Trust & Integrity

​In a recent video (which I plan to address more directly later) some claims were made related to my integrity and trustworthiness in my communication with Dr. Michael Brown. I’d like to explain and address those issues here, so that those with concerns can see the full context. 

Initial Contact with Dr. Brown
​In November of 2021, I sent the following email to Dr. Michael Brown as an initial email inviting him to be interviewed in AG3.

Hello Dr. Brown,

My name is Brandon Kimber and I'm a Christian filmmaker from Cleveland, Ohio and producer of the "American Gospel" documentary series (americangospel.com, watchagtv.com). In case you aren't familiar with the films, my first, “American Gospel: Christ Alone” critiqued the Word of Faith movement, and the second, “Christ Crucified,” critiqued progressive Christianity; each compared these errors to the true gospel. Both films have had an international impact, and we’ve received hundreds of testimonials of the Lord’s gracious work in saving, and delivering people from deception through the films. I come from a charismatic background but now identify from a Reformed Baptist perspective. The church I grew up in was heavily influenced by the Toronto Blessing and other revivals (my parents took me to Toronto, Pensacola, etc), and also had some Word of Faith influence. The films that I’ve made are largely based on my own personal experiences in these churches, and my desire to help my own family understand the truth.

I am currently working on a third film in the American Gospel series on the topic of the true person and work of the Holy Spirit, and the New Apostolic Reformation (You can read more about it here: http://www.americangospelfilm.com/spirit--fire-ag3.html). I know that you have spoken about these issues, often critiquing the critics of NAR, so I wanted to reach out to you to see if you would be interested in participating in a video interview for this docuseries. I know that since we disagree on certain issues, trust is likely a big concern for you. The way I often address this trust issue to offer you the ability to view how you are edited in the series before you sign your appearance release. Legally I cannot use you image without your approval, so there is really no risk. In my previous film “Christ Crucified,” I interviewed a few progressives and a secular humanist that I disagreed with. I offered them the same deal, and they all ended up signing their releases without any changes. Here is Bart Campolo (secular humanist) explaining his experience with me: ( https://www.watchagtv.com/progressive-christianity/videos/campolo-recommend ). There’s no doubt that I will want to ask you some tough questions, but I will be happy to provide those beforehand. I’m also willing to travel to you to film the interview (sometimes I also hire a shooter and conduct the interview remotely over Zoom, etc.).

My goal is to [create] an honest and balanced film, and I think your participation is a step toward making that a reality. I do not intend to approach this topic from a cessationist/continuationist divide. I intend to bring both groups together in our common critique of certain hyper-charismatic teachings and practices that are commonly connected to those who believe in the modern day offices of apostle and prophet.
​
Let me know if you have any interest in participating. Thank you for your consideration!

​Grace & peace,

• - Brandon Kimber

---

This email was sent as an introduction, and wasn’t meant to get into full details about the project (who I’ve interviewed, what questions would be asked, etc.). I figured that connecting myself to my past films would at least lead Dr. Brown to ask some followup questions before deciding to agree to do this. I sent this email at 12:14 PM, and Dr. Brown responded 9 minutes later at 12:23 PM, agreeing to participate and do the interview! I recall being surprised at how quickly he replied. Knowing now that he had never watched the previous AG films before agreeing to participate is hard to believe, and it makes sense now that there was some concerns relating to the interview questions that I would later send him.

The Questions
​Our interview would take place on January 24, 2022. At the beginning of the month (January 6, 2022), I emailed Dr. Brown my interview questions, which you can read below. I explained to Dr. Brown that the questions were extensive (about 40k including notes to help him understand the context) and that I wanted to be respectful of his time. I explained that I was making a docuseries, which is equivalent to multiple films, covering more topics than a single film would cover— thus the reason for the extended questions. The question also revealed the topics that I planned to discuss in this project, including allowing Dr. Brown to address criticisms that have often been directed at him by critics like Justin Peters or Chris Rosebrough.

---

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

INTRO:
Q. Can you summarize how you came to faith in Christ?
Q. Tell me about your life in ministry (thesis on Healing?).
- You’re known for writing a response book to John MacArthur’s “Strange Fire”. Can you give me a little background as to why, and your history in interacting with critics of the charismatic movement?

• - In your thesis you mentioned that all healing and blessings were from God, and all sickness is from Satan. Do you agree that Scripture often presents God as one who inflicts sickness on people (including Israel) in his justice or discipline to bring them to repentance? Doesn’t the “curse” come from God? (I like to distinguish between sin and the consequences of sin; Sin is the work of the devil, the curse and the consequences of sin are the work of God in His justice in a fallen world.)

