@@ureasmith3049 Rubbish, Brown has spoken out against the excesses of Hinn many times, You just bore false testimony against Brown and need to repent publicly because you made a false public slander. 👎🏼
The problem is you can't equate Luther and a false teacher because Luther did not teach that the bible says we should do [insert the wrong thing that Luther did]. He wasn't being a false teacher. He was just a sinner like you and I.
@@Jonathan-tw4xm but CR is judging his actions based on historical context to justify what he said and did. Regardless of historical context, what Luther did was wrong according to scripture AND Luther used the biblical text to support his statements. We cannot pretend his actions and thoughts were divorced from his biblical understanding.
@beaberean3286 that's why the context matters he wasn't a false teacher he was a sinner like you and I. If you don't consider context you won't ever be wrong because you won't see why you are wrong.
Here are my issues. I will admit that I have not watched much of Michael Browns stuff, but what I have seen is concerning. When watching the round table, he was shown evidence of the blasphemy that Copeland and Hinn consistently speak, but would not rebuke them. He won’t call them out by name for their harmful teachings, and uses the “I haven’t watched their ministry” and “I don’t know their heart.” Lines to defend his reluctance to call them out publicly. However, when Chris posts a video to explain the perspective of Luther in his time in order to add further context to the discussion, while being careful to say that Luther was sinful. Brown is quick to publicly rebuke him, and makes plans to do a video on it. It reveals a double standard and shines a light on what he values most. Blasphemy and Spiritual abuse take a back seat to what he falsely perceives as Chris perpetuating antisemitism.
100% well said and articulated. He wants to go live with a debate now about Luther, BUT DOESNT WANT, to discuss anything about Roth or white, as they are his friends. And knows them personally. VERY VERY WEAK
Mr. Michael Brown’s favorite line is, “God hates unequal weights and measures.” But he himself is guilty of this as he has no problem exposing Martin Luther as he should, but hesitates to do the same when it comes to Sid Roth and Todd White because of his loyalty as a friend. There is a clear bias and a dislike for Martin Luther because of Luther’s hatred towards Jews. But the root of the problem is that Mr. Brown’s foundation is Jewish so he naturally would rebuke anyone opposed to his belief system. God is no respecter of person. If someone is in violation of the Word of God, it needs to be addressed no matter who they are and doing so is not condemning that individual to hell.
I had the EXACT same opinion of Michael Brown after watching the entire roundtable discussion. He appears to be an apostate(in my opinion)...straight out of the Book of Jude. He pulled the "anti-Semite" card, too...which is a low blow. He won't call out or rebuke people like Copeland, Hinn, Sid Roth, Todd White...which is SHOCKING. I find it ridiculous that he always brings up Martin Luther...who has been DEAD for CENTURIES!
@@hermangroenewald8751 This honestly sounds like sanctimonious name calling. It is possible to lovingly disagree. Go check out Mike Donehey’s book called Grace in the Gray
@@hermangroenewald8751 After grinding my teeth through four hours of that round table, I think Brown and Storm would rather talk theology than preachers. Short version of my opinion is Pastors should call out false teachers. All this nonsense has become UA-cam “stars” feuding with each other and taking pot shots. None of this productive conversation.
I find it amazing that MB can spend all this time on someone who lived 500 years ago, yet hasn't the time to research one single false teacher today, who defends the indefensible, who says he has been friends with Sid Roth for 40 years, hosted his shows twice, yet hasn't had the time to watch his show., yet knows everything Chris Rosebrough has said. That makes him either a hypocrite or a liar.
Judith that is a horrible thing to say about a man of God. Dr. Brown is a Jew and a Theologian so it makes sense that he has studied Martin Luther. You haven't even met the man and you are so quick to judge. May God shine His face on Dr. Brown and on his ministry. If he is blinded, then I pray God opens his eyes.
@@tammy9497 I am only saying what he has said many times. He always says he doesn't have time to check out false teachers like Benny Hinn, but he has time to have a go at anyone who does critique false teachers. How does he have time for that.
The same could be said in reverse towards those who defend luther so easily, and are so quick to condemn (I agree, heretics). This is what Dr Brown meant by unequal scales
@@Chupie77777 Luther was anti-Judaism, not anti-Semitic. NEVER did he claim to have a problem with Jewish people as an ethnicity. On the contrary, read his tract "That Jesus Christ was born a Jew." It is very much a positive commentary on Jews as an ethnicity. Luther abhorred their theology, just like he did the theology of the anabaptists and the Papacy. It was NOT an ethnic issue.
@@Outrider74 it doesn't discount the sinfulness of his conclusions, or the comments he made about them. Christians pray for those who persecute them. Paul knew very well where the Jews fell short, yet in the beginning of Romans 9, he said he'd rather be cut off from Christ if it would mean their salvation. Jesus knows very well what their sins are/were, and yet while He was being crucified, He prayed to the Father for their forgiveness. Stephen was being stoned to death by the Jews, and yet He prayed to the Lord that He wouldn't hold this sin against them, *while* he was being murdered by them. Compare this to Luther's statements on the Jews. Whether it was ethnicity or theology, it was not a Christian attitude. I'm not defending Benny Hinn's doctrines, but as far as I know, he's never called for the murder of a single person in the Name of God. The whole point is there are unequal scales being used, not whether or not Martin Luther was a racists. I'm moreso defending Dr. Brown than anyone else. Idk much about Martin Luther or Benny Hinn, but I see Christians that have plaques with Martin Luther's name on it, or wearing shirts with his face on it. I hear a lot of praise for Martin Luther, like there's even a denomination named after him, and his sins regarding his attitude towards the Jews does seem to be kind of swept under the rug, *especially* when you compare them with how Christians are quick to condemn and throw Benny Hinn out of the kingdom. To be clear, in my heart, I'm confident that Benny Hinn is a false teacher and should sell everything his ministry owns to give to the poor and sick, and step down from teaching for the rest of his life. He should absolutely be sitting under the teaching and discipleship of a mature Christian. And also to be clear, God for sure used Martin Luther for great things in the kingdom. The point is, when it is someone we admire, we tend to defend them and undermine their sins, all the while being quick to condemn and rebuke someone we don't admire. I'm guilty of this too. Like, I tend to be more harsh with people who are cessatiomist or calvinistic, and less harsh with those who aren't. That's a sin in my heart and attitude that I need to repent of. Ultimately, we shouldn't be using unequal scales. We should genuinely care more about being pleasing to God rather than sticking up for our tribe while berating another. And if there is rebuke that needs to be given, even to our enemies, it should be done with a genuine attitude of love, and not use "telling the truth is a form of love" as an excuse to berate and hate someone
How about the unequal scales the brother Brown use in judging between the Israelis and the Palestinians? Israel is an openly anti-Christ nation and government. So are the Muslim Palestinian governments. There are many Palestinians who are Christians. Brother Brown is emotionally locked into ethnic idolatry. He avoids the Christian Palestinians altogether and invests his affections on the rabbinic Jews in Israel as if they are the chosen under the New Covenant. When it comes to evaluating between the anti-Christian Israelis and the anti-Christian Muslims, Brown's scales are 100% defective. @@Chupie77777
Soooo... He still can't find the time to watch one show of his friend of 4 decades (Sid Roth) or any false teacher to see if what people are saying is true, but he has time for this?
@@marclaclear6628 perhaps not deflect attention to a guy who has been dead for almost 500 years at the expense of dealing with a current and massive issue at hand - widespread hypercharismatic abuses by false teachers who he has become the leading apologist and cover for. This is merely a digression, a deflection, and a distraction from the fact that he is unwilling to do ANY due diligence in fact finding or research because the results would confirm what Justin Peters and Jim Osman said all along. Edit: for typo
@@marclaclear6628Perhaps not deflect attention to a guy who has been dead for almost 500 years at the expense of addressing the issue that was at hand - the abuses of hypercharismatic false teachers of whom he has become the leading apologist for. This was merely a digression, deflection, and distraction from the fact that MB refuses to invest any time or do any due diligence in fact finding or research because the results would prove what Justin & Jim said all along.
@@Foreknown_ "Perhaps not deflect attention to a guy who has been dead for almost 500 years at the expense of addressing the issue that was at hand - the abuses of hypercharismatic false teachers of whom he has become the leading apologist for." That is not a very charitable representation of what happened in that discussion. Brown did say that if what Justin Peters said about Hinn were accurate then Hinn is not a brother. What more do you expect him to do? Justin Peters has a long history of lying about charismatics and word of faith. I wouldn't trust him further than I could throw him. But Brown brought up Martin Luther after all of that was addressed. He asked if Martin Luther was a false teacher because of his bad fruit. Perfectly legitimate question to illustrate the hypocrisy. But Brown was probably trying to make them rethink their position, knowing him. "This was merely a digression, deflection, and distraction from the fact that MB refuses to invest any time or do any due diligence in fact finding or research because the results would prove what Justin & Jim said all along." That isn't Brown's job. I know that's the only reason anybody knows Justin Peters' name though. He should examine his false teaching of Calvinism. Calvinism has done way more harm to the Gospel than any of these charismatic abuses he keeps harping on.
Right. The irony is that he started the video talking about unequal weights and measures and happily calls out people not in his camp but won't call out people in his own camp.
@@G.H._bunnywow, you guys are something. He does call them out. Have you read any of his books? He just hesitant to call them false teachers. He's NOT calling Luther a false teacher, his point is simply if you call for example Hinn a false teacher, by same measure you should call Luther a false teacher. But first, you have unequal measures, so you wouldn't do that. And second, you have poor comprehension skills, so you don't even get the point he's trying to make.
Dr Brown I disagree about your interpretation of Pastor Rosebrough's video. It wasn't anti- Semitic and if someone finds reason in it to hate the Jewish people then they were already going to with or without his video.
