An old friend (let's call her Jane) recently reached out to me with some questions about a movement known as the New Apostolic Reformation. Here's the situation:
Jane has two friends that recently went to a church that identifies as part of the NAR. They attended a night service in which a man designated as an apostle was conducting fire tunnels, teaching people how to tap into new spiritual gift like healing and prophesy, and so on. One was pretty freaked out and the other thought it was relatively normal.
So, what gives? Is this heresy? Satan in disguise? A day in the life of a Pentecostal? Too much Red Bull? Just enough Red Bull?
Let's see.
First, let's start with the general.
In Christianity, there are two types of doctrines: Close-fisted and open-handed.
In the closed fist are the core beliefs that separate Christianity from anything else. These typically include the divinity of Christ, the necessity of His death for salvation, the Trinity, and so on. If you get these right, then congratulations, you're not a heretic.
In the open hand are a number of secondary doctrines. These are what typically separate one denomination from another. Often included in this bucket are issues like women in leadership, whether or not to baptize infants, and so on. This is the arena in which scholars and academics like to dig into the Greek and Hebrew, explore historical context, duke it out over who's right, and then go and get a pint together because, at they end of the day, we're all still brothers and sisters in Christ (but just a pint of ice cream for the baptists because Jesus just drank grape juice or something).
Now, the big question here is which is which?
Progressive churches tend to err on the side of putting everything into the open hand. "So what if they believe in Muhammad? They're Christians too!" Conservative churches tend to err on the side of putting everything into the closed hand. "You don't believe in every exact thing I believe in the exact way that I believe it? Have fun in HELL, mouthpiece of Satan!1!" The happy place is somewhere in between.
So, the first thing to ask when trying to weigh the legitimacy of a church, a movement, or a particular ideology, is are you dealing with open-handed or close-fisted doctrines?
Ok. On to the point proper.
To be perfectly honest, I hadn't heard of the NAR when Jane brought it up. She was kind enough to send some articles and I did a little research of my own. From that, here's what I've got.
New Apostolic Reformation is a term coined by the late Peter Wagner. He originally used it to describe pentecostal/charismatic churches that had a particular emphasis on spiritual gifts, spiritual warfare, and engaging the world. It's not an official organization with a unified set of distinguishing doctrines, but Wagner said these churches tend to agree on the following:
The offices of apostle and prophet are import and continue today.
We are called to continue in Christ's mission of establishing the Kingdom of God on earth.
God continues to speak to us through the Holy Spirit, but the Bible is the court of supreme authority.
Governance structures within the church are dynamic and flexible.
Spiritual gifts are good, for us today, and play an active role in the life and work of the Christian.
Now, there's a couple of things here worthy of note.
First, these are secondary doctrines that most theologians agree fall into the open hand category. If we're just looking at these, we're not talking orthodoxy vs heresy. More like chocolate vs pistachio. The critiques I've seen making it into more than that usually involve a false representation of the beliefs above.
Second, most of the arguments against the NAR I've seen are not new ones. Rather, it's all just a recent iteration of an old debate, which is cessationism vs continuationism. Most of the doctrinal differences are rooted in whether or not the Holy Spirit is still working in the world today the same way He was in New Testament times. Hardcore cessationists have always accused the pentecostal crowd of being demon possessed and whatnot. It's worth determining whether a critique is coming from that perspective or not.
Third, this is a massive category. With the exception of Catholics, the majority of Christians in the world today fall into this bucket. This would include all pentecostal/charismatic denominations (Assemblies of God, Foursquare, etc), many baptist churches, almost all non-denominational churches (including big ones like Bethel and Hillsong), and basically everything in the young reformed movement (Acts 29, etc).
The problem with large categories, of course, is that you risk losing meaningful distinctions. If you run into a problem with a NAR church, it may not be the NAR part that's the problem. What we have is a flamethrower, but what we need is a scalpel.
In Jane's case, she's looking at two friends who had an experience at a particular church. And a particular service at a particular church, at that. So, in keeping with the word of the day, let's focus on the particulars.
Which, in this case, is spiritual gifts and manifestations.
Now, one of the issues taken here is that the leader was trying to teach people to prophecy and heal the sick. What does the Bible say about this?
“And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the higher gifts.” - 1 Corinthians 12:28-31
“Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.” - 1 Corinthians 14:1
Does the Bible say we can all have spiritual gifts? Yes, it would appear so.
Are we to endeavor to acquire new spiritual gifts? Yes, it would appear so.
Paul makes no bones about it. The Holy Spirit has poured out various gifting to the people of God so that they are equipped to do the work of God. Not only can new gifts be given, but we should "earnestly desire" them. Paul even calls out the gift of prophecy specifically. Apparently, these are good things that we are to use, enjoy, and even pursue.
But, at the same time, that doesn't mean we should always let our freak flag fly.
“For God is not a God of confusion but of peace… So, my brothers, earnestly desire to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. But all things should be done decently and in order.” - 1 Corinthians 14:33-40
While Paul encourages us to use and pursue spiritual gifts, he also devotes quite a bit of ink in 1 Corinthians 14 to the importance of not getting too crazy. It is possible, it would seem, to go overboard with the charismaniac stuff. There is a time for spiritual manifestations, and a time to cool your jets.
It is possible that what Jane's friends experienced was a demon-possessed wolf in sheep's clothing, praying on the unsuspecting Jesus-seekers of this church. Or maybe it was just a well-intentioned shepherd who went a little too far.
Too much Red Bull, as it were.
Anyway, the great thing is that if her friends are connected to the body, there's always a resource within in reach. God gave us pastors so that they could know us, our situation, and help guide us to green pastures. Furthermore, we have access to God directly in prayer. We can ask him to help us, and to understand and apply His word to our lives. He can help us distinguish between what is good for us, what is bad for us, and what may healthily stretch us outside our comfort zone.
Jane, thank you for reaching out. I hope my ramblings are of some use.
Blessings on you and yours!