YOUR CRITIQUES OF THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT:

• Q. Can you summarize your critiques of the charismatic movement? What things are you ‘ashamed' of that are done in the name of the Holy Spirit today in the Charismatic movement?
  • “While I am absolutely unashamed to be called a Pentecostal-Charismatic believer, I am terribly ashamed at many things that are done in the name of the Holy Spirit today, especially by leaders on ‘Christian’ TV.” —Authentic Fire

CRITIQUES OF CESSATIONISTS

• Q. What are your concerns about the beliefs of cessationists?
• Q. Cessationists say that the modern charismatic gifts have been downgraded from the NT versions. Do you agree or disagree?
  • Gift of Healing? (Was it instantaneous, visible?) (miracles meant to confirm that a prophet or Apostle was sent from God?)
  • Gift of Prophecy? (Fallible?)

THE NAR: MODERN GOVERNING OFFICES OF APOSTLE AND PROPHET
Q. I am aware that you take issue with the label “The New Apostolic Reformation,” or NAR. Can you explain your concerns and why you have pushed back against critics of the NAR?

• What aspects of NAR do you reject, or embrace, according to their definition?

Q. Your critics have a number of critiques of your practices in ministry. Do you think these are fair critiques?

1. 1. They say that that you have created a strawman definition of the NAR; you’ve portrayed it as a tightly networked global conspiracy that is working behind the scenes, but we’re defining it as a loosely organized network with similar overlapping ideas— mainly a dominionist movement which asserts that God is restoring the offices of Apostle and Prophet in church governance.
   • - (C. Peter Wagner observed this movement and named it NAR. Che Ahn affirms this label (NAR). But it has also been called INC, or Independent Network Christianity)
2. 2. Your critics also say that you tend to avoid addressing the content of their criticism by:
   1. Labelling them all “hyper-critics,” dishonest, using “destructive criticism.”
   2. When asked about certain false teachers, you commonly say that you don’t have time to know what they teach, but point to your personal relationship with them as evidence that they are brothers in Christ.
   3. The critics are the problem, and the false teachers are given a pass.

Q. Do you believe the Church should be GOVERNED by modern Apostles, and Prophets? Do you think they can bring new revelation? (Is this on par with Scripture?)

• - Do they function like Ché Ahn describes in his book, Modern Day Apostles?
  • - Have extraordinary authority
  • - They play a critical, key role in advancing & fulfilling the Great Commission
  • - Social transformation, heaven on Earth overcomes individual salvation.
• - Bill Hamon says modern prophets have the same anointing, authority, and ministry as the Old Testament prophets.

Q. Are you an Apostle? Are you a member of any Apostolic Networks?
- It appears you are a national council member of the USCAL in 2017: 


APOSTOLIC/PROPHETIC DECLARATIONS VS. BIBLICAL PRAYER
Q. In what sense do you believe in Apostolic or prophetic declarations?

• Is decreeing and declaring a Biblical model of prayer?

Prophetic Declarations:
Q. Some churches teach that we can speak things into existence, because we are made in God’s image, and therefore have the same power in our words as God did when He created the world. (Faith is more of a force or science in this sense). Do you agree with this teaching?
Apostolic Declarations:
Context: In his book, modern day Apostles, Che Ahn says that “Apostles have authority to wage warfare and make Apostolic decrees.” In 2020, Bill Johnson, Che Ahn, and some other Apostolic and prophetic leaders put this into practice by decreeing away the “spirit of racism” over the United States. They modeled their declarations after The Lord of Rings: Fellowship of the Ring film, where the wizard Gandalf defeats a demon (Balrog) by taking his staff and declaring, “You shall not pass!”

• “So as an apostolic team, with the authority that God has given to us, we decree and declare that racism will end, it's over, in the ecclesia from this night forward in Jesus' mighty name. Let's lift it up and bang it!... Repeat with us! Thou shall not pass!” - Che Ahn


• Q. Do you think modern Apostles and prophets should be modeling their declarations after Hollywood films, or examples of wizards/witchcraft?

REVIVAL:
Q. How do you define revival? How do you believe the Holy Spirit works in regeneration? Are you a synergist or a monergist?

• Is revival for Christians only? (Vs. An awakening). An individual thing, or a movement on a larger level (our country).
• Does the Spirit move apart from the preaching of the Word? You’ve referenced historical stories like where ships came into an area where revival was happening and God’s Spirit caused people to repent without the means of hearing the gospel, but just by being near a location that has a stronger presence of God.