@@lisfong CR is judging his actions based on historical context to justify what he said and did. Regardless of historical context, what Luther did was wrong according to scripture AND Luther used the biblical text to support his statements. We cannot pretend his actions and thoughts were divorced from his biblical understanding.
Luther attacked Jews not on racial ground, but on theological ground. As if it is okay to attack Jews physically on theological ground. That is intentionally or unintentionally giving a new ground to support antisemitism
I don't get it when Dr. Brown says what Luther did was far more destructive than Copeland, Hinn etc. If these guys are preaching a false gospel message and sheparding people to hell how is that not as bad as what Luther did?
All I can say is Pastor Chris Rosebrough has helped me and my daughter so much. We have learned discernment and what the true gospel means. We went to a Vineyard church for years and they were wonderful and lovely and that time was blessed but we weren’t taught the true gospel or about repentance, at all. It was more focused on gifts and signs and wonders and self. It was an empty seven years. Once we learned the full truth, thanks to watching Pastor Chris Rosebrough’s videos, where he explains how false teachers twist scripture and lead people astray, we were set free! I didn’t know what being born-again really meant or that we are born sinners. I was once a slave to sin but I’m not anymore! Burdens and sins have been lifted off. Praise the Lord! Thank you, Pastor Chris Rosebrough. And I pray for Dr. Michael Brown. He seems like he wants to get it right for the Kingdom and I can appreciate that. I just know, from experience, how detrimental it is listening to teachers who twist scripture. God bless.
Martin Luther, despite his glaring flaws, was used mightily by the Lord to spark the greatest spiritual awakening since Pentecost in Acts 2. It is important that the church keep its eyes fixated on the Author and Finisher of our faith; Jesus Christ.
@@marclaclear6628 Yes. But the preachers Dr. Michael Brown is willing to defend (Not a hater, i like the guy) distort the gospel so much that even the knowledge many people get o "Jesus" might just be a stumbling block to when they hear the actual gospel. Them who arent against us are with us, but we should really rethink how we define "with us". I dont think prechers of a different "gospel" are "with us"
It's amazing how Michael Brown will drive home the sins of Martin Luther to now belittle his blatant acceptance of false teachers today. He wants everyone to admit that Martin Luther isn't even a Christian, but will he denounce Sid Roth as a heretic for his crazy teaching and rantings. Chris was very kind to Brown, but Brown needs to be told that no one has to bow down to his "outrage" in order for him to denounce false teachers (and many of their followers) that violate Romans 16:17-18, 1 Timothy 6:3-5, 2 Timothy 4:3-4, 2 Peter 2, and Jude every chance they get. This man is about his own sense of "righteousness" and I hope more people blatantly call him out. (And by the way, this is the same man who said you can leave the Christian faith while being challenged with it from John 10:28-30.)
Well Dr Michael Brown wants to zero into Martin Luther but never addresses the behavior and racial views and actions of the fathers of the Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God/Church of God denominations that held those beliefs all the way to mid to late 19th Century? I think we need to address both if your going to point one out.
He seems to frequently refute these claims, that he’s not doing enough to call out the error, by saying, “I written extensively on blah, blah, blah…” I think he realizes he’d be immediately ostracized out of the charismatic world if he really dissected Pentecostal roots and theology errors. He usually seems to take the “I give them the benefit of the doubt,” when really hard pressed on specifics. That’s why we still have “Skittles from Heaven” type content coming from Sid Roth.
I find it incredible that Brown says he “doesn’t watch Christian TV”; so that means he’s never seen Sid Roths show. Really? He’s been friends with Sid 40 years, even hosted the show. If he hears what critics like Justin Peters says about the show, you’d think he’d want to go see for himself.
EXACTLY! Hagge has taught that Salvation was NOT for the Jews in his book- 2 Salvations one for Jews another for Gentiles. Like it or not that is heretical. There is only One salvation for Jews and Gentile. The 12 Disciples were to take the gospel to the Jews . Apostle Paul was to take the Gospel to the Gentiles ( us the hated pagans) its stsrts in Acts but one must read the entire book in context. But Hagge is WoF.
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU! Great exchange. Thank you CB for calling in and identifying yourself. DMB thank you for being gracious with hearing out CB and responding so respectfully.
Why are we talking about Luther's antisemitism? Michel Brown says that it calls into question his salvation and therefore his theology. Chris Rosebrough cannot accept the question of his salvation because the taint on his theology is not an acceptable conclusion. Cannot the theology be separated from Luther's personal salvific state? For example, Balaam, whose Messianic prophecy is one of the most beautiful in the Old Testament. Yet the New Testament rightfully uses Balaam as an example of apostasy and does so without any taint on the Messianic prophecy. I have no idea as to Luther's salvific state. Only God knows. However, I do know that the reformation in which he was a prime actor was a Divine work.
Can we just say we can't read any of their hearts (Luther, Copeland, Hinn, etc), and be able to call out their error without condemning them to flames?
Luther taught the Gospel but as reformers they were the very beginning the long road from the bondage of a 1000 years of false doctrine toward a clearer understanding. Hinn and Copeland with all the foundations of the reformers have instead rejected a lot of sound doctrine in favor of a gnostic teaching with unsound teaching of scripture and then as a consequence they profited from the sick and mentally unstable in which some have died because of the poor teachings. After 500 years of sound doctrine being taught, Hinn and Copeland rejected it for cult like scripture twisting theology that gained them popularity and richness. With information technology that we have today, they are without excuse, and they are only 2 men of a multitude. These 2 men along with a great many others all claim to be getting special revelations from God that produced their false doctrines they teach, Luther never claimed to be hearing special revelation from God in his imagination as do all the false prophets today do. Luther cannot be accused of taking Gods Holy name in vain. breaking the 3rd commandment. Luther's sin on this basis can be categorized as ignorance but it is still an atrocious sin. Hinn, Copeland and all the others in the charismatic church are charged with breaking the 3rd commandment. This contains a certain judgment of eternal damnation, yet no one wants to talk about this because they love gnostic/mystic beliefs whereby they speak from their own vain imaginations claiming it is of God bring damnations to hundreds of millions who follow the same teaching.
Luther preached against the laws of God, and the Bible teaches in Deuteronomy and Isaiah that whoever does so is a liar. The whole "we don't know their hearts" talk is the lazy man's way of saying they don't want hear the truth. Christ said to look at the fruits. A person will show who they are by their actions, their words, and in those men's cases, their theology. Protestantism was based on hating Jews, God's laws, and God's government.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779Protestantism was based on hating Jews? Have not most people? Look at the history of the Catholic church for example! The Vatican supported Hitler to name one occasion. Luther was frustrated by the Jews. He taught a very strong form of nationalism in a similar vain to Islam but not quite as bad as Islam and i don't see he was worse than many of the former Popes and the Catholic church atrocities as well as how they twisted scripture to gain more power and riches. Luther was not trying to twist scripture to gain power and riches for himself. We look at the fruits of Hinn and Copeland for example. They both teach heresy to serve their greed and fame and they both claim God speaks to them and through them personally. Luther spoke often from himself and prepared to sacrifi9ce his life for the future benefit of the church. He was at the beginning of the reformation and ahead of his time albeit we, 500 years later have the benefit of 500 years of debate and information. We are in a far better position to make an informed opinion than Luther could. Luther if alive today would likely think very differently yet possibly remain firm upon a Government on earth as it is in heaven ran by Christ and Christ alone.
I totally agree that Luther’s antisemitism was reprehensible and he needed repentance “to be right with God”, but Michael brown blaming Luther for the Nazis murder of millions of Jews is just silly .
Thanks for sharing AGTV. I enjoyed the recent round table with Brown, Storms, Peters and Osman. I’ve enjoyed hearing from the charismatic side and them providing a defence and how they view things.
To those who are easily intimidated? Or maybe they have something to hide and there is some truth to the accusation. A man/woman who isn't truly Anti-Semitic will let cheap judgments roll off their back. Only good faith actors apply for honest debate.
@@machtnichtsseimann What Luther can only be regarded as anti-semitic. At the very least, what Luther said was used by Nazis to convince the regular folks that the Jews were a problem.
The use of racism and antisemetism work the same way. It's always interesting to see. And Dr. Brown knows Chris was not saying either form of antisemetism were okay, he was simply explaining the misapplication of Luther influence on the Nahzees, due to the difference in foundations. He only presented information. Dr. Brown's emotional response is eerily similar to Ben Shapiro's over Kanye West's rant. I guess birds fly south for the winter.
@@alexisdaniels8901 It's completely ignored today that Martin Luther was initially more benevolent to Jews than the average Catholics of his era. But he found some more pesky facts later and that was what outraged him. The National Socialist didn't need 'Luther's influence', they had first hand experiences themselves. And were probably astonished how that coincided with experiences during other ages. Judaism is a counter design against Christianity. They are not 'God's chosen people' and they have to come into Christ like anybody else.
Luther wasn't under the delusion that his contemporary Hebrews had a different path than Christ to be accepted and sacrificed to God. When the Jews aligned themselves with the anabaptists to burn, loot, kill papists... Luther chose the other side.
Not only that but someone who died centuries before he was even born. Yet he goes into a dither if anyone who has never met Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland etc dares to question whether they are Christian.
Whenever Osman and Peters cite blatant examples of a charismatics false teaching the only comeback Brown comes up with is "I know this man. He is a humble nice moral man...." blah blah blah but refuses to address the false teaching itself right after dogmatically insisting that Luther was one of the worst people who even existed. What I said is exactly what he is doing. Oh and look at that Dr Brown just said "And whats remarkable to me...." after Storms poorly defends Mike Bickle-lest Peters or Osman have a chance to refute Storms poor defense-I wonder if he's gonna say something about Luther. Oh yep there he goes. Big surrpise
@@MackLeeGreen In the case of Kevin Zadai, he always says ''my son in law is friends with him and speaks highly of him". He uses that to justify the bizarre unbiblical teachings and false prophecies and even to wtite the foreword to Kevin's book.
