Kingdom Through Culture: The New Apostolic Reformation and its Cultural Appeal, Part 1

Introduction

Drawing popular scrutiny during the 2012 presidential election,¹ the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) embraces the largest non-Catholic segment of world Christianity. It is also the fastest growing segment, the only segment of Christianity currently growing faster than the world population and faster than Islam.² “The NAR represents the most radical change in the way of doing church since the Protestant Reformation. This is not a doctrinal change. We adhere to the major tenets of the Reformation: the authority of Scripture, justification by faith, and the priesthood of all believers. But the quality of church life, the governance of the church, the worship, the theology of prayer, the missional goals, the optimistic vision for the future, and other features, constitute quite a change from traditional Protestantism.”³ The NAR is remarkably noteworthy, globally influential, and should be understood in context.

The modern continuationist movement emerged in three distinct waves. The first wave arrived in the form of Pentecostalism in the early 1900’s with the teaching of Charles Parham and William Seymour’s Asuza Street Revival (1906–1915). The Charismatic movement of the 1960’s constituted the second wave, during which word of faith and prosperity theology found their way into churches previously untouched by Pentecostalism. In the early 1980’s, the third wave added an emphasis on signs and wonders resulting from the work of the Holy Spirit, along with renewed prophetic and apostolic ministry in the church. Especially influential were John Wimber and the Vineyard Movement and C. Peter Wagner and his teachings and writings.⁴ The third wave evolved, especially through C. Peter Wagner, into a movement some have considered a fourth wave, identified by Wagner as the New Apostolic Reformation.

Rather than a denomination or membership group, the NAR is a movement with distinctive theological beliefs and practical applications, alleging a second apostolic age. C. Peter Wagner acknowledged that he “might be seen as an “intellectual godfather” … might have been the first to observe the movement, give a name to it, and describe its characteristics as [He] saw them.”⁵ In a watershed 2011 article Wagner explains how in 1994 he arrived at the term: “Reformation” because the movement matched the Protestant Reformation in world impact; “Apostolic” because of all the changes the most radical one was apostolic governance … and “New” because several churches and denominations already carried the name “apostolic,” but they did not fit the NAR pattern.”⁶ Wagner envisioned the NAR as a world-changing movement with staying power: “The New Apostolic Reformation is an extraordinary work of God that began at the close of the twentieth century and continues on. It is, to a significant extent, changing the shape of the Protestant world.”⁷

The NAR has been associated with charismatic influencers such as the Latter Rain Movement (1948), the Toronto Blessing (1994), Cesar Castellanos’ G12 Movement, Bill Johnson (Bethel Church), Brian and Bobbie Houston (Hillsong Church), Cindy Jacobs (Generals International), Mike Bickle (IHOPKC),⁸ Rick Joyner (Morningstar Ministries), Brian Simmons (Stairway Ministries), Todd Bentley (Fresh Fire), Lou Engle (formerly of The Call), and many others.

Six Theological Distinctives

While there are a number of theological nuances attributed to the NAR, according to Wagner, there are six definitive distinctives. (1) Apostolic Governance – Most of traditional Christianity accepts evangelists, pastors, and teachers, but not apostles and prophets. I think that all five are given to be active in churches today.⁹ Wagner loosely defines an apostle as a, “Christian leader who is gifted, taught, and commissioned by God with the authority to establish the foundational government of the Church within an assigned sphere of ministry by hearing what the Spirit is saying to the churches and by setting things in order accordingly for the advancement of the Kingdom of God.”¹⁰ Cottle and Kelly provide a more comprehensive description and definition, of apostles as “ambassadors, generals-governors, and patriarchs.”¹¹ In developing this threefold characterization, Cottle and Kelly connect the authorities exercised by those referred to in the NT as apostolos, with the authoritative ambassadorship of the OT sheliach (e.g., Gen 24:2, 15:2). It is a logical conclusion that such leaders must be imbued with the miracle-working authorities of the apostolic age. (2) The necessity of the present-day office of prophet is assumed by the definition of apostle, and thus (3) the legitimacy of extra-biblical revelation and (4) supernatural signs and wonders are necessary extrapolations for the empowering of apostles in this age.

The NAR is a theological reformation in the sense that while the Protestant Reformation emphasized sola scriptura the NAR claims a second apostolic age, returning the church to days of extra-biblical authority. The Reformers espoused a cessationist view, in part to counter Catholic claims of miracles as confirmation of unorthodox doctrines. To their credit, the Reformers, in accordance with sola scriptura, sought to ground their arguments exegetically. Luther is resolute in his cessationist stance, asserting that “Once the Church had been established and properly advertised by these miracles, the visible appearance of the Holy Ghost ceased.”¹² Calvin’s perspective on healing is similar: “But that gift of healing, like the rest of the miracles, which the Lord willed to be brought forth for a time, has vanished away in order to make the new preaching of the gospel marvelous forever.”¹³