Q. You’ve spoken at Light the Fire Again Conference in 2018. Can you tell me about the Toronto Blessing in the 1990’s, it’s impact on your life, and other ministries? How do you respond to some of the common critiques of Toronto (those who do not believe this was a move of God)?
Q. Tell me the Brownsville Revival (and your involvement).

• Q. How did this revival start? Was is planned or was it a genuine move of the Spirit?
• Q. Critics say the revival was planned and modeled after Toronto. In the Pensacola News Journal (11/19/97), the headline says “Pastors Orchestrated first revival.” How would you respond this this? The article makes the following claims based on watching the video of June 18, 1995 Father’s day sermon, and interviewing former church members:

• - “In the months before the revival: [Kilpatrick] talked persistently about bringing revival to Brownsville, and threatened to quit if the church did not accept the revival.”
• - “The Pastor’s wife, Brenda Kilpatrick and a number of Brownsville church officials travelled to Canada and observed revival crowd control techniques and prayer team methods at the phenomenally successful ongoing revival there, the Toronto Blessing.”
• - Kilpatrick showed the congregation a video of a Toronto blessing service, in which people fall to the floor, “slain in the spirit,” as they feel the Holy Spirit taking over them.”
• - “Kilpatrick has followers of evangelist Rodney Howard Browne attend a Brownsville service, where they functioned as an example of highly expressive worship.” (His followers manifested “holy laughter” and “hysterical convulsions” at Brownsville).

(During the 6/18/95 sermon, Steve is working hard get something to happen, prompting the people, telling them what they are going to experience before it happens, repeatedly asking people not to leave. The overall appearance is that man is in control of releasing or accepting God’s presence, not God. Do you think that is a fair assessment?

Q. During the Brownsville revival, you received a letter from a critic and read this letter while pretending to be a blind man on stage. It sounds like you believed that this critic was “blind” because all of his critiques points were the hallmarks of the Brownsville revival. Can you explain the context of this letter and your response to it?

IMPARTATION THEOLOGY
Q. Much of the stories behind the Toronto Blessing and the Brownsville Revival indicate a belief that anointings or “fire” can be transfered from person to person or “caught” (Catch the Fire). What do you believe about impartations and transferable anointings? Do you have any thoughts about the following critiques?

• 1. 1949 AOG paper rejected an overemphasis of:
  • “The overemphasis relative to imparting, identifying, bestowing or confirming of gifts by the laying on of hands and prophecy.”
  
  
  • 2. A Pentecostal pastor, Kenneth E. Lamb, explained how he believed this was unbiblical (quotes from 6/21/98 article in the Pensacola News Journal):

• • “The Holy Spirit Falls upon whom God sees fit” (not where a human imparts Him).
  • It makes Jesus a liar (John 14:6), because you “need a particular person as an intermediary.”
  • “It’s the first step into cultism. It sets up a particular human as the only way to God’s power...”
    • With repetitive prayer, “Now! Now! More Lord! Fire! Fire!” do you think it’s fair say that you believe that the Holy Spirit is released at the commands of people who pray in this way? Isn’t this treating the Spirit more like a force that we can control?

Q. What is a Baptism of Fire?

• Is it biblical to yell “Fire!” in prayer?

MANIFESTATIONS OF THE SPIRIT
Q. Mike Bickle has said that in his experience, 80% of Holy Spirit manifestations are not real, 20% are real. “It’s a learned behavior that doesn’t take the Holy Spirit to do it.” Do you agree with his assessment? How do you discern what is a biblical manifestation of the Holy Spirit?

Q. Do you believe that being “Slain in the Spirit” is biblical?

• Why were you given the nickname “Knock ‘em Down Brown” in the Brownsville Revival?

Q. Do you believe that "drunk in the spirit behavior is Biblical?"

• 
  
• Q. Drunk to the point of not being able to speak, preach? Why would the Holy Spirit shut up his Word?
  
• 
  
• Q. In Scripture, demons manifest by making someone convulse (Mark 1:26), roll around (Mark 9:20), scream (Luke 9:39), slamming people to the ground (Luke 9:42), etc. Do you find it troubling that many of this same behavior is attributed to the Holy Spirit?
• 
  
• Q. Do you think that the fruit of the Spirit being self-control (sound mind, discipline) is a good way to judge manifestations?