@@e.m.8094 no, he is not missing out on anything. Just google "fire fire fire" and michael brown. The guy has been a false teacher for 25+ years. Claims God has spoken to him, claims he can speak in tongues, and defends nearly every false teacher of note. Are you sure you are even a Christian? Why not flee to Jesus Christ through faith alone, by grace alone, in Him alone and stop listening to false teachers.
I admit I was troubled by something in the round table. I recently watched a documentary on the Nuremberg Trials after WW2 and to a man, every german soldier kept saying “I was only following orders.” Despite that they were still held accountable for their actions towards the Jews. I was reminded of that every time Dr Brown and Sam Storms said “If those things are true then they are false teachers.” The issue is they repeatedly said they never watched more than one Sid Roth show or Hinn program or even planned to therefore they couldn’t say they were false teachers or even wolves. That was like a magic formula that absolved them of any accountability for giving the heretics shade. Hinn etc are sending people to hell on a handrail but these two men are so caring and careful they don’t want to call them wolves despite being given proofs. To them “sending an email ” is good enough. What about caring for those they are victimizing and robbing everyday and in some cases sexually abusing? Just sayin 🤔
Correct me if I'm wrong, but (1) would a genuine anti-Semite even follow Jesus as Luther did? (2) Would a genuine anti-Semite even consider evangelizing the Jews? Luther did both, right? Why would he of had if he was genuinely an anti-Semite?
Luther followed his own ideas of who Christ was. The Christ that actually exists in the Bible consistently preached the eternal authority of the Law and the Prophets. The false Christ Luther preached opposed the authority of the Law and the Prophets. Luther's hatred for God's laws and contemptuously denouncing them as "Jewish customs" Christ supposedly abolished reveals how he tried to disguise his hatred of Jews with Christian language.
I read a quote of Luther's saying to take the belongings of the Jews and give them to Jewish converts to Christianity. As horrific as that is, I have to wonder if true anti-s would want Jews in their religion. Same question as you, I guess.
@theeternalsbeliever1779 Luther followed the Christ whom he believed in his own words was "... God and man in one person. He has neither sinned nor died, and He is not condemned; His righteousness, life, and salvation are unconquerable, eternal, omnipotent." Of his Christian experience, Luther stated, "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know one who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!" Concerning the Law, in his the Freedom of the Christian Luther wrote, “For the Law has its terminus defining how far it is to go and what it is to achieve, namely, to terrify the impenitent with the wrath and displeasure of God and drive them to Christ.” Luther held the prophets in such high regard that he wrote, "Know that no one can have indulged in the Holy Writers sufficiently, unless he has governed churches for a hundred years with the prophets, such as Elijah and Elisha, John the Baptist, Christ and the apostles... We are beggars: this is true." He also said, "[Our] plan is to follow the example of the prophets and the ancient fathers of the church, and to compose psalms...so that the Word of God may be among the people also in the form of music."
I think of all the sinful men God used in the old testament. When God called them to repentance they repented and mourned. I believe Luther would do likewise. When Copeland, Hinn and Osteen are called to repentance... they roll around in their cash and say "don't touch me or God will make you sick" -- See the difference? -- Now since Dr.Brown says Luther sinned... Is he willing to admit Copeland and Hinn are currently in sin? Me thinks not.
The whole problem with Michael brown’s comments is that he is taking the easy route of condemning someone’s sin who is long gone and refuses to condemn others who are committing horrific sins now which is happening right now in front of his eyes and this is something that he will have to give an account before Christ. The only one who is downplaying any sin right now is dr Michael brown for his charismatic friends like Sid Roth and Keneth Copeland who have destroyed so many lives with their actions.
9:07 "I don't think Luther was aware that what he was saying was sinful" What a terrible excuse. You can advocate killing innocent people as long as you arent aware its sinful?
Obviously that doesn't make it less of a sin but I bet if he was explained from scripture why it was wrong he'd repent. I hope you watch the short video on this channel that chris did on Martin Luther he explains it in more detail there. Also, remember that Luther is dead and not many people actually read church history but Benny Hinn is alive and very popular. Brown only brought this topic up to move away from that.
Hypocrisy??? Are you joking Dr. Brown? You who has constantly claimed that you don't know abut the NAR? You who supports Sid Roth and his nonsense? You who behaved as you did at Brownsville? Dr. Brown should address those issues before you attack others for their supposed hypocrisy! And how can you Dr. Brown state that you are prepared to sit with Chris Rosebrough and speak with him when you have refused to debate these issues in public with him in the past? Debate in public if you have the courage of your convictions!
@@e.m.8094 A generous offer from Pastor Rosebrough given the history of Brown''s refusal to debate with him in the past. The history of this is important but perhaps many are not aware.
There is a difference between having character flaws like a weakness for women and being an openly hostile racist who encouraged ppl to hate a certain group of ppl for no logical reason, especially as it pertains to the Jews. Someone who hates the Jews to the extent Luther did is not just suffering from a character flaw. They are reflecting Satan's own hatred for them.
By your comment, you can accept Kenneth Copeland, because he has flaws due to not being Jesus. (just putting it into perspective of what Brown's point most likely is)
Brown's point (from the round table discussion) is that why is it not enough to also say "Benny Hinn has flaws" and "Martin Luther has flaws" and still accept them as believers and brethren?
Brown only brought this up to deflect from Benny Hinn's false teachings. Brown said (in the Roundtable) that Luther was worse that Hinn. Of course we all agree that Luther sinned but Brown isn't understanding why bringing that up doesn't excuse him from calling out Hinn. Because Brown thinks that people like Chris need to call out Luther if they call out Hinn.
Dr. Brown had a lot of grace in that convo, when he knows how mocked he is by Chris. I must say, both men handled that very well, and I think I can see how both are trying to honour the holiness of God, in different ways. It seems Dr. Brown honours God's holiness by being extremely (too) careful when it comes to judging by fruits (unless as bad as Bickel), because only God knows peoples' hearts and can know 100% if they're a wolf. And Chris seems to honour God's holiness by holding teachers to a high standard and calling them out when they don't respect God's word and the Gospel (clear sign of a wolf). I fall more to the latter, but after realising the above, I have more respect for Dr. Brown now. Like Piper, he wants to be loving and not tear down someone who may be a brother, for fear of God.
Dr. Brown sure knows how to strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. He steadfastly refuses to call out false teachers in the charismatic movement for the sake of "unity".
@@markkozlowski3674good point. When you think about it, they're actually saying that calling for the killing of Jews in mass is actually a lesser evil than the "heresies" spoken by the Charismatic leaders they don't agree with. So, Charismatic "heresies" will break the camel's back for sure, but not calling for the murder of entire Jewish communities. That will never break the camel's back, that only makes Luther "a man of his times". And they still can't see the hypocrisy of it all????
Brown has unity with the devil and is a false teacher. Brownsville fake revival to a host of sad obvious deceptions of chaos that he affirms from near every false teacher of note.
There was two cases in the bible where Paul lashed out and let go when it comes to preaching/teaching the bible: the Judaizers adding to the gospel message, Paul rebuked fiercely in Acts 1 with the requirement of circumcision to be saved and the group who preached the gospel but with wrong motivation and even so, Paul rejoices (Phil 1:15-18). The problem with the NAR is they are more like the Judaizers, adding to scripture saying that salvation must come with healing and prophecy or whatever. Paul would rebuke this fiercely. People like Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn not only adds to scripture but their motives are also very questionable. For Luther, his hate towards the jews is kinda like Paul's strong language against the Judaizers in Gal 5:12 but taken to the logical end where it's become way too much to the point of wishing them death and condemnation where as Paul would gladly switch places with his Jewish brothers if he had the choice. At the end of the day, Luther and the NAR leaders are not "equal" as Dr. Brown claims. NAR preaches and teaches dangerous doctrine and even heresey which can lead people to damnation though they themselves may believe they're doing God's work and have the best intentions. So did the Judaizers. Luther preached and taught right doctrine for most of his life and it was sad to see his zealous-ness lead him down a dark path like Jonah who did not wish the Ninevites be saved. I would see Luther as a Jonah at the end of his life, someone God sent who helped the church but had deep character flaws while the NAR leaders are the Judaizers who are, in their own ignorance, harming the church with poisonous doctrine.
I remember reading Luther's, "On the Jews and their Lies," and I totally agree with my brother, Chris Rosebrough. Luther's book was PRIMARILY a Theological Treatise! Read it for THAT reason alone; no other! Luther lived in a time where the Church and State were ENMESHED for so long (over 1,000 YEARS), that unraveling that enmeshment took a long time. The USA (the "lamb like beast" of Rev. 13:11-17) tried to clear that up. *Soli Deo Gloria*
As an historical observation, in the 16th Century they still had blasphemy laws, and rabbis both practiced and taught that Jewish people ought to daily blaspheme Christ, who is God. The sanction for unrepentant, intentional, and persistent blasphemy was the death penalty. It had nothing to do with race. The Torah itself prescribes the death penalty for blasphemy. The idea of the death penalty for blasphemy is historical and Scriptural.
I’ve been immensely blessed by Dr. Brown and his ministry and love for the Lord. I hope he and Chris can follow through on this get together and, by God’s grace, bring some unity to two parts of the body that love to attack each other.
So glad that the Bible gives us so much guidance on how to live our lives. Thankful that Paul and Peter called error by giving the church the truth. I imagine they wouldn’t spend a lot of time on social media calling out people but would invest in building up the church relationally and discipling them rather than a drive-by shooting.
Dr Brown made an extremely relevant point at the round table discussion. Many people go round nit picking, looking for sound bites, and generally painting every ‘charismatic’ with the same brush. When the absolutely abominable behaviour of Luther is raised, it gets brushed aside. That’s unequal measure. Wake up!
