Dr. Michael Brown Ruins His Credibility on His Own Facebook Wall, Then Deletes All the Evidence

Steven Kozar claims that Dr. Michael Brown lost all credibility on his Facebook wall by choosing to become a “cheerleader” for false teachers. Sadly, Dr. Brown, who is a highly regarded Bible scholar and host of The Line of Fire, has declined to compare the teaching of those who teach doctrines of devils (1 Tim 4:1) such as Jennifer LeClaire, Heidi Baker, Bill & Beni Johnson and others to Scripture.  Brown has been chided for appearing on the shows of two notorious false teachers, Benny Hinn and Sid Roth.

In this piece over at Messed Up Church, Steven Kozer lays out the evidence that Dr. Michael Brown really “stepped in it”:

Photo credit: Charisma News

On May 5th, 2017, Dr. Michael Brown interviewed Jennifer LeClaire on his call-in radio show “The Line of Fire,” and after the interview segment was finished Chris Rosebrough called the show to ask Dr. Brown some tough questions about Jennifer LeClaire and her “Sneaky Squid Spirit.” There was a brief and interesting exchange between the two men.

I (Steven Kozar) wrote a blog post about the exchange where I said this about Dr. Michael Brown: “He’s a hyper-charismatic cheerleader with a big microphone and a very gullible audience.” (Here’s the full blog post with audio of the “Sneaky Squid Spirit” exchange between Dr. Brown and Chris Rosebrough: Michael Brown Can’t Defend “Sneaky Squid Spirit”-Repeatedly Changes the Subject)

Dr. Brown decided to make light of my quote and garner support from his Facebook friends by posting this:

TitleQuoteFromFacebook.jpg

I decided to comment on Dr. Brown’s Facebook page and ask him some serious questions; here’s a screenshot of my first comment plus a few more. I figured that as long as I might get through to a few Dr. Brown fans, I’d add two of my articles; by now some other people were starting to ask Dr. Brown some really good questions and make their own comments:  Continue reading

Check out our White Papers on the New Apostolic Reformation and Discernment

, ,

12 Responses to Dr. Michael Brown Ruins His Credibility on His Own Facebook Wall, Then Deletes All the Evidence

  1. lyn May 17, 2017 at 11:53 am #

    This man has a history of defending that which is false. He doesn’t even have the foundational truths found in the bible correct. He adheres to a ‘free will’ theology, which the bible never teaches. Where does this ‘free will’ theology originate from? This link show the ties of this heresy to the Jesuits and the RCC – https://elijah1757.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/swarms_of_locusts.pdf

    Here is an excerpt, “Coornhert was a Dutch humanist who was enamored with the teachings of the Catholic humanist Desiderius Erasmus and a Spanish Jesuit monk named Luis de Molina. Dirck Coornhert disdained the Reformation teachings on the Doctrines of Grace, and sought to confront them wherever he found them. Coornhert had read with growing affections the teachings of Luis de Molina regarding Free Will and Predestination. The Jesuits had hit on a brilliant way of dismantling the debate. They would preach that BOTH “free will” and predestination were true and that a good God who was truly sovereign surely might have given his creations a freedom of the will in order to allow them to choose to be saved. Luis de Molina was creating a doctrine that would eventually be called Media Scientia or “Middle-Knowledge”. Eventually this heresy would be known as Molinism. In an article on Luis de Molina entitled, Contending for the Faith, Rev. Bernard Woudenberg said of the Jesuit Luis de Molina,
    “Being a Romanist, he was forced to honor the theology of Thomas Aquinas with its acceptance of divine sovereignty, but at the same time, as a Jesuit, he was committed to defending the papacy against the growing influences of Calvinism. And so de Molina set forth to steer between these by proposing his original and highly influential concept of the media scientia, or “middle- knowledge.” In this he proposed that “between God’s knowledge of the cause and effect relations which He had implanted in the universe, and that of divine freedom whereby He remains free at any time to do what He wills, there is an area of middle-knowledge which God provides for man in which man is granted freedom to do whatever he chooses without outside necessity or predetermination of any kind.” (emphasis added)
    The following quote came from a Jesuit, written in 1628 to the Jesuit Rector at Bruxels, to calm his nerves about an ensuing parliamentary call. The Jesuit writer tells the Rector that he has nothing to worry about, because the Jesuits have planted the seed “arminianisme” and it will certainly come to fruition:
    “March, 1628. Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine (sudden) and unexpected calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the better prevention of the Puritanes, the Arminians have already locked up the Duke’s (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which stand continually at the Duke’s chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine fabricke:–OUR FOUNDATION IS ARMINIANISME” [Hidden works of darkness, p. 89, 90. Edit. 1645.] (emphasis added)