Q. Do you believe that those who uncomfortable with these manifestations, have an anti-Christ spirit? (Are they opposed to Christ or God in any way?)

DISCERNING FALSE TEACHING AND TEACHERS
Q. Do false teachers exist? What would it take for you to publicly name someone a false teacher, and ask your listeners to avoid them (Romans 16:17-18)?
Q. Tell me about your investigation into Todd Bentley. What did you conclude?
Q. Why do you believe Todd Bentley is supernaturally gifted by God?

• “We love Todd and believe that he has been supernaturally gifted by God, and our highest joy would be to see Todd coming before God and the community of believers in humility and repentance, openly desiring help to get his life fully healed and surrendered to Jesus. Sadly, we see no signs of true, lasting repentance. Instead, we see a steady pattern of compromised behavior, including credible accusations of adultery, sexting (including the exchanging of nude pictures or videos), vulgar language, and substance abuse.” https://t.co/aY4pIDcvYq

Q. Here’s a pattern that I see in hyper-charismatic circles. There could be a person who is apparently supernaturally gifted by God in healing or prophecy (Ex: William Branham), but they teach false doctrine, and are living in an unrepentant immoral lifestyle. Yet it seems like some charismatics can’t put this person into the category of a “false teacher” simply because of their apparent supernatural gifting by the Holy Spirit. It’s as if they have no category for signs and wonders that are either false or demonic in origin. I think the same applies to Todd Bentley. Since Todd has refused repent of his immoral lifestyle, and since he has not been able to provide documentation of healings or miracles, I believe he has shown the fruit of being a wolf in sheep’s clothing (false teacher or false prophet). I don’t think it’s hard to conclude that the Holy Spirit is not working through him. Have you ever considered the possibility that the signs and wonders that Todd has been operating in are from a different spirit, and not empowered by the Holy Spirit?

• (Matthew 24:24) speaks of false Christs who perform great signs and wonders. Are they operating in the gifts of the Holy Spirit or another spirit?
• In Matthew 7:21, there are many who call Jesus “Lord Lord,” claim to operate in the gifts of the Spirit, yet Christ says “I never knew you.” (they were never born again). Does the Holy Spirit give gifts to non-believers? Or are these works done through another spirit?

Q. Many of your critics are concerned that you associate with, promote, endorse, and are friends with false teachers and false prophets (Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland) or people who promote false teaching (Sid Roth). Are you aware of that criticism?
Q. Your response to this criticism has typically been offense that anyone would damn your friends to hell. You point to your personal relationship with these teachers as evidence that they are sincere and know the Lord (”Sid Roth is genuine brother who loves the Lord”), but you also claim you don’t have time to examine all of what they teach.

• I know you get offended when someone calls your friends “charlatans” or “hucksters” because that implies that they know they are lying, and are putting on an act. I’ll take your word that Sid Roth (or any false teacher) appear sincere, likable, or appear to genuinely love the Lord. But do you think that someone like Sid could be sincere, but deceived (or sincerely wrong)? Could he be like the person in Matthew 7:21-23 that emphatically calls Christ “Lord” but is a false convert?
  • - 2 Tim 3:13 talks about people who are “deceiving and being deceived.”
    • - “But evil people and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”
• Q. Do you believe that the appearance of sincerity overrides the Biblical marks of a false teacher or false prophet? How can you trust your subjective ability to see into their hearts, over the fruit of what they teach and promote publicly?

FALLIBLE PROPHECY & FALSE PROPHETS
Q. Why did you feel it necessary to help create the Prophetic Standards Statement?
Context: https://propheticstandards.com/

• WE REJECT the notion that a contemporary prophetic word is on the same level of inspiration or authority as Scripture or that God always speaks inerrantly through prophets today, since the Bible says we only know in part and prophesy in part (1 Cor. 13:9). It is the written Word alone that can lay claim to being “the Word of God” (2 Tim. 3:16); prophecies, at best, are “a word from the Lord,” to be tested by the Word of God.
  Finally, while we believe in holding prophets accountable for their words, in accordance with the Scriptures, we do not believe that a sincere prophet who delivers an inaccurate message is therefore a false prophet. Instead, as Jesus explained, and as the Old Testament emphasized, false prophets are wolves in sheep’s clothing, in contrast to true believers who might speak inaccurately (see Matt. 7:15-20; Jer. 23:9-40; Ezek. 13:23). Thus a false prophet is someone who operates under a false spirit masquerading as the Holy Spirit.