@@jeffk4355 to be honest, I’d prefer not to get into the historical context too much. I believe there is some truth to what Chris is saying. But putting my beliefs aside, even if Chris is 100% correct about the historical context, the point still remains. Luther had some unquestionably heretical teachings. God doesn’t change with ‘historical context’. Today, some people are so quick to yell ‘false teacher’ via their platform without knowing the details. Then, worse still, they paint all ‘charasmatic’ Christian’s with the same brush. I’ve heard so many straw-man arguments. It’s an unequal measure. God hates it.
@@ahall3823baloney, I've not seen Chris paint ALL charismatics with the same brush. And then you procede to tell us what God hates... I'll tell you that what Benny hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Paula white and others like them are doing is downright evil. And destroying people's lives and faith, pushing some away from God and into an eternity in hell. I've gone through some hellish, horrible times as a result of the influence of Charismatic and so called "spirit filled" churches. You and Doc Brown need to think long and hard about what YOU trivialize.
As an expat who has been outside the United States for over 25 years, I feel fortunate to only have to endure this debate from a distance. And as someone who still reads 1 Corinthians 14:1 literally (As well as the rest of the NT). I cannot recall even one of Dr. Roth's guests, or the guest's of Remnant Radio, or your guest's Dr. Brown, to have that gift. Would that they had, Isa 50:4-5. I find it ironic that Dr. Brown such an ardent defender of the gift of prophecy, would be so incensed when God chooses instruments like Chris Rosebrough and Steve Kozar to speak to those who listen, Rev 2:16-17. A plain reading of 1 Cor 5:11 "covetous" and Paul's demand to judge, and the Apostle John's warning to not go beyond the doctrine of Christ 2 John 9-11 (I would add in either word or practice)...might prick the conscience of those devastated by the indignation of Christ, Rev 21:7. It is Ken Copeland's mansion, not Luther's grave that the current debate is about. It is Bill Johnson's school (2 John 9-11), not history's crimes that are our generation's concern. The dead have no ears to listen to your rebuke Dr. Brown. Would that you have ears to hear the living word that comes to you, Prov 12:1, Prov 9:7-8. And I do not hesitate to call you "Dr. Obfuscation". Because that is what you are, and that is what you do. If you had equal weights in your bag of criticisms how relieved I would be.
I watched the original round table discussion ( that was an epic watch I had to do over 3-4 sittings). I found that Sam and Michael are very much caught up in Post Modernism, as there language was peppered with it all through the discussion. Justin was very gracious and a true example of kindness when he referred to Michael as having a huge deficit in his discernment. I wander how long it will be before both men realize that maybe they should trust the word of God as Justin and Jim do, especially after they put out a written statement that they were highly deceived by Mike Bickle and really didn't really know him as well as they had.
Frankly I found Jim's response to be a bit lackluster towards Luther's failings(One thing not mentioned is that some of Luther's comments on the book of James that would be fairly heterodox[Desiring to reject it from the canon]). As for the others, Michael Brown was quite evasive(Which somewhat fits with his aptitude for not checking out the people he carries water for), and Justin Peters's conflation of the people promoting the blab it and grab it "gospel"(Word of Faith, Name it and claim it...etc), the Prosperity gospel, and the NAR with the charismatic movement by putting forward the notion that the heretics are the mainstream within the movement(He did handle this particular excursion fairly well though otherwise), and thereby writing off the others as also being aberrant by association(Which to give him credit, he was far more distinct in this on this occasion than many others). Sam Storms did far better than Michael Brown on his side of the table, although I'm really not fond of his associations with Mike Bickle. It will be interesting to see what ends up happening with him going through the lot of Ihop's propaganda over the years and see what comes of that.
I feel like this is a thing now: find the most impressive flaw you can in a past Christian hero (Luther, Edwards), read the flaw through a modern lens in order to maximize how bad it looks, and then use the whole thing to avoid calling out gross current sins in current Christian leaders. I'm sure it's fair to point out Luther's horrible rants. But at some point you have to land the plane and give some criteria for when you WILL call out a modern leader. At some point, you will do that, right? I mean, if you would've rebuked Luther when he was alive, won't you rebuke Hinn and Copeland now? And isn't there a difference between rage + church/state theology (Luther) and cold, calculated fleecing of the flock (Hinn, Copeland)? Both sins, but... And why didn't Brown acknowledge Chris's point about the difference between racism and violent religious opposition? If we call Luther a racist, aren't we actually confirming the way his stuff is used to support modern racism? But if we point out that his sin was actually religious violence and not racism, won't we accomplish a good thing by removing him as a potential support for modern antisemitism? And don't we also need to separate a man's guilt from the historical effect of his sin? If participating in state-enforced theology damns you to hell, then you'll have to gut the middle half of church history--you'd have to consign most Christians, Eastern and Western, to hell between Constantin to the Reformation... right?
It's very interesting the sudden conversation between charismatics and cessationists. I do hope another round table discussion takes place with Chris. I am a charismatic but when I came out of NAR it was Chris and Justin that taught me so much of the wrong teaching of the NAR world. I've never heard this part about Luther but I do have to wonder why it's Browns main argument? Like why he is not judging the obvious false teachers of today but uses a single 400 yr old man as his argument. I don't think this round table did him any favors at all for it has exposed his biased towards false teachers who are his friends and colleagues.
Brown’s ministry is to his fellow Jews, which is why he knows so much about Luther. Also, in the roundtable he admitted that Hinn and others were false teachers based on what he was told about them, which is something the Calvinists on the panel would not admit regarding Luther.
@@TheAhull15 I didn't know any of this about Luther which I find shocking now. Seems a very important piece of Intel that is rather hidden. Justin and Osman did agree that they'd call Luther a false teacher today. Brown's wording was more like ..... 'if the teachers are in fact doing as you say then I would call that a false teaching... but you have to know the man's life. And I don't watch their ministry vids. It doesn't take doing deep dives into personal lives to see Hinn, Copeland, Johnson and Bickle as teaching false. He never said his friends were false teachers. He seemed to be stuck on the idea that calling them false teachers meant he was sentencing them to hell. He was dogmatic and ridiculously stubborn on the issue. Brown frustrated me so much I didn't listen to last 25 minutes. It's because of this good ol boys club that false teachers have been robbing, lying to, and doing massive damage to the body of Christ for past 30 years!!
@@destinycoach5 I missed the part where Justin and Osman agreed that Luther was a false teacher. I didn't watch the entire 4 hour roundtable, however. Did that happen towards then end of the video? I know when it was initially brought up they refused to admit it.
@@TheAhull15 that's right they would not say that. Then they talked around the circle few more times and brown bright it right back and asked them. Peters said if Luther was here today and doing saying those things then yes id call him false.
@@destinycoach5 I heard that too. I disagree. He, Luther, may have a strong idea but he sure isn't a false teacher. Luther still had a lot of popish influence regarding the Jews.
There's an important distinction to be made here. Martin Luther is dead and his works are complete : we can now look back on what he taught, compare it to Scripture. On the other hand, in our current time, we have people alive today with big platforms who are teaching and prophetising falsely and who continue to do damage to the body of Christ. Most people on the side of Dr Michael Brown will agree that God used Martin Luther to shine a light on the Gospel. But what he said and did in his later life is to some extent irrelevant, since our standard is the Bible, not the life of Luther, and we only accept Lutheran teachings in as much as they agree with Holy Scripture. Indeed, that fact that he was far from perfect puts us on guard against uncritically accepting his teachings, but incites us to measure his teachings against the Bible. As for those who are preaching false doctines and spouting false prophecies, they must be urgently called out and stopped before they do more damage. That sense of urgency and outrage among their critics may be abrasive at times. At the same time these false teachers have many friends and relationships and there is a tendency within this wider circle to refrain from criticising, which creates a barrier around the false teachers. The invitation to have discussions between the opposing camps is excellent news which will certainly favor the truth over relationships.
So Chris is saying Martin Luther did not have the Holy Spirit if he did not know what he was saying in condemning the Jews... I experience immediate conviction and I hope to never loose this...
That's not what he said at all. If you are a christian you have the Holy Spirit. He's talking more along the lines of he didn't understand that it was sinful (because of the time he lived in) but I bet if he did understand he would repent. Please watch Chris' video that is on this channel about Martin Luther he explains it in detail.
Did you watch the video? Because he didn't defend any claims of Kenneth Copeland. He explicitely mentioned, several times, that if Justin Peters was accurate in his discriptions of Kenneth Copeland, then it is absolutely heresy. The only thing he seemed to "defend" was the fact that he hasn't researched enough to make a claim about anyone's salvation. It's being slow to speak, and quick to listen.
And this is the point, it is in some senses sad that there was a kind of tit for tat scoring Luther against Hinn, etc. I think that there needs to be a bit more grace offered, lets not straw man or make ad hominem attacks.
I like both these brothers. I feel like that is as sharp as disagreement between brothers with respect as it gets. Well done both of you. I hope good things come from this.
Luther was also dealing with the fact that the Jews had been altering the Hebrew text and outlawed the LXX since about 100AD. Contextually he was just saying what the Bible said about people who opposed Jesus Christ Messiah whether by theology or deed.
Not adhering to the strict Oral Laws of the Pharisees-Scribes imposed, Traditions of the Elders, (Oral Laws that were added) found in Book of Matthew. The Pharisees also changed the Feast Days and calendar. Exodus 11 ? PASSOVER was to be the beginning of months -( Nisan- Spring-March-April) per the LORD to Moses and Aaron. Not the Fall. 🤷🏽 Not a Scholar, but a listener- reader of the Word.
According to Sam Storms and Brown everyone has a good heart and cannot be judged, unless you see them face to face. These men are full of 'Hot Air'. Mike Bickle, Benny Hinn, Todd White, in their eyes cannot do anything wrong and their theology is perfect. You know why? Because he believe the same garbage as they do. I'm with you Pastor Chris and I'm glad you stand for truth.