    This is why A. W. Pink made this statement, ” “In the year 1563 by the order of the Pope, there was a council held at Trent. And Rome then and there defined her theological position on the points that had been made by the Reformers, and one of their decrees read thus [now the decrees of the Council of Trent are their standard today on controverted points], “If anyone shall affirm that since the fall of Adam man’s free will is lost, let him be accursed”. I want to read that again, what I am reading now is Roman Catholic Doctrine according to their own standards the decrees of the Council of Trent 1563, “If anyone shall affirm that since the fall of Adam man’s free will is lost, let him be accursed”. So that those who insist on man’s free will place themselves side by side with Rome on that doctrine!”- from ‘studies in the Scriptures’ April 1926

    • SusanJ May 17, 2017 at 4:15 pm #

      Too bad Lyn you had to make this kind of comment and risk causing offence to good folks. It is sad that you make your point with quotes that are hard to read and understand and not a bible verse in sight. I am not persuaded by what someone wrote 400 years ago.

      I am neither a follower of Calvin or Armenius. I strongly contend for the truth of God’s Word and instruct those who have no clue on the errors of the RCC. I hold to ‘predestination’ yes the predestination of Romans 8:29 ie “predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son”. And that people when faced with the truth of the Scriptures and the claims and demands of the Gospel, then people will choose to believe or not. As in Acts 28:23-24. But I would not put down the work of the Holy Spirit either in convicting men of sin (John 16:8) or that salvation is by grace, a free gift of God (Ephesians 2:8) and that people must be born again of the Spirit.

      I see Michael Brown making some wrong choices, in my opinion, in associating with erroneous people. Exercising his free will. And he holds to doctrines that I would not. And he does need a gracious challenge on it and then leaving alone.

      But to use your kind of sources Lyn, according to a calvinistic document written in 1689 which I just happened to be looking at, under the section on God’s Decree it states “From all eternity God decreed all that should happen in time”. So from that I guess calvinists would take it that actually Brown has no choice in what he does and says and that God decreed he should endorse false teachers.

      • lyn May 18, 2017 at 12:26 am #

        Susan,

        Brown holds to an Arminian view, which is an accursed gospel. Had you followed the link you could have gotten a clearer picture of where this false teaching originated from. Jacob Arminius had strong ties with the Jesuits and he was notorious for implementing the false teaching of free will into Protestantism. This damning lie has such a hold on multitudes and many have already departed this life believing in this lie. Praise God for His marvelous, saving grace! And for revealing the truth to those who seek it as one who seeks great treasures.

        Nowhere does the Bible say you have the ability to choose or reject Christ. It teaches quite the opposite, for example, Eph 2:5  ‘Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved’,  Eph 2:8, 9  ‘For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.’ Joh 1:13  ‘Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God’. 

        No sinner comes to Christ willingly, as He stated in John 3:19  ‘And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 
        Joh 3:20  For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.’
        The love of sin and the bondage to sin {see John 8:34} keep the sinner in darkness, and all love it. All love their sins and will never come to the light because they do NOT want their evil deeds revealed. This has nothing to do with man’s free will, rather, it has everything to do with the nature of man – it is corrupted by sin. They will never come to the light; to Christ and His gospel truth, ‘lest his deeds should be reproved’ [vs. 20] – or ‘  reprove, rebuke, discipline, expose, show to be guilty’. This is why Christ stated no one can come to Him unless the Father ‘draws’ {literally ‘drag’ in the Greek} them {see John 6:44}. Why must we be ‘dragged’ to Him? It is because of our natural love of sin and the bondage it has over us. Only the supernatural power of God is able to pull us out of this darkness by opening our understanding to our own vileness. We then see our desperate need for Christ, but not because we ‘chose’ to see. We were given eyes to see by God Himself. This text causes the heart to be filled with such gratitude for what God has done, from 2Th 2:13  ‘But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth’.

        Now, as for the will of man, look at Jeremiah 17:9, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” What is the ‘heart’ spoken of here? It’s defined by Brown/Driver/Briggs Hebrew definitions as ‘inner man, mind, will, heart, understanding’, or in other words, the entire ‘inner man’. Notice the will of man is included in this. What about the inner man? The heart, including the will, is deceitful, which means ‘polluted, crooked’. It is also desperately wicked, meaning ‘incurable, sick’. With that said, how can such a heart choose correctly concerning spiritual matters? It cannot. This is why Paul wrote this in 1Cor. 2:14  “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”. In your natural sinful state, sinners cannot understand spiritual things. This is why Christ told Nicodemus ‘unless you are born again, you cannot see the kingdom of God’. To ‘see’ means to understand; unless God the Spirit does a supernatural work in the mind of the sinner, they will not understand spiritual truth. Again, look into Luke 24:45  “Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures”.

        The will of man is not a separate entity that functions apart from the rest of the inner man. It is tainted by sin, just as the mind is. The mind and will function together and both are corrupted by sin. All have the same nature as Adam….a sin nature.

        It’s unfortunate you drag Calvin into this issue, even though I never quoted him, nor have I read anything from him. This is the usual response from the free will defenders because you do not understand what is being said. I used to adhere to the same view and tactic until God taught me different. The doctrines of grace did not originate with Calvin, they originated with God the Spirit. Praise God for revealing His marvelous grace and the work of the triune God in saving wretched sinners!