Q. How do you define a false prophet? Do you believe that the standard of Deut. 18:20-22 does not apply to testing New Testament prophets?
Q. In Exodus 20:7 the 3rd commandment says that we shall not take the Lord’s name in vain (you shall not carry the Lord’s name into falsehood, or vanity). Do you believe that giving a false prophecy breaks this commandment?

• If yes, how does the New Testament make this no longer an egregious sin?

Q. The wording of this statement seems to suggest that God can speak in error through prophets today. It places the error on God, rather than man, which conflicts with an essential attribute of God— that He is Truth (Titus 1:2)

• “WE REJECT the notion... that God always speaks inerrantly through prophets today,”
  • (Opposite: “We accept the notion that God sometimes speaks errantly through prophets today.”)

Q. What Scriptures talk about sincerity, or good intentions as a measure to test false prophets?

• “We do not believe that a sincere prophet who delivers an inaccurate message is therefore a false prophet.”

KENOTIC CHRISTOLOGY
Q. Is it wrong to say, “Jesus emptied Himself of all divinity?” According to Philippians 2:5-8, what does it mean that Jesus emptied Himself?
Q. Todd White has publicly stated that you have helped to correct his language when it comes to the topic of the kenosis— Christ emptying Himself. Can you explain why you did this?

• Todd White’s previous language: 
  • “Jesus wasn't born into this world to be God.”
  • “He wasn't here as God.”
  • "He had to lay aside all divinity— every bit of it"
  • “He had to lay fully God aside.”
  • “He called himself the Son of Man.” (Not the Son of God)
  • “If he came as God, he wouldn't have to be anointed.”
  • “He didn't live his sinless life as God.”
  • “He didn't die on the cross as God.”
  • “He didn't defeat the devil as God.”
  • Todd’s Change: “He had to let go of his divinitive rights to act it out as God.”

Q. Do you think Todd White should be teaching a school when he has errors in his Christology? Do you consider this a first-tier, essential issue?
Q. Certain men have taken this teaching to the conclusion that we (as Holy Spirit-filled believers) are “on par with Jesus,” or should be duplicating Jesus’s works in the following ways:

• All Christians are mandated to perform miracles, even greater miracles than Jesus.
• “Jesus didn’t do His miracles to prove that he was the Messiah. He didn’t do his miracles to prove that He could, He did His miracles to prove that we could.”
• We (as born-again humans) could have accomplished what Jesus did on the cross, had we had the same knowledge, and sinless life as Jesus.

PROSPERITY GOSPEL:
Q. How would you define the prosperity gospel? What aspects do you disagree or agree with?

• Q. Do you believe that it is always God’s will to heal people now in this life)?

NEW AGE PRACTICES
Q. Are you concerned with New Age practices infiltrating the Church through charismatic practices?

• “Charismatic Christianity without the cross, is new age witchcraft.” Do you agree?


• Q. You were involved in investigating Christalignment (Jenny Hodge), the ministry that practices “Destiny Card Reading” (for words of knowledge). You couldn’t endorse their methods. Can you explain why?
  - Bethel’s Theresa Dedmon also uses Destiny cards: 
  - Bethel promotes undercover evangelism at psychic fairs, where they hide Christian language/truth (”The Spirit of Creation”): 
  - Encounter evangelism: Evangelism that does not include these truths communicated: Christ Crucified. Repentance, forgiveness of sins (Ex: all the Darren Wilson documentaries).
  
  
  
  FINAL PLEA TO ‘HYPER-CRITICS’?
  Q. Your plea to the hyper-critics. You’ve noticed a pattern of bearing false witness against charismatics. Explain.

---

​Dr. Brown graciously agreed to give me extra time in the interview if needed (and he did), but he responded to my questions with surprise and a number of concerns. He was concerned about the questions related to the Brownsville revival being “planned” (there are local Pensacola newspaper articles caliming this). He was also not expecting to answer questions about Todd White, thinking that these issues were not directly related to “the alleged NAR”. He asked me to kindly explain my reasoning for these questions:

 ​“…can you tell me honestly, before the Lord, why you are inviting my involvement? Will there really be an opportunity for me to present the truth clearly in a context that will not be prejudiced against it out of the gate?” - Dr. Brown

​In my followup email, I explained some of the following points:

​“First, while I am focusing on NAR, this is also a film about the Holy Spirit and sometimes there are topics that branch outside of topic of modern Apostles and Prophets.” -Brandon

