I'm just wondering, I've had people say that Christians shouldn't listen to Wagner, but why is that? They never could give me a real answer they just told me that is what someone else told them. :-(
If he was into something wrong I'd like to know that, but no ones told me.
Thanks!
Jordan
Wagner is part of the NAR (New Apostolic Reformation). The basic error in the restoration thought is that certain 5-fold 'offices' (a phrase coined over 20 years ago), have gone missing and must be 'restored' and/or are now reappearing.
Which begs the question, "was the church defficient for the past two milenium??" Was the church of Jesus Christ incapeable of carrying on due to a missing component? Of course not, It's a bunch of silliness.
In short, Wagner emphasises the need for an Apolstolic Reformation, that the local church has been insuffient for the ast 2 thousand years because it hasn't honored "the five-fold ministry". He claims the church should be governed by Apostolic oversight, as opposed to Pastoral oversight. It's simply a hang-up on terminology and is another way of distracting the church from its primary objective... that of evangelizing the lost. Whether we call the man a Pastor or Apostle, so what?
Traditional Christendom teaches that the role of Apostle was only given to the twelve apostles, that the function is no longer required because the church has been established throughout the globe.
Certain theologies related to this teaching is known as "The Third Wave", Dominion Theology, and Kingdom Now Theology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Apostolic_Reformation
I've had people say that Christians shouldn't listen to Wagner
Are you refering to Richard Wagner, the German composer?
[color=000066]HAHAHA I thought you meant the classical music of Wagner!!!
Do you mean C.Peter Wagner? He's really "off" if he's the one I'm thinking of. I read a small part of a book about "taking cities" by spiritual warfare, but couldn't go on with it
Absolute rubbish, (compare 2 Thessalonians 2:8 following ... [/color][i][b]8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, and the Lord Jesus will slay him with the breath of his mouth and destroy him by his appearing and his coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, 10 and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false, 12 so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness [b]
I thought you meant the classical music of Wagner!!!
I was a bit confused...
Actually, I still am a bit confused, ha.
This thread reminded me of my first post at SI (apart from my introduction) called "3 divergent movements within the church."
Here is a brief description I had written (2 years ago?) on the New Apostolic Reformation.
The Apostolic Reformation: The loose formation of apostolic networks all over the world in Asia, Latin America, Africa and the United States, which desire to be God’s "new wineskins" for what used to be denominations. At the core of this idea is that God is restoring the office of Apostle in every literal sense minus the penning of new scripture. Along with prophets, these leaders become the foundation of the church.
"Vertical" apostles are over several churches and "horizonal" apostles postion themselves as guides to other apostles. It should be noted that all of this sounds much more authoritative then it could be---these structures currently just function as friendly peer groups.
The pastor, rather then being an employee of the church, leads almost unilaterally with majority descretion of the budget. Megachurches are regarded as the flagship vessels, where most of the senior apostolic talent will be raised up. Money and modernity are talked about openly and directly as pragmatic solutions for advancing God's kingdom.
The chief virtue of the Apostolic Reformation is that the church, through nimble Godly leadership, can mobilize people and resources faster, without bureaucracy to fullfill it's prophetic mandate.
For more info read C.Peter Wagner's "Churchquake", regarded as an essential guidebook for the movement."
[url=http://www.globalharvest.org/]C. P. Wagner
MC
It's funny - I just read something last week about Richard Wagner (the composer who wrote the Flight of the Valkyries and Sigfried Idyll) and how he was Adolf Hitler's favorite composer, and how loudspeakers would blast his militant music during Nazi rallies. I was reading how someone determined that there were anti-semetic undertones in the music and that Christians would defile themselves by listening to it.
You can imagine my initial confusion reading this thread!
Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
[color=6600FF]Having read the above verses I would have to say that these offices are still needed in the church. We have not exhausted the need to raise up those for the perfecting of the saints or the work of the ministry. Nor have we all come into the Eph. 4:13 fulness. I don't think it is right to assume that these offices are no longer being raised up by God. I don't think you have to add a title to someone but if we still have pastors and teachers and evangelists what is the matter with the other offices? [/color]
Also we need to be careful that we don't run down someone's ministry because we might be working against God if He indeed established that ministry.