The Reformers were convinced of cessationism, recognizing the connection between apostolic authority and signs, miracles, wonders, and new revelation. B.B. Warfield later observed an important nuance of that connection, when he noted that miracles were “The characterizing peculiarity of specifically the Apostolic Church, and it belonged therefore exclusively to the Apostolic age … These gifts were not possession of the primitive Christian as such; nor for that matter of the Apostolic Church or the Apostolic age for themselves; they were distinctively the authentication of the Apostles … This does not mean, of course, that only the Apostles appear in the New Testament as working miracles, or that they alone are represented as recipients of the charismata. But it does mean that the charismata belonged, in a true sense, to the Apostles, and constituted one of the true signs of an Apostle.”¹⁴ NAR leaders likewise recognize the apostolic-verification aspect of the charismata, and view that present day apostles are needed, because new revelation is needed. Thus, the Scriptures are sufficient to an extent, but more is needed and provided in this NAR era. Bill Johnson expresses why the Scriptures are no longer sufficient:

All Church history is built on partial revelation. Everything that has happened in the Church over the past 1900 years has fallen short of what the early Church had and lost. Each move of God has been followed by another, just to restore what was forfeited and forgotten. And we still haven’t arrived to the standard that they attained, let alone surpassed it. Yet, not even the early Church fulfilled God’s full intention for His people. That privilege was reserved for those in the last leg of the race. It is our destiny. As wonderful as our spiritual roots are, they are insufficient. What was good for yesterday is deficient for today. To insist that we stay with what our fathers fought for is to insult our forefathers. They risked all to pursue something fresh and new in God. It’s not that everything must change for us to flow with what God is saying and doing. It’s just that we make too many assumptions about the rightness of what presently exists. Those assumptions blind us to the revelations still contained in Scripture. In reality, what we think of as the normal Christian life cannot hold the weight of what God is about to do.¹⁵

To complement additional and ongoing revelation is an “expansive, fresh, fiery translation of God’s Word,”¹⁶ that has been endorsed by a number of leaders recognized as NAR (first and foremost of which is Bill Johnson¹⁷). Brian Simmons’ The Passion Translation (TPT) asserts that “words can become poor containers for revelation,¹⁸” and that “the essential meaning of the passage should take precedent over the literal form.”¹⁹ Consequently, the translation adds includes roughly 50% more words in certain sections than other translations. Andrew Shead²⁰ wonders “Where do all these extra words come from?”²¹ Shead answers his own question: “Double translation is Simmons’s principal translation technique, but his constant addition of images and ideas into the text is not confined within his double translations. Sometimes he creatively alters the Hebrew … elsewhere he creates stand-alone additions, or attaches them by hyphen to a word in the text.”²² Shead notices the additions often aim at one goal: “Additions aimed at stirring up ecstasy are unsurprisingly prominent in TPT’s praise psalms.”²³ Shead concludes that, “Simmons makes a false claim when he states that TPT will ‘re-introduce the passion and fire of the Bible to the English reader.’ It’s the other way round – Simmons is trying to introduce the ‘passion and fire’ beloved of his own culture into the Bible. He is trying to make the Bible value something that we value – the feeling of being overwhelmed by a strong emotion – in spite of the strong stance the Bible consistently takes against this exact thing.”²⁴ Notice how statements of positional truth (translated in the NASB) are rendered as experiential in the TPT:

• NASB: John 6:47 – “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.”
• TPT: John 6:47 – ”I speak to you living truth: Unite your heart to me and believe—and you will experience eternal life!”
• NASB: 1 Corinthians 12:7 – But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.
• TPT: 1 Corinthians 12:7 – Each believer is given continuous revelation by the Holy Spirit to benefit not just himself but all.

Also notice how Peter’s plain sense hermeneutic is changed to a mystical one. Also, the aorist punctiliar (was ever made) is replaced with the present tense:

• NASB: 2 Peter 1:20-21 – But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
• TPT: 2 Peter 1:20-21 – You must understand this at the outset: Interpretation of scriptural prophecy requires the Holy Spirit, for it does not originate from someone’s own imagination. No true prophecy comes from human initiative but is inspired by the moving of the Holy Spirit upon those who spoke the message that came from God.

Paul’s past tense (perfect active indicative) reference to seeing Jesus is augmented with the present tense:

• NASB: 1 Corinthians 9:1a – Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?
• TPT: 1 Corinthians 9:1a – Am I not completely free and unrestrained? Absolutely! Am I not an apostle? Of course! Haven’t I had a personal encounter with our Jesus face-to-face—and continue to see him? Emphatically yes!

These few examples illustrate the license taken to alter the meaning of the text so that specific concepts can be introduced and highlighted. In light of this emphasis on experience, present tense, and emotion, it is fitting that leaders of Bethel, Hillsong, and Jesus Culture, endorse the translation. Simmons further reveals his own emphasis on the supernatural and experiential in his account of being translated to the library of heaven and seeing a book entitled John 22, and in his delivering of a prophetic word for healing.²⁵