​The topic of “revival and revivalism” is outside of the topic of “modern Apostles and Prophets,” but is still a huge emphasis in this movement. I explained my background again and connections to the Toronto Blessing, and Rodney Howard Browne’s laughing revival. I also knew that the Brownsville revival was very influenced by the Toronto Blessing, and wanting to see that same move of God happen there in Florida. I found a number news articles detailing some man-centered “planning” that occurred, which lead to the start of this revival. I explained:

​“I have no context for what happened at Brownsville, other than I know it came shortly after Toronto. I think what the newspaper was describing was not necessarily “planning” (even though it says that in the headline) but having a group of people (hungry for God) hearing about a revival elsewhere (Toronto), seeing the manifestations in that, and wanting to prep their church for the same thing.” -Brandon

​The reason I had questions related Todd White was in connection to this false kenotic christology teaching:

“The Todd White question is connected to my first American Gospel film. We explained the kenotic christology issue (because I consider it one of those first tier issues that is common in circles like Bethel, etc.). Todd responded to the AG film a few times, and at one point said he “repented for not preaching the full gospel.” (then he kind of recanted his repentance, and said we took his teaching out of context, but simultaneously admitted that you were helping him change his language). I would just like your perspective on this, and how you would teach a Biblical view of Christ’s kenosis (this is all connected to the teaching that all believers can do the same and greater miracles as Jesus— as if the miracles are merely examples for us to follow). I want to explore the idea of what it means to follow Christ vs. duplicate Christ. If you aren’t comfortable talking about your help with Todd, we can just focus on the kenosis.” -Brandon

Notice how I pinpointed that Todd White had publicly said that Dr. Brown had helped him changed his language on his biggest error (ontological kenotic christology), where Todd essentially says thing like, “Jesus wasn’t here as God” or “Jesus emptied himself of all divinity…”

​The question that I wrote for this was:

​Q. Do you think Todd White should be teaching a school when he has errors in his Christology? Do you consider this a first-tier, essential issue?

Dr. Brown informed me that he preferred to NOT talk about Todd directly (or answer this question), but was happy to speak about his view of the kenosis (Christ emptying himself) in general. My original intention here was to get Dr. Brown to “change his mind” or “repent” of this specific issue, because I think it’s a serious error to allow someone who has preached heresy to first, deny it publicly, but then help them change/correct their language behind the scenes; Brown should have had a serious conversation with Todd about his qualifications in teaching, and having his own school (LCU) to teach others. But Brown declined to speak about this, so that discussion never happened.
​
Finally, I explained my goals and motives, and offered him the chance to watch “AG2: Christ Crucified” if he hadn't already:

• “I’ve been honest with you since my first email, explaining that we disagree in a lot of areas related to charismatic theology (I also think we may agree in a lot of areas too). My goal is to not make this film become a Strange Fire 2.0. I want more charismatic perspectives to be heard from someone in the continuatonist group, and you are one of the few people who respond to charismatic critics. I will do my best to allow you to present your understanding of Scripture clearly, but that will not completely eliminate my bias (I have interviewed people like Justin Peters, Chris Rosebrough, Phil Johnson, etc. which is why I’m asking questions that sound like they are coming from people like them).
  *If you’d like an example of how I edited people I disagree with, I can send you a screener link to "American Gospel: Christ Crucified” if you’d like. Here’s Bart Campolo’s video again, explaining his experience: https://www.watchagtv.com/videos/campolo-recommend*
  I want to be honest and fair, and glorify Christ with this project. Part of that will happen by exposing false teaching and practices that I have seen hurt people in my own life (by comparing to the truths of Scripture)…” (personal info removed)
  “Thanks for being willing to extend our time together a bit. Let me know if this clears any confusion up.”
  
  ​-Brandon
  

The Agreement
Leading up to our interview, Dr. Brown wanted to solidify our agreement. He expressed the following points:

​“To be sure that we’re all comfortable and get to speak and record freely, it will be important to me to have specific language in our agreement that will allow you to use our interviews only based on my final approval. This would include seeing the full context in which I am quoted at any point in the series, along with any footage in which others mention me by name. Also, I’d like to have full, unedited copies of our interviews NOT for public distribution in any form but rather for my own records.”

​I responded with the following points:

1. I will provide you with the full unedited interview for your reference (not for public distribution in any form).
2. I will not be able to use your interview in the series until you review the project (how you are edited among others), approve of it, and sign your appearance release. If you have any issues, I am willing to fix them (by allowing you to respond with further commentary, etc.), or accepting that you no longer wish to be involved with the project.
3. I cannot use your video in a trailer without your approval.