We may find out in the final outcome that they stand before God with more rewards than we do. Maybe they showed more mercy or love. God might be more pleased with that than their theology on apostles or prophets and fivefold ministry. We need to be very careful not to pass judgment on a fellow believer and if we do we need to have the exact information that proves they are in error to back it up, not just some vague thing about where they are off.
Every one of us if we continue to write long enough, even on this forum, will have our turn at being off or in error. We know in part, later we will know what we missed. I don't want to say of anyone on this forum, don't listen them because they are off. Each part of the body has something of value to the rest. Chris might know more about love than others, TJ about the salvation message. When we put all the parts together we get a clearer picture of the whole. We need to be careful not to accuse the brethern about these kinds of doctrinal issues. Now if C.P. Wagner was denying the essentials of our faith, the virgin birth, salvation through the blood, the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, etc. that is a differnt issue, but to write him off because he teaches a restoration of the fivefold ministry isn't wise. We might be standing in opposition to God.
Now if C.P. Wagner was denying the essentials of our faith, the virgin birth, salvation through the blood, the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, etc. that is a differnt issue, but to write him off because he teaches a restoration of the fivefold ministry isn't wise.
I agree. In this day and age it seems too easy to get 'trigger-happy."
Yet, I do think it's worth noting the discussion over Wagner is not over his basic belief in the '5-fold' ministry, which in our present day is finding different expressions in the local church. Instead, it is Wagners specific formula for apostolic authority whereby multiple churches across many cities participate and submit to a hierarchial and autocratic chain of command. (By specific formula I meant not only spiritual warfare 'techniques' such as 'mapping' but also ideas for organizational structures.)
Wagner reads "...God's household, having been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets" to mean he and contemporary apostles/prophets like him are the foundation for today's functioning Church. This perspective I believe, is probably the kernel of any controversy.
Blessings,
MC
For once I have to admit I do not know enough about Wagner to comment on his ministry.
Personally I do not believe there are Apostles such as the orginal ones of the NT were. The Apostles we read about in the NT had one thing in common: They had all seen Jesus. There were the men who walked with Him during His ministry, and then Paul, who had an unexpected appointment with Him on the road to Demascus.
I do believe that some operate in a smaller sense of the word "apostle" today in that they are church planters, and take the Word of God to those who have never heard. We call them missionaries. But the original Apostles were used of God to write the scriptures & reveal the New Covenant of God to His people because scripture was not yet complete. Scripture has been completed (regardless of what the shows on TV about the Gnostic "gospels" tell you!). All we need to know about God is in scripture. He is not revealing any new truth about Himself.
On a side note... I always wondered why some folks put so much stock in so-called "prophets" and hearing something "new" from the Lord when most of them have never even read the Bible all the way through... probably havent even read the NT all the way through. Why would God reveal anything "new" when we havent exhausted what He's already given us??
Krispy
By the way, in my understanding of the Epistles, Paul was not an overseer of the churches. He was an encourager of them, but not an overseer. He gave clear guidelines for elders, deacons, etc. The churches were local and autonomous. Paul wrote to them, preached in them, encouraged them, attempted to correct them when they wandered, but I do not get the sense that he was their overseer, or governed them.
I know some will say that what I described is an overseer... but in my opinion, an overseer is someone who is in charge and responsible for a group of people. Paul clearly stated to the believers: [b]Heb 13:17[i]Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
Obviously he was speaking about those in the local church... elders.
Krispy
Ultimately I have to also confess that my own skepticism is from personal experience with a church that was attempting to enter into an "apostolic network." Our pastor was the 'lead apostle' over about 20 other churches...there were a few vertical apostles and a some more horizontal apostles. It wasn't something they talked about too much in the normal church community...only the leadership really knew that much about it.
For the independent church, it had some good features such as shared retirement planning and legal help for pastors. Yet it also so completely fused the spiritual oversight of the church to the administrative government of the church that eventaully I felt these churches became too personality driven.It's worth noting that this single leader focus is not viewed as a weakness to Wagner but a strength. He made no bones about saying that a successful pastor needs a 'dynamic and charismatic' personality. (By charismatic he does not mean strong in 'charisma' but strong in appeal.)
Well in our case, this pinning of all spiritual and administrative authority essentially on one man, ultimately proved disasterous.