        • Gail May 18, 2017 at 3:03 am #

          Oh then Arminian’s aren’t saved? Perhaps John Wesley isn’t saved. I suggest you read Dave Hunt’s Book, “What love is this”?

          • lyn May 20, 2017 at 11:46 am #

            Can you show me where I stated Wesley wasn’t saved? Can you prove he was?
            Examine fruit, look for a continuing evidence of the new birth and growing in Christ in your own life. We cannot know for certain who the elect of God are, but we can self examine and we should.

        • SusanJ May 18, 2017 at 10:21 am #

          Lynn I would disagree with how you interpret some of the verses and settled biblically a long long time ago on many of the points you try to persuade me otherwise.

          I agree that the bible is full of doctrines of grace but generally ‘doctrines of grace’ refers to a TULIP or calvinistic understanding. The grace of God is surely amazing to read about.

          Of course sinners come willingly to Christ. The Bereans of Acts 17:11-12 came eagerly and willingly to Christ. They heard the message checked it out and believed. I personally have witnessed many men women and children come willingly to Christ on hearing the Gospel explained clearly to them and also had the joy and privilege of discipling them and walking with them.

          You should also not make broad statements like ‘you do not understand’ or imply that some of the readers of this website place themselves side by side with Rome. I understand perfectly what is being said but I will leave it now as I do not wish to continue any pointless debate. That is not what this website is about and the post is on Michael Brown after all. I wish you well in the Lord.

          • lyn May 18, 2017 at 12:28 pm #

            I did not ‘interpret’ them, I laid them out as written, and then gave the definitions from the original language.

            What causes a sinner to ‘willingly’ come to Christ? What caused them to eagerly receive the word? Who prepares the heart for this? Who draws them? You still are not understanding the work God must do in the heart before a sinner can be saved. You are accrediting sinners with the ability to do something the bible says they cannot do because they are dead in sin, they love darkness, and they are in bondage to sin.

            This is why I gave John 3:3, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. The ministerial work of God the Spirit is denied by those who believe man can ‘do something’ to help the salvation process be complete.

            I ask you this, all the verses I gave, who wrote them – God or Calvin? How is giving His truth in the context of the subject – free will – associated with ‘calvinism’? This continual accusation wears thin, especially when I stated I do not read his writings. What I believe was taught to me by God the Spirit as I studied His truth by going into the original language and examining the truth more carefully. You can choose to disagree, but your argument is not with me, it is with God. It is His truth, not mine.

            This is an excellent study tool, it provides an interlinear bible which is great for those who desire to dig deeper – http://biblehub.com/

          • lyn May 18, 2017 at 12:30 pm #

            What is your understanding of the new birth? i.e. – it’s origin, and how it works in the overall doctrine of soteriology?

      • Daisy May 20, 2017 at 11:15 am #

        Thank you! I consider both Calvinism and Arminism false.

  2. lyn May 20, 2017 at 11:43 am #

    The question isn’t ‘is it arminianism’ or ‘is it calvinism’? The question is this, ‘is it biblical’? Does the bible teach free will? No. Here’s an example …. Who wrote this, “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins”? Did God write this or did Calvin? How does the Holy Spirit work in the saving of a sinner? It is the Father, Son AND Spirit that work in saving a sinner. Yet, this ministry of the Spirit is chucked to the wind in favor of ‘free will’.

    When we attach man-made labels to what is presented, we steer away from what is necessary….proving truth from God’s word. It also causes division, which is why we have oodles of various denominations in organized religion. All cherry pick what they say they believe. Satan has had a field day dividing the visible churches with this cherry picking method. The doctrines of grace are automatically rejected and accredited to Calvin, even though he is not the author of these doctrinal truths. So, Satan keeps the elect in a stupor because many reject God’s truth because of this system of labeling.

    As for Dave Hunt’s book, I recommend https://michaeljeshurun.wordpress.com/2017/03/19/dave-hunts-scripture-twisting/

    If some say we shouldn’t get our theology from Calvin, why is it okay to get yours from Hunt or Wesley? If these men do not have the foundations right, how can they be trusted?
    Again, search the scriptures to find truth, dig deep and pray for wisdom and understanding. Chuck the study bibles and the writings of men IF what they say is contrary to God’s word. Dig into the original language, study the bible in the context of the chapter, cross reference verses, and PRAY for a right understanding.
    I once held to the ‘free will’ view, praise God He took me deeper into His truth and showed me my error. I was wrong to follow the teachings of the church I attended at that time and I am grateful God showed me otherwise.

    • Amy Spreeman May 22, 2017 at 10:24 am #

      Well said, Lyn.

      • lyn May 22, 2017 at 11:41 am #

        thank you Amy, and thank you for granting me the privilege to stand for His truth.

Leave a Reply