Dr. Michael Brown seems to be using Martin Luther as a distraction from the fact that he has many false teachers in his inner circle. I think we can all agree that Martin Luther was sinning in many things he said, calling for the deaths of anyone for any purpose, and was a false teacher in that regard. That goes without saying. But it seems as though Dr. Brown's argument is "my friends don't teach anything as bad as Martin Luther did, so it's not as important." Whether or not Martin Luther is a false teacher has nothing to do with Dr. Brown's partnership with false teachers. It seems as though he's trying to discredit his critics by making them out to be hypocrites while simultaneously showing himself to be one. He refuses to call people false teachers solely on the basis of their teachings if he doesn't have a personal relationship with them. Then he turns around and condems Osman, Peters, and Roseborough for their comments on Luther based solely on Luther's teachings. By Dr. Brown's logic, he cannot call Luther a false teacher because he didn't know him personally. He wants people to judge Luther on his teachings but refuses to do the same for his own friends like Sid Roth, for example.
Pray that this beef fruitful for the two of them. If these two could come to some sort of reconciliation, or common understanding, with one or the other being able, or willing to admit that he was wrong about something, they could be a powerful duo. But the Lord will do What he will do.
@Clouseauish that is a great question. I don’t want to say that he’s lost, but I can’t disagree that your logic is pretty sound. Either way, pray that God help him.
Holy moly all these comments seep with such elitism and arrogance. We get it, your camp loves to think youre the only ones with discernment and sound teaching. Such disrespect for Dr Brown who has labored for the Lord in many ways for so long.
I'm a cessationist who actually agrees with you. The more of the nasty comments I read about Brown the sadder I'm getting. "A new commandment I give unto you, that you love one another as I have loved you. By THIS shall all men know that you are my disciples, for you have love one for another." There is a way to disagree without seeming like you'd run the person over if you got the chance.
Why don’t people see the hypocrisy and double standard the American gospel guys put forward when they try to protect Luther from his “blind sins” yet aren’t charitable to Benny Hinn for his blind sins? Why can’t they be consistent in condemning both Luther and Hinn as false teachers/non Christians or give charity to both as brothers in the Lord with blind spots?
I am of the view that God chastened Luther by removing him from this life following his diatribe against the Jews. I read it and was astonished at the venom that dripped from his pen. But my issue with Hinn stems from an incident in 1997 when he appeared on TBN at Billy Joe Daugherty's conference in Tulsa. That might a huge face demon appeared in my living room laughing at me. Hinn's message was a contributing factor in my mental battle that I was dealing with. I am convinced that the enemy used his ministry to target my mind as a 18 year-old Christian who was about two years old in the Faith.
That's very interesting, Chris. I knew a man who loved the Lord so much he gave most of his income to a missionary he'd befriended online. He went to India several times to help his family build things for his community and little church there. But when the man I knew married his ex wife again, after both had been married and divorced to other people, my friend got very ill and died within a year from an aggressive cancer. I wondered if it was God's chastening, and still do to this day. I wonder if God did the same thing with Luther.
I am not a Dr. Brown fan and I find he constantly obfuscates on issues that he knows to be problematic and refuses to confront the constant problematic and sinful issues of charismatic church however There is no way Pastor Chris can defend anything Luther said. Let what Luther said be where it is, awful and disgusting
See, I'm actually not a fan of CR. At all. The only thing I've ever heard him do is point of figurative finger at everyone else. I have yet to learn anything new from him or gain anything positive from his ministry whatsoever. Does he have any full-length videos where he doesn't throw shade on someone else?
@@e.m.8094that’s what I’m saying too. CR is totally divisive and not helpful. Anyone can tear down verbally things they oppose that doesn’t take any character. But to thoughtfully edify the Body of Christ does. To that point I have seen Brown rebuke many many excesses of charismania and written volumes of articles and stories in the topic that are actually helpful.
@@bobs8005I don't know if Brown is an apologist. That may not be his area of expertise. But whatever he has written I honestly doubt is forceful enough to get the attention of those causing harm within the Charismatic community
It's interesting that the Doc knows all of Chris' nicknames for him, but is ignorant to all of the heresies and cons propogated by some of the giants in the charismatic faith. I'm not sure why Brown will go to the mattresses to besmirch the name of Martin Luther but can't spot a false teacher in Sid Roth!!!! Are we going to have to live another 400 years so that we can compare the rotten fruit coming from modern day charismania to the fruit that came from the protestant reformation started by Martin Luther? (insert singing) "One of these things is not like the others. One of these things does not belong." Great job Chris!!! You are right in this matter all the way. There is something very dark about needing Martin Luther to be "not a Christian". This guy....
Bingoooo. Even when video evidence was giving. It was still "well he's a good guy, I sat down with him". I cannot take him & Sam seriously after that round table.
Dr. Brown, based on this discussion, doesn't believe in the gospel. He believes in works righteousness and that every individual sin must be confessed like the Catholics. He doesn't believe in God's pure grace in forgiveness of sins, even the ones we are not aware of for ourselves. This is a result of rejecting Jesus' giving of the Holy Spirit in baptism. Mattew chapter 3. John says he needs to be baptized by Jesus, and that Jesus' baptism is with the Holy Spirit. Baptism is Jesus' work that is a need for us, and it gives the Holy Spirit for the forgiveness of sins. We are free from sin, and our conscience is clear from our sin, known and unknown, because we trust in Jesus and his work and free gifts to us.
@@joabthejavelin5119he believes salvation by grace alone through faith alone but that true Christian’s bear fruit. Same thing MacArthur, Peter’s, and I think Roseborough believe usually I thought…
dr browns number 1 goal is to get support for israel, IMO he is an israeli agent. he REFUSES to call out israels sins from abortion to the current genocide of the palastinian people. he clearly values Jews above all non jews. he correctly opposes white christian nationalism but supports jewish nationalism in israel. BOTH are supremacists movements .
I saw this and had to stop this video. I do not have any respect for Michael Brown. Though I am sure Chris Rosebrough can defend himself very well and I would put him in a biblical ring with Michael Brown and it would not even last one round and Michael Brown would get knocked out. Though I tried to watch this video earlier the fact it started with Michael Brown going on and placing the sin of Martin Luther on a scale because his was worth and any other made me immediately think that Michael Brown is an ecumenist and that he determined that the sin of Martin Luther's sin was far greater than anyone else made me cringe and thought I was listening to a Roman Catholic priest. The other thing that struck me is Michael Brown, the one who has defended those predators who have used their "spiritual" gifts to abuse women/men is berating Chris Rosebrough for defending Martin Luther's conduct and sin, and if you actually listened to the Chris Rosebrough video you would hear and see that there is context to be considered concerning the events of that era and Chris Rosebrough did not, from my point of view, excuse or brush off the sin of Martin Luther. What is Michael Brown trying to do? Remove the stain from defending the indefensible of his NAR brothers. If there was any credibility concerning this man Michael Brown he would remove himself from any ministry.
Bravo to Chris!! I've never seen Brown give the opposition so much UNINTERRUPTED time. He must be getting worn down by all the truth tellers coming out more & more & confronting his falsehoods.
Believe me Kim, Dr. Brown is a truth teller. You are right though, the naysaying cessationists are wearing him down, but God is his strength. I will pray for Dr. Brown.
Isn't it sad that he won't even watch Chris's work? I think that's pathetic. How could you actually know what somebody is saying about you if you have never watched their videos as brown claims? He's one of those"I don't know" type of guys. One that never stands for anything and doesn't know anything about anything.
Brown loves to revision history through a 21st century lens. Example: If America had blasphemy laws, which we did, and punished those ,hypothetically, by death, then they would not be unlawful for enforcing the laws. Thus, under the Roman Empire, they were doing just that. I’m not saying that the laws for right, but they were, as the law stated it, lawful in caring out what they prescribed.
Yes, in the roundtable discussion one could easily get the impression that you Michael meant that Martin Luther was in hell. And even now, when you are asked a direct question about this, you cannot give a clear answer. You can only at most bring yourself to say: Only God knows. Yes, Martin Luther's anti-Semitic words were sinful. But your attempt to imply that Martin Luther is in hell is also both sinful and slanderous. In this you need to make a public repentance.
11:29 Brown to Rosebrough: "I just want to tell you this your video is going to be used for destructive purposes. It will, in the eyes of people, downplay the severity of the sins of Martin Luther." Talk about slander. Brown is relying on his audience to NOT watch Rosberough's video. It's unbeliebale how he belittles the intelligence and activities of his audience. 11:40 Brown admits HE HAS A MORE GREATER KNOWLEDGE of Hinn and Copeland to the point he is able to compare them and dsiregard them to these selct few but horrific writings of Luther: "What he said and did is far more severe to me than anything anybody's brought to me about Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland or anybody in terms of the weight the magnitude, the ugliness, the horror of it." 11:00 Brown to Rosebrough: "I'm answering questions for decades, trying to be as [inaudible] what the Apostle of Obfuscation, whatever name. I think- I think it's stupid. I think it's petty. I think it's divisive. I think it's even slanderous and unhelpful." But is the title for Brown as 'Apostle of Obfuscation' wrong? Not at all. Brown is an apostle. He lies. He is tricky. And he engages in deceitful/fallacious arguments and false theologies that demonise his critics. Wicked man.
The bigger question: Does Christ forgive us for unrepentant sin that we were unaware of and joined in with the rest of our generation in committing? Does his atonement cover that?