I once was talking to a good friend supportive of Wagner, who was planning on meeting him. He asked me what I thought about his ideas. I said, "I'm not really the right guy to discuss the New Apostolic Reformation...after what has happened to our church." He replied, "Maybe you are the right guy."
Hmmm...
You know, if we spend anytime at all reading the ante-nicene church leaders we can see that there was a strong sense of hierarchy early in the church. Men like Polycarp and Ignatius were adressing the same churches that Paul had written to a generation or two earlier.
Yet today, it seems such a thing can't work. Maybe it's a reflection of our fragmented self-interested society. Maybe in other countries, other cultures, there are strong unified churches in cities. However, in our present day it seems that you can't have elevated men in the church...no one is humble enough to lay down their lives for such a calling. In the end the modern character proves to be too weak even in our most revered leaders, and invariably they succumb to materialistic and sensual excesses to the shame of all of us. And so we learn to mistrust men with great authority.
Maybe in prison there would be the ancient unity.
MC
What many people fail to realize is that there are 2 types of Apostles. First, there are the 12 which were the first and they will never be again. The 12 came in contact physically with Jesus Christ and they play a very special role in the initiation of the church in Acts.
Then the second type of Apostle is the one SENT by the church to bring the Gospel out to new areas. This of course is done AFTER Christ's death. Look at Apostle Paul for one. Christians today believe that the only apostles were the 12. An apostle is just as important as a prophet, pastor, evangelist and teacher. Otherwise why would have Paul written that in Ephesians 4:11?
I think it should be clarified that the problem with all this is not so much Wagner's assertion that the apostolic role needs to be recognized, that is debateable. The problem is with the term "Reformation" and his assertion that an essential component of church leadership has been non-existent for the past 2000 years. As if to insinuate that he has been assigned the task of restoring something that only God Himself could be responsible for directing. Did God see fit to remove the role with the passing of the original apostles? I don't know. If not, then it has continued, weather recognized or not. A man cannot build the kingdom... Unless the Lord build the house, the people labor in vain.
The problem is, who is to say who the apostle is today? Now we have men who are trying to set themselves up as an authority over local churches in their own cities because they are self-proclaimed apostles and want to have a voice. I really struggle with any pastor who coins himself as "the pastor of my city" which has become a common phrase as a result of Wagners teaching. We have these new apostolic "City Churches" who believe they ave been called to oversee "the Church" in general in their city. It undermines the autonomy and authenticity of the local church and the authorities each local church are subject to in their own denominations. Each denomination has it's own church government, and within that gov't there could very well be men who demonstrate the riole of an apostle within their own circle.
On another note, there are church leaders who have gained respect and noteriety from many denominations and church leaders, perhaps the Lord has used them in an apostolic role, but to declare the church has been missing a vital and necessary role and needs reformation on those grounds, seems to imply that the gates of hell have prevailed in some way.
Good Grief! I was talking about the composer.:-D C.S. Lewis liked him a lot, but I've had several people tell me not to listen to him. I was just wondering if anyone knew something about jis music that was bad. :-P
Sorry about the confusion!
JOrdan
HomeFree89 wrote:
Good Grief! I was talking about the composer.:-D C.S. Lewis liked him a lot, but I've had several people tell me not to listen to him. I was just wondering if anyone knew something about jis music that was bad. :-PSorry about the confusion!
JOrdan
LOL! :lol:
duped post deleted
C.S. Lewis liked him a lot, but I've had several people tell me not to listen to him
That's it. I quit. :-P
You actually meant Wagner the composer? You had people tell you not to listen to Richard Wagner? If Elmer Fudd sings it how bad can it be? (Kill the wabbit! Kill the wabbit!)
MC
Did anyone read my earlier post (about the composer) and the so-called anti-semetic undercurrents to his music?
If he was into something wrong I'd like to know that, but no ones told me.
I think this is the part that made it sound like you meant Peter Wagner. I'm sure any secular musician is into something wrong... sin. Not to mention he's a child of the devil until he is born of God. So why even ask? It's like asking if there's any reason not to listen to Britney Spears or Emenen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagner_controversies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Wagner#Wagner.27s_influence_and_legacy
This discussion is locked.