​This language in our emails was used as the basis of our agreement. In sum, Dr. Brown knew the questions leading up to the interview, and thus, the nature of the topics in the docuseries. I tried to explain my intentions with whatever concerns that he had. 

The Interview
It’s hard for me to remember all the details of my time together with Dr. Brown, but I think the interview went very well, and our conversation was very friendly. Our conversation did have points where I challenged Dr. Brown or questioned some of his beliefs or practices, as I stated in my initial email (he also did the same thing in my direction on the topic of discernment and hyper-criticism). A number of the questions that I asked were related to serious concerns that people had over Dr Brown’s past associations (Benny Hinn, Sid Roth), his refusal to mark someone like Kenneth Copeland as a false teacher, and what appears to be a pattern of downplaying hyper-charismatic errors, while elevating the sins of “hyper-critics” to an equal level of error. I also believe I pushed back a bit on his perspective on God’s will and healing. We also discussed his denial of the existence of NAR, and his alleged participation in an apostolic leadership network (USCAL) which has used the “New Apostolic Reformation” language in the past on their website.

​Another thing that stood out in our interview is that I asked a question related to the prophetic standards statement, which said:

​“we reject the notion that… God always speaks inerrantly through prophets today.”

​My problem with this statement is explained in my question here:

​The wording of this statement seems to suggest that God can speak in error through prophets today. It places the error on God, rather than man, which conflicts with an essential attribute of God— that He is Truth (Titus 1:2)
“WE REJECT the notion... that God always speaks inerrantly through prophets today,” (Opposite: “We accept the notion that God sometimes speaks errantly through prophets today.”)

Dr. Brown responded to this by thanking me for bringing this error to his attention, and he reaffirmed that he believes that God speak infallibly through prophets (who don't always hear infallibly). He also told me that he would get this language changed in the statement, which today, says the following: ​

“WE REJECT the notion that a contemporary prophetic word is on the same level of inspiration or authority as Scripture or that God’s inerrant speech is always communicated perfectly by prophets today…” https://propheticstandards.com/​

The Facebook Post
After our interview, I posted the following on our Facebook page:

​“We’re asking for your prayers for today’s AG3 interview today with Dr. Michael Brown. Like AG2, we are interviewing people we disagree with the hope of asking challenging questions and calling to repentance.”

​Immediately after this post, Dr. Brown emailed me with concerns about the language “calling to repentance” and was confused as to why I used that language in front of my audience, but had not clearly communicate that to him personally. He was concerned about the public responses to the post (hyper critical bad fruit) where people would think that I was suggesting that I thought he was a “heretic” needing to repent. That was not my intention. I don’t believe that Dr. Brown is a heretic through a denial of any essential gospel issue. However, as I’ve explained above and through the nature of the questions that were sent to him, it was clear that I had a number of concerns that I wanted to challenge or “change his mind” (repent) about.
​
​This is part of my initial response to him:

​“As far as the Facebook post, I’m happy to explain. From the beginning I made you aware that we had disagreements, and I intended to ask you questions and challenge some of your beliefs by having your consider Scripture, and to consider changing your mind, or beliefs about what Scripture teaches in certain areas (This is what I meant by repentance— not necessarily in the sense of a specific sin, but changing your mind about certain charismatic practices that we were discussing).”

​After more discussion on this, I edited my initial Facebook post to say the following:

• We’re asking for your prayers for today’s AG3 interview today with Dr. Michael Brown. Like AG2, we are interviewing people we disagree with the hope of asking challenging questions and calling to repentance.
  
  
• Update:
  Yesterday’s interview with Dr. Michael Brown went well. Thank you for your prayers. The goal of the interview was to present Dr. Brown with some challenging questions concerning certain hyper-charismatic doctrine and practices, with the goal of getting him to change his mind in light of Scripture. This is what we meant by “calling to repentance.” We want clarify that we do not think Dr. Brown is a wolf, or heretic, like some in the comments have suggested. He believes a Biblical gospel (please watch his debate with Brian Zahnd on penal substitution: https://youtu.be/T27av-RF2-Y). We do agree on quite a few things including the abuses of the prosperity gospel, but there are still some remaining disagreements especially in the areas of our understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit, and how we are to associate with teachers or prophets who may be deceived or deceiving others (2 Tim 3:13).
  
  
• A final take away from our interaction is the necessity of practicing loving and truthful discernment, and how to distinguish between first tier essential gospel error (heresy), and second-tier errors (which can still hurt people, but do not put someone outside the camp of Christianity).
  