Chris actually answers that in his Martin Luther video that is on this channel. It's a short one if you are asking it because you don't know. Sometimes I ask questions to get people to think and not because I don't know so I'm not sure which reason you asking ☺️
I hear what Brown is saying, but I don’t think anyone is trying to uphold Luther and act like what he did was acceptable. I also don’t agree with Brown in his belief that in order to condemn someone for heresy and false teaching you must know them privately for a longer period of time. I almost think he is breaking his own rule by vehemently attacking Luther in the way Hinn was targeted by for his false teachings
Protestants do put Luther on a pedestal because they claim that he supposedly restored true biblical doctrines in spite of how evil he obviously was. Protestants are 100% guilty of idolizing Luther this way because they would never say the same thing about the pope. As an outsider, i have observed how Protestants universally characterize the pope as an antichrist while they try to lump Luther in the same boat as someone like King David.
How did Charles Stanley remain a preacher after the divorce. The baptist belief is a stumbling block for me to be an officer or deacon. I was divorced over 33 years ago.
At 10:14, what Dr. Brown says about Martin Luther, if sin is sin regardless if one committing it is sincere in his beliefs, why is he not willing to apply that standard to Benny Hinn, Todd White, Kenneth Copeland? In the roundtable discussion he heard them teach heresy and error, but dismissed that by saying they may sincerely believe that, and that doesn't make them unsaved. How is that not double standard? I am honestly trying to understand this, not stirring the pot. I respect all the ministers who participated in the roundtable discussion, am opened to listening to the best and the most sound continuationist proponents, and am not dogmatic about continuationism vs cessationism just yet (I am a Reformed Baptist), but there seems to be a bias here when it comes to the topic of Jews and Judaism. What deeply concerns me is that it seems like saying rank heresy about our Triune God and the Gospel gets a pass, but saying horrible things about Jews gets you condemned no questions asked (at 11:42, just wow)...
This is what I know for sure, the devil does not want unity between Christ following brothers and you two meeting together is a threat to the gates of Hell. I trust it will be profitable time together in the Lord.
I would love to see theologians from both camps come together and take a stand against heresies in both camps. Call them to the carpet, agreed in their desire to expose lies and heresies and abominable practices in both camps. I'd also like to see Jesus return today ;)
What Brown fails to take into account, like Chris said, it’s not our sins that condemn us to hell. But that come judgement day all our fruits will be tested. The bad fruit will be burned up and we will be rewarded on what remains. No human knows every sin they’ve committed. No human will die having repented of every sin they committed. Even Dr Brown. Psalm 19:12-13, Who can discern his errors? Acquit me of hidden faults. Also, keep back Your slave from presumptuous sins. Let them not rule over me. Then I will be blameless and I shall be acquitted of great transgressions.
Michael Brown is not a man to be recommended. He will stand on his head, and tie himself in knots to protect all manner of weird, wacky, and dangerous behavior that we find in today's charismania.
I love Chris’s expositional teachings and tend to think Dr. Michael Brown turns a blind eye to nonsense on the Charismatic side of the church…however I think his stance here is fair. I think, however it should lean him more on the side of sayings Benny Hinn/etc’s teaching are harmful as well. I would love to see them sit down together for a conversation and show actual clips of disgraceful charismatic teachings so he can’t turn a blind eye to it and talk through where the line is. I would love to see both sides of the aisle end up agreeing honestly.
I can fix this whole argument with this assertion: Martin Luther appeared at the foot of my bed playing a Saxophone.
🤣
Not impossible 😅😂
😂😂😂
What kind of sax was it?
Michael Brown CANNOT deny this argument
I admire that though both men have strong opposing views and debate freely, they are so enthusiastic to meet together privately. Brothers in Christ.
he cant face the facts that why he avoids the video.......
Brothers in Christ!
I admire neither, but at least Rosebrough isn't a total liar and hypocrite like Brown.
@@martyroth2994facts
@@martyroth2994this is an incredible ignorance of Romans 2 if you're speaking like that man.
Brown always says that he doesn’t watch videos of his critics but then he knows what they say.
Yeah, and for years he pretends not to know the wicked behavior of his "brother" Benny Hinn.
@@ureasmith3049
Rubbish,
Brown has spoken out against the excesses of Hinn many times,
You just bore false testimony against Brown and need to repent publicly because you made a false public slander.
👎🏼
Good.
Jesus said to his brothers it wasn't His time to go down to Jerusalem...and then He went.
👉🏻 🧠 💡
@@ureasmith3049you’re lying. He has on multiple occasions spoken out against Benny Hinn and his nonsense.
@@JohnS-ol8dn
Relevant to what ?
We can’t in anyway downplay what Luther did. And this is coming from someone who respects many aspects of his theology.
Why do we downplay the Inquisition where both Jews and Protestants fled their reach? Convert or die ?
The problem is you can't equate Luther and a false teacher because Luther did not teach that the bible says we should do [insert the wrong thing that Luther did]. He wasn't being a false teacher. He was just a sinner like you and I.
@@Jonathan-tw4xm but CR is judging his actions based on historical context to justify what he said and did. Regardless of historical context, what Luther did was wrong according to scripture AND Luther used the biblical text to support his statements. We cannot pretend his actions and thoughts were divorced from his biblical understanding.
@beaberean3286 that's why the context matters he wasn't a false teacher he was a sinner like you and I. If you don't consider context you won't ever be wrong because you won't see why you are wrong.
Excellant point. Perfect answer. Context is the most important aspect of this discussion regarding Luther.
@@Jonathan-tw4xm
Here are my issues. I will admit that I have not watched much of Michael Browns stuff, but what I have seen is concerning. When watching the round table, he was shown evidence of the blasphemy that Copeland and Hinn consistently speak, but would not rebuke them. He won’t call them out by name for their harmful teachings, and uses the “I haven’t watched their ministry” and “I don’t know their heart.” Lines to defend his reluctance to call them out publicly.
However, when Chris posts a video to explain the perspective of Luther in his time in order to add further context to the discussion, while being careful to say that Luther was sinful. Brown is quick to publicly rebuke him, and makes plans to do a video on it. It reveals a double standard and shines a light on what he values most. Blasphemy and Spiritual abuse take a back seat to what he falsely perceives as Chris perpetuating antisemitism.
100% well said and articulated. He wants to go live with a debate now about Luther, BUT DOESNT WANT, to discuss anything about Roth or white, as they are his friends. And knows them personally. VERY VERY WEAK
Right!
Brown says he has no time to watch even a single video if Benny Hinn but has time to research Luther.? Hmm
Mr. Michael Brown’s favorite line is, “God hates unequal weights and measures.” But he himself is guilty of this as he has no problem exposing Martin Luther as he should, but hesitates to do the same when it comes to Sid Roth and Todd White because of his loyalty as a friend. There is a clear bias and a dislike for Martin Luther because of Luther’s hatred towards Jews. But the root of the problem is that Mr. Brown’s foundation is Jewish so he naturally would rebuke anyone opposed to his belief system. God is no respecter of person. If someone is in violation of the Word of God, it needs to be addressed no matter who they are and doing so is not condemning that individual to hell.
I had the EXACT same opinion of Michael Brown after watching the entire roundtable discussion. He appears to be an apostate(in my opinion)...straight out of the Book of Jude. He pulled the "anti-Semite" card, too...which is a low blow. He won't call out or rebuke people like Copeland, Hinn, Sid Roth, Todd White...which is SHOCKING. I find it ridiculous that he always brings up Martin Luther...who has been DEAD for CENTURIES!
Brown points out the double standard against the Charismatics.
I genuinely hope these men can reconcile and do a work for God
How do you reconcile with someone who defends wolves?
@@hermangroenewald8751 This honestly sounds like sanctimonious name calling. It is possible to lovingly disagree. Go check out Mike Donehey’s book called Grace in the Gray
I totally agree. I hope God works thru these men meeting.
@@hermangroenewald8751 After grinding my teeth through four hours of that round table, I think Brown and Storm would rather talk theology than preachers. Short version of my opinion is Pastors should call out false teachers. All this nonsense has become UA-cam “stars” feuding with each other and taking pot shots. None of this productive conversation.
@@thevoiceoftheteacher3581100% attention seeking.
I find it amazing that MB can spend all this time on someone who lived 500 years ago, yet hasn't the time to research one single false teacher today, who defends the indefensible, who says he has been friends with Sid Roth for 40 years, hosted his shows twice, yet hasn't had the time to watch his show., yet knows everything Chris Rosebrough has said.
That makes him either a hypocrite or a liar.
Tell it!!
I think that might be due to the fact that Michael Brown evangelizes to Jews. But he should have done his homework I agree.
Judith that is a horrible thing to say about a man of God. Dr. Brown is a Jew and a Theologian so it makes sense that he has studied Martin Luther. You haven't even met the man and you are so quick to judge. May God shine His face on Dr. Brown and on his ministry. If he is blinded, then I pray God opens his eyes.
@@tammy9497 I am only saying what he has said many times. He always says he doesn't have time to check out false teachers like Benny Hinn, but he has time to have a go at anyone who does critique false teachers. How does he have time for that.
A liar for sure.
so interesting how quick he is to condemn luther but how slow he is to condemn modern day heretics...
Bro one dude blows people over with a sport coat and the other called for the murder of Jews. Who are you people?
The same could be said in reverse towards those who defend luther so easily, and are so quick to condemn (I agree, heretics). This is what Dr Brown meant by unequal scales
@@Chupie77777 Luther was anti-Judaism, not anti-Semitic. NEVER did he claim to have a problem with Jewish people as an ethnicity. On the contrary, read his tract "That Jesus Christ was born a Jew." It is very much a positive commentary on Jews as an ethnicity. Luther abhorred their theology, just like he did the theology of the anabaptists and the Papacy. It was NOT an ethnic issue.
@@Outrider74 it doesn't discount the sinfulness of his conclusions, or the comments he made about them. Christians pray for those who persecute them.
Paul knew very well where the Jews fell short, yet in the beginning of Romans 9, he said he'd rather be cut off from Christ if it would mean their salvation.
