil - like the false teaching of the New Apostolic Reformation - by girding your loins with truth and taking up the sword of the Spirit which is the Word of God. That is spiritual warfare. (Does Ms. Lesley believe in demons? Does she believe that Christians can cast them out? Does she believe that Hollywood or government might be infested with demonic activity? Why or why not? Please explain. Something, anything.)

False Doctrine 4:
Signs and Wonders

This is probably the best known doctrine of the NAR because it’s the most visible and publicized. The NAR teaches that you can do all the same miracles you saw Jesus do during his earthly ministry.

For many, the reason they believe this is that they believe a twisted version of Philippians 2:6-7. They think when that passage says Jesus “emptied Himself,” that He gave up His deity. That when He came to earth, He was not God. This is called Kenoticism, or the Kenotic heresy. (Let's quote Bethel's doctrinal statement: 

We believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, the one and only Son of God, was conceived of the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, and is God’s Anointed One, empowered by the Holy Spirit to inaugurate God’s kingdom on earth. He was crucified for our sins, died, was buried, resurrected, and ascended into heaven, and is now alive today in the presence of God the Father and in His people. He is "true God" and "true man."

If Bethel believes that Jesus was not God, we ought to at least find some hint of that here. We don't. We think Ms. Lesley, by not quoting any information from the NAR, is feeling free to lie to us.)

Bethel Church in Redding, California, is basically ground zero for the NAR in the United States- and that’s what they believe. That’s why you’ll hear discerning Christians say that Bethel and the NAR are heretical. Because they are. They literally deny the deity of Christ. You can’t get more heretical than that. (What has this got to do with signs and wonders?)

Both Bethel and most of the NAR believe Jesus was just a regular human being like you and me who was so faithful to God and so filled with the Spirit that He was able to work miracles. So, of course, if you’re able to be that faithful to God and filled with the Spirit, you can do those miracles, too.

They’ll also take you to John 14:12, where Jesus said: “…he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do…”

Now, if you’re a good student of your Bible, you will read this verse in context and you will quickly see that it is not promising or commanding Christians today to go out and work miracles. (Since we desire to be good students of the Bible, we shall rise to the challenge. So we will actually attempt to discover the context. By quoting it.

Jesus was being questioned by the disciples, first Thomas, then Philip. He was answering Philip when He said,

Jn. 14:9-14 ...Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father?" 10 Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves. 12 I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.

13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.

Jesus said the Father was speaking His words and doing His work though Him [vs. 10]. Jesus then appealed to the miracles He was doing as evidence that these claims were true (vs. 11).  He then promises that the same miracles will be done by anyone who believes in Him [vs. 12], and even greater [vs. 12]. The reason? Because He is going to return to the Father [vs. 12].

Why would Jesus say that these miracles are contingent on Him going to the Father? Here's why: 

Jn. 16:7 But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.

This is it, the reason Jesus assured us we would do these things and greater ones, because He was going to send the Holy Spirit. The Spirit would be poured out on all flesh [Ac. 2:17], and dwell within all His people, not just a single God/man in Israel.

The Holy Spirit hasn't left. He still dwells in His church. His church therefore should be doing the things the God/man did.)

But the NAR twists this verse to mean that they are to do all the same miracles Jesus did. Mostly healing the sick and raising the dead. And then you’ve also got speaking in tongues, and prophecy, and extra-biblical revelation.

But they don’t even get their own Bible twisting right, because Jesus didn’t just say they would do the same works He did. Jesus said those of us who believe on Him would do greater works than He did. What’s greater than healing the sick, or raising the dead? (Ms. Lesley suggests that the NAR twists the Bible because there is nothing greater than what Jesus did...)

There’s only one thing greater than that- it’s the miracle that takes place when God raises the spiritually dead to newness of life in Christ. (... but there actually is something greater, salvation. So there is nothing greater which makes the NAR wrong, but there is something greater, which must mean the NAR is not wrong... or is wrong about which miracles... or is wrong about what's greater... or... something.

This is truly muddled thinking. Ms. Lesley fancies herself a teacher of women. She ought not teach anyone.)

We have the privilege and the honor of being entrusted by Christ to take the gospel – the true gospel – to those who are dead in their sins so that Jesus can give them life.

That’s the greater work. (The Bible never says this.)

Jesus could not do that work during His earthly ministry the way we can, because He had not yet died and risen from the grave. And another thing – Jesus’ entire earthly ministry was spent in that little tiny area of Israel. It wasn’t God’s plan for Him to take the gospel to the uttermost parts of the earth like we’ve been able to do. So it’s a greater work in that sense, too. (Speculation, since the Bible never tells us that widespread salvation is the greater work. Rather, Jesus was speaking about the miracles He was doing, not salvation. And He told us "anyone" would do this. Not the evangelistic efforts of the Church, but people. Individual Christians would do greater things.

The plain meaning of these verses is being turned on its head for a fanciful theory. We shall not permit this.)

But the NAR not only gets it wrong in that they don’t understand what the greater work is, they don’t even do the same works Jesus did. They have never genuinely healed one person. They have never genuinely raised one person from the dead. They’ve never multiplied food for thousands or calmed a storm or caused a fig tree to wither instantaneously. Never. If they had, there would be evidence of it. (This is No Faith speaking. It can't happen because it isn't happening. It won't happen because it hasn't happened. If anything is going to happen, it won't be what did happen.

That's her "devastating" argument.) 

(Part two will follow later.)