  
• “The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.”
  — 2 Timothy 2:24-26

​This whole discussion culminated in Dr. Brown talking about this on his radio program back in February of 2022 in the episode titled, "The American Gospel, NAR, Hyper-Critics, and Me". He also asked me to post about this on our Facebook page (which you can read below):

​

• When I approach someone with an interview request with whom I disagree, I have a few goals:
  
  
  1. 1. Allow them to express their perspective in a fair and balanced way. If someone else may be critiquing their views, allow them a chance to defend their position. We believe that this is the best way to accurately demonstrate someone’s beliefs (allowing them to speak for themselves) vs. using fair use clips of their preaching (which have the potential of being taken out of context; even if they aren’t, people love to use that to dismiss any critique). To ensure fairness and trust, we allow them to review how we edited them in the film before they sign their appearance release. This is how we handled the interviews in AG2 with Bart Campolo, Tony Jones, and the Deconstructionist Podcast. See Bart Campolo’s explanation of this process here: https://www.watchagtv.com/americ.../videos/campolo-recommend
  2. 2. I want to ask tough or challenging questions. By challenging, I mean to push back against any beliefs or practices that are unbiblical, in the hope to get them to change their mind or repent of a specific practice or belief. If they do not, I at least have the ability to create a sharp contrast in the film between two opposing views, and I pray that perhaps the overall film will help them change their mind.
  The whole AG series is about comparing the “American Gospel” to Scripture. If what we believe about God, the gospel, etc. doesn’t align with what Scripture teaches, then I pray that the Lord will change your mind, by granting you repentance in that area. I pray the same thing for myself, (I don’t claim to be without error in my beliefs) knowing that when people are deceived, they don’t know it.
• In this video Dr. Michael Brown talks about my initial contact emails with him. Dr. Brown was surprised by the wording of last Monday’s Facebook post, particularly the phrase, “calling him to repentance” in light of my initial email to him (it came across to him as if I was communicating to our audience that he was a false teacher, which I did not intend). In this initial contact email with Dr. Brown I explain our disagreements, and that there would be challenging questions in the interview provided to him beforehand. Perhaps I could have been more clear in saying that I considered the purpose of these challenging questions to be that I wanted him to change his mind about certain doctrines and practices (repentance). In Dr. Brown’s case, we agree on gospel essentials, but have remaining disagreements about the work of the Holy Spirit, particularly in manifestations. We also discussed our differences in who we considered to be false teachers, and when one should “mark and avoid” (Romans 16:17-18), lest we participate in their wicked works:
• “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.” (2 John 1)
• As you can see from the email, I do not desire to create a Strange Fire 2.0 in the sense that only cessationists are featured. This approach typically gives some charismatics an excuse to dismiss anything that is critiqued because they believe “cessationists don’t believe in the work of the Holy Spirit.” (which is often said, but is not true). I believe that Dr. Brown agrees with many of our critiques of hyper-charismatic practices, but disagreements remain.
• Please pray for the editing process— that it would be done with integrity, and that final product would be glorifying to God.
  
  
  • -Brandon Kimber

TODAY
​Today, this whole issue still continues to come back up, and is used against me to attack my integrity (Again, I will address this more specifically later). Meanwhile, I still agree with what I said in February of 2022:

​“Perhaps I could have been more clear in saying that I considered the purpose of these challenging questions to be that I wanted him to change his mind about certain doctrines and practices (repentance).” 

​I did not intend to be deceptive in my communication with Dr. Brown, but that’s how it appeared to him. When you’re dealing with a huge project like this, communicating with multiple people, working through research and hundreds of hours of footage, in the midst of the responsibilities of life... mistakes happen.

​Looking back, I wish Dr. Brown would not have agreed to participate in the project so quickly. I think if he had watched the first two films, he may have concluded, “This is hyper-criticism, and I don’t want to participate.” In light of Dr. Brown’s recent decision to withdraw from the project, I still consider Dr. Brown a brother in Christ who is in error on certain issues. I appreciate his desire to help me see and turn from my own errors and blindspots in my faith, particularly in the world of online discernment. I would just hope that we all could view a “call to repentance” or “reformation” in our understanding of Scripture to be a loving act and not something to offended by.

Note: Dr. Brown recently did give us permission to post an unedited version of his interview, and roundtable discussions for the public to see (as long as they aren't part of the American Gospel: Spirit & Fire project). So if the interview questions intrigued you, you will be able to hear his answers (not every question was covered) in the future.