Jesus knows very well what their sins are/were, and yet while He was being crucified, He prayed to the Father for their forgiveness.
Stephen was being stoned to death by the Jews, and yet He prayed to the Lord that He wouldn't hold this sin against them, *while* he was being murdered by them.
Compare this to Luther's statements on the Jews. Whether it was ethnicity or theology, it was not a Christian attitude.
I'm not defending Benny Hinn's doctrines, but as far as I know, he's never called for the murder of a single person in the Name of God. The whole point is there are unequal scales being used, not whether or not Martin Luther was a racists.
I'm moreso defending Dr. Brown than anyone else. Idk much about Martin Luther or Benny Hinn, but I see Christians that have plaques with Martin Luther's name on it, or wearing shirts with his face on it. I hear a lot of praise for Martin Luther, like there's even a denomination named after him, and his sins regarding his attitude towards the Jews does seem to be kind of swept under the rug, *especially* when you compare them with how Christians are quick to condemn and throw Benny Hinn out of the kingdom.
To be clear, in my heart, I'm confident that Benny Hinn is a false teacher and should sell everything his ministry owns to give to the poor and sick, and step down from teaching for the rest of his life. He should absolutely be sitting under the teaching and discipleship of a mature Christian.
And also to be clear, God for sure used Martin Luther for great things in the kingdom.
The point is, when it is someone we admire, we tend to defend them and undermine their sins, all the while being quick to condemn and rebuke someone we don't admire. I'm guilty of this too. Like, I tend to be more harsh with people who are cessatiomist or calvinistic, and less harsh with those who aren't. That's a sin in my heart and attitude that I need to repent of.
Ultimately, we shouldn't be using unequal scales. We should genuinely care more about being pleasing to God rather than sticking up for our tribe while berating another. And if there is rebuke that needs to be given, even to our enemies, it should be done with a genuine attitude of love, and not use "telling the truth is a form of love" as an excuse to berate and hate someone
How about the unequal scales the brother Brown use in judging between the Israelis and the Palestinians? Israel is an openly anti-Christ nation and government. So are the Muslim Palestinian governments. There are many Palestinians who are Christians. Brother Brown is emotionally locked into ethnic idolatry. He avoids the Christian Palestinians altogether and invests his affections on the rabbinic Jews in Israel as if they are the chosen under the New Covenant. When it comes to evaluating between the anti-Christian Israelis and the anti-Christian Muslims, Brown's scales are 100% defective. @@Chupie77777
Soooo... He still can't find the time to watch one show of his friend of 4 decades (Sid Roth) or any false teacher to see if what people are saying is true, but he has time for this?
What about Martin Luther?
Dr. Brown has already said Roth shouldn't have many of those guests on his show. What more do you want him to do?
@@marclaclear6628 perhaps not deflect attention to a guy who has been dead for almost 500 years at the expense of dealing with a current and massive issue at hand - widespread hypercharismatic abuses by false teachers who he has become the leading apologist and cover for.
This is merely a digression, a deflection, and a distraction from the fact that he is unwilling to do ANY due diligence in fact finding or research because the results would confirm what Justin Peters and Jim Osman said all along.
Edit: for typo
Amen!!! Thank you!!!
@@marclaclear6628Perhaps not deflect attention to a guy who has been dead for almost 500 years at the expense of addressing the issue that was at hand - the abuses of hypercharismatic false teachers of whom he has become the leading apologist for.
This was merely a digression, deflection, and distraction from the fact that MB refuses to invest any time or do any due diligence in fact finding or research because the results would prove what Justin & Jim said all along.
@@Foreknown_ "Perhaps not deflect attention to a guy who has been dead for almost 500 years at the expense of addressing the issue that was at hand - the abuses of hypercharismatic false teachers of whom he has become the leading apologist for."
That is not a very charitable representation of what happened in that discussion. Brown did say that if what Justin Peters said about Hinn were accurate then Hinn is not a brother. What more do you expect him to do? Justin Peters has a long history of lying about charismatics and word of faith. I wouldn't trust him further than I could throw him.
But Brown brought up Martin Luther after all of that was addressed. He asked if Martin Luther was a false teacher because of his bad fruit. Perfectly legitimate question to illustrate the hypocrisy. But Brown was probably trying to make them rethink their position, knowing him.
"This was merely a digression, deflection, and distraction from the fact that MB refuses to invest any time or do any due diligence in fact finding or research because the results would prove what Justin & Jim said all along."
That isn't Brown's job. I know that's the only reason anybody knows Justin Peters' name though. He should examine his false teaching of Calvinism. Calvinism has done way more harm to the Gospel than any of these charismatic abuses he keeps harping on.
Truly amazing. Michael Brown, who refuses to call even Kenneth Copeland a false teacher, will happily mischaracterize and condemn Martin Luther. 😮
Right.
The irony is that he started the video talking about unequal weights and measures and happily calls out people not in his camp but won't call out people in his own camp.
@@G.H._bunnywow, you guys are something. He does call them out. Have you read any of his books? He just hesitant to call them false teachers. He's NOT calling Luther a false teacher, his point is simply if you call for example Hinn a false teacher, by same measure you should call Luther a false teacher. But first, you have unequal measures, so you wouldn't do that. And second, you have poor comprehension skills, so you don't even get the point he's trying to make.
Kenneth Copeland and Luther are both false teachers. 👍
Professional doubters like you are as blinded as Martin Luther calling for the death of Jews. Grow up spiritually.
Martin luther was a murderous man. No murderer shall inherit the kingdom of heaven.
I love the way Dr. Brown is willing to debate and listen.. and appreciate his consistency over time.
Dr Brown I disagree about your interpretation of Pastor Rosebrough's video. It wasn't anti- Semitic and if someone finds reason in it to hate the Jewish people then they were already going to with or without his video.
Way to go on justifying Luther’s sin
@@ben.s.harper89 ummmm.... what? Sorry but that's pretty pathetic.
Nonsense. Brown is on target.
@@lisfong CR is judging his actions based on historical context to justify what he said and did. Regardless of historical context, what Luther did was wrong according to scripture AND Luther used the biblical text to support his statements. We cannot pretend his actions and thoughts were divorced from his biblical understanding.
Luther attacked Jews not on racial ground, but on theological ground. As if it is okay to attack Jews physically on theological ground. That is intentionally or unintentionally giving a new ground to support antisemitism
I don't get it when Dr. Brown says what Luther did was far more destructive than Copeland, Hinn etc. If these guys are preaching a false gospel message and sheparding people to hell how is that not as bad as what Luther did?
All I can say is Pastor Chris Rosebrough has helped me and my daughter so much. We have learned discernment and what the true gospel means. We went to a Vineyard church for years and they were wonderful and lovely and that time was blessed but we weren’t taught the true gospel or about repentance, at all. It was more focused on gifts and signs and wonders and self. It was an empty seven years. Once we learned the full truth, thanks to watching Pastor Chris Rosebrough’s videos, where he explains how false teachers twist scripture and lead people astray, we were set free! I didn’t know what being born-again really meant or that we are born sinners. I was once a slave to sin but I’m not anymore! Burdens and sins have been lifted off. Praise the Lord! Thank you, Pastor Chris Rosebrough. And I pray for Dr. Michael Brown. He seems like he wants to get it right for the Kingdom and I can appreciate that. I just know, from experience, how detrimental it is listening to teachers who twist scripture. God bless.
Martin Luther, despite his glaring flaws, was used mightily by the Lord to spark the greatest spiritual awakening since Pentecost in Acts 2. It is important that the church keep its eyes fixated on the Author and Finisher of our faith; Jesus Christ.
Absolutely 💯💯💯💯 correct!
Can modern people be used mightily by God and have some glaring flaws?
God used Pontius Pilate to bring about salvation for mankind. 🤷
Martin Luther called for the murder of Jews who refused to convert to Christianity. Adolph Hitler called Luther his greatest inspiration.
@@marclaclear6628 Yes. But the preachers Dr. Michael Brown is willing to defend (Not a hater, i like the guy) distort the gospel so much that even the knowledge many people get o "Jesus" might just be a stumbling block to when they hear the actual gospel. Them who arent against us are with us, but we should really rethink how we define "with us". I dont think prechers of a different "gospel" are "with us"
It's amazing how Michael Brown will drive home the sins of Martin Luther to now belittle his blatant acceptance of false teachers today. He wants everyone to admit that Martin Luther isn't even a Christian, but will he denounce Sid Roth as a heretic for his crazy teaching and rantings. Chris was very kind to Brown, but Brown needs to be told that no one has to bow down to his "outrage" in order for him to denounce false teachers (and many of their followers) that violate Romans 16:17-18, 1 Timothy 6:3-5, 2 Timothy 4:3-4, 2 Peter 2, and Jude every chance they get. This man is about his own sense of "righteousness" and I hope more people blatantly call him out. (And by the way, this is the same man who said you can leave the Christian faith while being challenged with it from John 10:28-30.)
Well Dr Michael Brown wants to zero into Martin Luther but never addresses the behavior and racial views and actions of the fathers of the Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God/Church of God denominations that held those beliefs all the way to mid to late 19th Century? I think we need to address both if your going to point one out.
He seems to frequently refute these claims, that he’s not doing enough to call out the error, by saying, “I written extensively on blah, blah, blah…”
I think he realizes he’d be immediately ostracized out of the charismatic world if he really dissected Pentecostal roots and theology errors. He usually seems to take the “I give them the benefit of the doubt,” when really hard pressed on specifics. That’s why we still have “Skittles from Heaven” type content coming from Sid Roth.
I find it incredible that Brown says he “doesn’t watch Christian TV”; so that means he’s never seen Sid Roths show. Really? He’s been friends with Sid 40 years, even hosted the show. If he hears what critics like Justin Peters says about the show, you’d think he’d want to go see for himself.
