Ho ho ho. ‘Tis indeed the season for jollity. The mob down at Pulpit & Pen are gathering a global conglomeration of ‘discernment’ folk to have a crack at Dr Michael Brown on their radio podcast.

Here’s their boast:

And so, what Pulpit & Pen is currently doing is having our contributors combine their labors with the largest coalition of discernment ministries possibly ever undertaken to compose a master-file on the gross theological errors of Dr. Michael Brown. On January 2, we will be ready to expose the lies that Dr. Brown will be promoting to Mr. White, while White unrepentantly takes part in the sin of 2nd John 11. Along with NAR polemicists from (literally) around the world (and from diverse theological traditions including Baptists, Presbyterians, and Lutherans, lest anyone want to say we just “hate people who aren’t exactly like us”), we will be producing that work with cited evidence and source links to demonstrate that White is deceived and Brown is deceiving.

‘NAR polemicists from around the world’. Yes, well…

This is an hilarious proposition. Dr Brown rejects their claims that he is a ‘NAR Apostle’, and they are compelled by their own inability to accept the rebuttal of their claims to gather all their ‘NAR polemicist’ mates to ‘compose a master-file’ in a futile attempt to prove their already disproven point?

These ‘NAR polemicists’ have publicly rejected the truth that Dr Brown is a Christian, despite his clear adherence to Biblical Christian principles, which is why Dr White, a Calvinist, has supported Dr Brown and opposed Pulpit & Pen’s assertion that Dr Brown is not saved and pointed out why he believes Dr Brown is saved.

But why does Dr Brown need a defence from anyone, despite the generous interjection by Dr White? He is answerable to God alone, not self-appointed ‘NAR polemicists’, cessationists, or Reformed theologists. He is certainly not insecure in his relationship with Christ, to which his peers will testify. The NAR polemicists’ are simply annoyed because they can’t get through the shield of faith with their darts.


The global ‘NAR polemicists’ are devising a ‘master-file’? A ‘master-file’ based on what? One assumes, with some accuracy, no doubt, it will be based on the dubious NAR narrative concocted by the ‘mastermind’ of churchwatchcentral over the last five or so years, and spread, anonymously, out to the gullible takers at the newly constructed ‘NAR polemicists’ union? A ‘master-file’ based on a flawed premise, then.

Does anyone think this preposterous ‘event’ will make a skerrick of difference to Dr Brown or his friend Dr James White, who will also be the subject of the ‘discernment ministries’ ‘scrutiny’ on their proposed broadcast?

One has to ask whether either of these men has been invited to be on the program to defend themselves, since they have the technical and theological capability of joining any live program, being broadcasters themselves.

J D Hall at Pulpit & Pen has long sought to debate Dr Brown, so why not offer the opportunity to defend his position rather than present what will be a one-sided affair along the lines of John MacArthur’s Strange Fire conference.

One would have to be aware, unless one was really ignorant, that neither Drs Brown nor White are at all insecure in their ministry, nor are they incapable of mounting a sound defence of their position.

And you’d hope, as a matter of credibility and fairness, that the global ‘NAR polemicists’ will present an even playing field by making the audience aware of who they are individually so that Drs Brown and White can respond to the ‘Elephant Room 3’ claims.

Is there a point?

But what is the actual point of this comedic exercise? To demonstrate that Dr Brown, despite his clear rejection of their claims, is a NAR Apostle? NAR is an acronym for the New Apostoloic Reformation.

He’s already said he isn’t involved with the NAR, nor an apostle, so why press into it? Simply, because the polemicists’ credibility is up for scrutiny if they are indeed wrong about both NAR and Dr Brown’s perceived involvement.

They’ve already been shown to be extremely wide of the mark in their claims, but they remain unrepentant and are desperate to form a self-appreciating huddle to hack out their contrived narrative once again in an attempt at shoring up their shaky walls of poor analysis.

As pointed out here previously, why would Dr Brown deny being either of the NAR or an apostle if, indeed, he was connected to either? There would be no point. In fact, he is intelligent and articulate enough to defend that position if he so desired.

The truth is that Dr Brown is neither of the NAR, and has clearly pointed out that he has never considered himself to be an apostle. Nor has he ever been known amongst his peers as an apostle. The only people who assert that he is an apostle are the very same ‘discernment’ crew that say he is a ‘NAR Apostle’.

Which is tantamount to the ‘NAR polemicists’ appointing their own apostles, as pointed out in a previous article!

This is, indeed, a farcical development by the polemicists.

The challenge to Pulpit & Pen

And to name themselves ‘NAR polemicists’. What on earth is a ‘NAR polemicist’? They do know, don’t they, that the NAR they are referring to has been shown to be a make-believe version of the NAR they attempted to ‘expose’. They have completely fabricated the NAR narrative to such an extent that they now believe their own press.

My challenge to the ‘NAR polemicists’ is to name each individual that contributes to their global enterprise. No anonymous contributors. No aliases. Let them all be named. Let them all be shown to be in attendance at a local church, since they have claimed that they are ‘from diverse theological traditions including Baptists, Presbyterians, and Lutherans’.

Let them prove this with every single ‘NAR polemicist’ contributor. Name yourselves or be silent. No anonymous contributors, i.e. from ‘News Division’, or from ‘churchwatchcentral’, or any other so-called ‘discernment ministry’.

Put your names to your claims, polemicists.