The other day Apprising Ministries brought to your attention that Francis Chan Declares “I Love Mike Bickle” Of IHOP. This occurred as Chan began his message during Session 8 on Monday, December 30 at the International House of Prayer (IHOP) Young Adult Conference 2013 One Thing.
As you can see for yourself in the video clip below, Chan begins by informing us that initially he really didn’t “know that much” about Mike Bickle and his IHOP organization.1 However, Chan reveals he began to do some research, “I kinda went on the Internet and started looking things up.”
So, now no one can argue that maybe Francis Chan wasn’t aware of IHOP or who Bickle is; because he then goes on quite enthusiastically to lavish praise upon IHOP and Bickle himself:
I go, man, there’s a lot of great things going on [at IHOP]. And today was the first time I ever met Mike Bickle. And, I love that guy. I do. And Mike knows—we talked about this—you know, there’s people who told me not to hang out with him.
Like, you know, words like “creepy” came up. And yet, I get to know this guy and I’m going, “Man, I love his heart. And I just want to publicly say I love Mike Bickle. (0:18-0:50)
This is sad, indeed. There’s really no way around the fact that this is an endorsement of Mike Bickle and IHOP, which becomes especially clear when Chan says, “I’m sure there’s some theological differences in there, somewhere; but, there’s so much we agree upon.” One wonders just what this might entail.
It needs to be understood that for Francis Chan to endorse Mike Bickle, telling us he loves his heart, is to also endorse Bickle’s warped theology that’s straight out of the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). If you didn’t know, the NAR is something which was dreamed up by “Apostle” C. Peter Wagner.2
Space doesn’t allow a detailed discussion so, for our purposes here, I’ll simply tell you that in The “New Apostolic” church movement we discover:
C. Peter Wagner states “I believe that the government of the church is finally coming into place and that is the, the scripture teaches in Eph. 2 that the foundation of the church is apostles and prophets” (CBN interview Jan.3, 2000)…
“ The second apostolic age began in the year 2001” “What’s important is that you’re the people of God out there, you’re representing the kingdom of God, and you know this, but nothing has happened because the government of the church has not come into place” (C. Peter Wagner Arise Prophetic Conference Gateway Church San Jose, CA 10/10/2004)…
C. Peter Wagner first labeled this Church movement “Post Denominationalism,” this term was dropped in January 1996 in favour of “New Apostolic reformation” “I needed a name … For a couple of years I experimented with ‘Post denominationalism’. The name I have settled on for the movement is the New Apostolic Reformation.” (C. Peter Wagner, The New Apostolic Churches 1998, p.18.)… (source)
Then in The Roots and Fruits of the New Apostolic Reformation Christian apologist Bob DeWaay adds that the NAR is merely the current version of the old Latter Rain movement. DeWaay brings us back around to C. Peter Wagner’s NAR fables as he explains:
At the very beginning of the 20th century a man named David Wesley Myland used the term “Latter Rain” to describe the Pentecostal revival that was going on. He allegorized Joel 2:23 that spoke of God blessing the agricultural harvest in Israel to create a theory of church history. In Israel’s agricultural cycles, there were the spring rains (early rain) and the fall rains (the latter rain).
Myland used this terminology and applied it to the Pentecost of Acts (early rain) and the one he claimed was again happening at Azusa Street and elsewhere (the latter rain). The key idea of these early Pentecostals was that the gift of tongues was being restored to the church and was going to issue forth into great power to evangelize the world.
But the Pentecostal movement was fraught with aberrations that soon arose—such as the Oneness doctrine that denied the Trinity. The thinking of early “Latter Rain” Pentecostals was that God was restoring the apostolic power of the early church. (source)
You should know that this is also the thinking of NAR teacher Mike Bickle as well; for you see, he was part of what came to be known as the Kansas City Prophets:
who brought grandiose claims that a “new breed” of super prophets were beginning to arrive on planet earth who would change the world forever. These so-called prophets were a group of men that coalesced around a church known as the Kansas City Fellowship, pastored by Mike Bickle, that attracted a following of other likeminded churches in that region.
They argued that God was spearheading a new revival from their churches, and that he was restoring the office of prophet. Just as other “prophets” we discussed in these pages, yesterday’s Kansas City stock could have it both ways. They could hear from God, and speak forth God’s words, prophesying of great events soon to transpire on planet earth.
And they could have flipped a coin as to whether what God allegedly told them would actually come true. Often they didn’t come true. Some of the main prophets and/or leaders in the movement included Paul Cain, Mike Bickle, Bob Jones, Rick Joyner, John Paul Jackson, Francis Frangipane, and others. (source)
As I get set to close this out, for now, I’ll remind you that Mike Bickle would adhere to most, if not all, of the heterodox and heretical notions outlined above;3 and in addition, he has been a leader in this Kansas City Prophets/Latter Rain/New Apostolic Reformation movement for years.
Francis Chan, a leading influence for the young, restless and reformed within the New Calvinism, has said he loves Mike Bickle; Chan tells us he knows Bickle’s heart, and there’s so much he is agreed upon with Mike Bickle and his cultic IHOP.4. And so we ask: Is Francis Chan really ok with this NAR mythology?
Finally, remember how we learned above that these prophet-leaders’ prophecies often don’t come true; well, below you’ll see NAR Apostle/Prophet Mike Bickle doing his best to deal with that fact. He’ll try and explain how a prophet doesn’t need to be labeled false if his prophecy doesn’t come true. Rather, says Bickle, “he just missed it.”
Sorry about that Mike Bickle, God said the standard is perfection; a supposed prophecy that doesn’t come true makes one a false prophet because a true prophet of God never misses it. It is written:
21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18: 21-22)
But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. (2 Peter 2:1)
And so in the end, we’re left with even more questions now that Francis Chan has so strongly endorsed false prophet Mike Bickle. For example, does Chan really think that God has somehow changed His mind and now He wants us to work in unity with these NAR dreamers who’re bringing in their destructive heresies?
- SANDY SIMPSON: THE NEW APOSTOLIC REFORMATION
- RICK WARREN ON MENTORS LIKE NAR’S C. PETER WAGNER
- AN EVALUATION OF WAYNE GRUDEM’S VIEW OF NT PROPHECY