Nobody balanced takes Justin peters seriously. He froze up like a hypocrite on the Martin Luther topic.
Right. He did admit in the Roundtable that he's only watched the video he's been on and never watched any others.
Sheltering Jews from the fact that without Jesus Christ they are offensive to God is the greater sin
what a nonsense you are spewing! "Salvation is of the Jews" John 4:22
@@holystrawberry
Salvation only comes through Jesus, John 14:6
Yes, gospel was preached to the jews first, and then to the gentiles.
EXACTLY! Hagge has taught that Salvation was NOT for the Jews in his book- 2 Salvations one for Jews another for Gentiles.
Like it or not that is heretical. There is only One salvation for Jews and Gentile. The 12 Disciples were to take the gospel to the Jews . Apostle Paul was to take the Gospel to the Gentiles ( us the hated pagans) its stsrts in Acts but one must read the entire book in context.
But Hagge is WoF.
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
Great exchange. Thank you CB for calling in and identifying yourself. DMB thank you for being gracious with hearing out CB and responding so respectfully.
Why are we talking about Luther's antisemitism? Michel Brown says that it calls into question his salvation and therefore his theology. Chris Rosebrough cannot accept the question of his salvation because the taint on his theology is not an acceptable conclusion. Cannot the theology be separated from Luther's personal salvific state? For example, Balaam, whose Messianic prophecy is one of the most beautiful in the Old Testament. Yet the New Testament rightfully uses Balaam as an example of apostasy and does so without any taint on the Messianic prophecy.
I have no idea as to Luther's salvific state. Only God knows. However, I do know that the reformation in which he was a prime actor was a Divine work.
Can we just say we can't read any of their hearts (Luther, Copeland, Hinn, etc), and be able to call out their error without condemning them to flames?
Luther taught the Gospel but as reformers they were the very beginning the long road from the bondage of a 1000 years of false doctrine toward a clearer understanding. Hinn and Copeland with all the foundations of the reformers have instead rejected a lot of sound doctrine in favor of a gnostic teaching with unsound teaching of scripture and then as a consequence they profited from the sick and mentally unstable in which some have died because of the poor teachings. After 500 years of sound doctrine being taught, Hinn and Copeland rejected it for cult like scripture twisting theology that gained them popularity and richness. With information technology that we have today, they are without excuse, and they are only 2 men of a multitude. These 2 men along with a great many others all claim to be getting special revelations from God that produced their false doctrines they teach, Luther never claimed to be hearing special revelation from God in his imagination as do all the false prophets today do. Luther cannot be accused of taking Gods Holy name in vain. breaking the 3rd commandment. Luther's sin on this basis can be categorized as ignorance but it is still an atrocious sin. Hinn, Copeland and all the others in the charismatic church are charged with breaking the 3rd commandment. This contains a certain judgment of eternal damnation, yet no one wants to talk about this because they love gnostic/mystic beliefs whereby they speak from their own vain imaginations claiming it is of God bring damnations to hundreds of millions who follow the same teaching.
Luther preached against the laws of God, and the Bible teaches in Deuteronomy and Isaiah that whoever does so is a liar. The whole "we don't know their hearts" talk is the lazy man's way of saying they don't want hear the truth. Christ said to look at the fruits. A person will show who they are by their actions, their words, and in those men's cases, their theology. Protestantism was based on hating Jews, God's laws, and God's government.
@@theeternalsbeliever1779Protestantism was based on hating Jews? Have not most people? Look at the history of the Catholic church for example! The Vatican supported Hitler to name one occasion. Luther was frustrated by the Jews. He taught a very strong form of nationalism in a similar vain to Islam but not quite as bad as Islam and i don't see he was worse than many of the former Popes and the Catholic church atrocities as well as how they twisted scripture to gain more power and riches. Luther was not trying to twist scripture to gain power and riches for himself. We look at the fruits of Hinn and Copeland for example. They both teach heresy to serve their greed and fame and they both claim God speaks to them and through them personally. Luther spoke often from himself and prepared to sacrifi9ce his life for the future benefit of the church. He was at the beginning of the reformation and ahead of his time albeit we, 500 years later have the benefit of 500 years of debate and information. We are in a far better position to make an informed opinion than Luther could. Luther if alive today would likely think very differently yet possibly remain firm upon a Government on earth as it is in heaven ran by Christ and Christ alone.
Out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks.
Brown is a false prophet, slanderer and liar.
Amen
I totally agree that Luther’s antisemitism was reprehensible and he needed repentance “to be right with God”, but Michael brown blaming Luther for the Nazis murder of millions of Jews is just silly .
Thanks for sharing AGTV. I enjoyed the recent round table with Brown, Storms, Peters and Osman. I’ve enjoyed hearing from the charismatic side and them providing a defence and how they view things.
"Antisemitism" ...a very effective thought-stopping accusation.
To those who are easily intimidated? Or maybe they have something to hide and there is some truth to the accusation. A man/woman who isn't truly Anti-Semitic will let cheap judgments roll off their back. Only good faith actors apply for honest debate.
@@machtnichtsseimann What Luther can only be regarded as anti-semitic. At the very least, what Luther said was used by Nazis to convince the regular folks that the Jews were a problem.
No doubt. And a completely meaningless word that reveals who presently enjoys a lot of power.
The use of racism and antisemetism work the same way. It's always interesting to see. And Dr. Brown knows Chris was not saying either form of antisemetism were okay, he was simply explaining the misapplication of Luther influence on the Nahzees, due to the difference in foundations. He only presented information. Dr. Brown's emotional response is eerily similar to Ben Shapiro's over Kanye West's rant. I guess birds fly south for the winter.
@@alexisdaniels8901 It's completely ignored today that Martin Luther was initially more benevolent to Jews than the average Catholics of his era. But he found some more pesky facts later and that was what outraged him. The National Socialist didn't need 'Luther's influence', they had first hand experiences themselves. And were probably astonished how that coincided with experiences during other ages. Judaism is a counter design against Christianity. They are not 'God's chosen people' and they have to come into Christ like anybody else.
Luther wasn't under the delusion that his contemporary Hebrews had a different path than Christ to be accepted and sacrificed to God. When the Jews aligned themselves with the anabaptists to burn, loot, kill papists... Luther chose the other side.
So only Dr Brown can say who is and who isnt a Christian?? He constantly speaks with a forked tongue.
Not only that but someone who died centuries before he was even born. Yet he goes into a dither if anyone who has never met Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland etc dares to question whether they are Christian.
If you have seen the video of AG roundtable, you'll see that it's exactly the opposite
@@Dariopcco I am literally watching the video right now and he is doing exactly what I said. The man is a blatant hypocrite.
Whenever Osman and Peters cite blatant examples of a charismatics false teaching the only comeback Brown comes up with is "I know this man. He is a humble nice moral man...." blah blah blah but refuses to address the false teaching itself right after dogmatically insisting that Luther was one of the worst people who even existed. What I said is exactly what he is doing.
Oh and look at that Dr Brown just said "And whats remarkable to me...." after Storms poorly defends Mike Bickle-lest Peters or Osman have a chance to refute Storms poor defense-I wonder if he's gonna say something about Luther. Oh yep there he goes. Big surrpise
@@MackLeeGreen
In the case of Kevin Zadai, he always says ''my son in law is friends with him and speaks highly of him". He uses that to justify the bizarre unbiblical teachings and false prophecies and even to wtite the foreword to Kevin's book.
I have added Michael Brown to my mark and avoid list.
Too bad. You're missing out on a lot of great teaching on holiness, revival, Jewish roots, cultural issues, etc.
@@e.m.8094 no, he is not missing out on anything. Just google "fire fire fire" and michael brown. The guy has been a false teacher for 25+ years. Claims God has spoken to him, claims he can speak in tongues, and defends nearly every false teacher of note.
Are you sure you are even a Christian? Why not flee to Jesus Christ through faith alone, by grace alone, in Him alone and stop listening to false teachers.
Unbelievable!
May truth and grace abound in your conversation together. God bless you both.
Let us ask Mr. Brown right know. ✋️
I admit I was troubled by something in the round table. I recently watched a documentary on the Nuremberg Trials after WW2 and to a man, every german soldier kept saying “I was only following orders.” Despite that they were still held accountable for their actions towards the Jews. I was reminded of that every time Dr Brown and Sam Storms said “If those things are true then they are false teachers.”
The issue is they repeatedly said they never watched more than one Sid Roth show or Hinn program or even planned to therefore they couldn’t say they were false teachers or even wolves. That was like a magic formula that absolved them of any accountability for giving the heretics shade.
Hinn etc are sending people to hell on a handrail but these two men are so caring and careful they don’t want to call them wolves despite being given proofs.
To them “sending an email ” is good enough.
What about caring for those they are victimizing and robbing everyday and in some cases sexually abusing? Just sayin 🤔
These videos have softened me a lot toward Dr. Brown, but you make an excellent point.
Shows they do not care about people. Only about the holy grail charismania.
Martin Luther is proof positive that just because God uses a person, it does not mean that person is holy.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but (1) would a genuine anti-Semite even follow Jesus as Luther did? (2) Would a genuine anti-Semite even consider evangelizing the Jews? Luther did both, right? Why would he of had if he was genuinely an anti-Semite?
Genuine Anti-Semites who claimed to follow Jesus carried out the Holocaust. Try not to forget that.
Luther followed his own ideas of who Christ was. The Christ that actually exists in the Bible consistently preached the eternal authority of the Law and the Prophets. The false Christ Luther preached opposed the authority of the Law and the Prophets. Luther's hatred for God's laws and contemptuously denouncing them as "Jewish customs" Christ supposedly abolished reveals how he tried to disguise his hatred of Jews with Christian language.
I read a quote of Luther's saying to take the belongings of the Jews and give them to Jewish converts to Christianity. As horrific as that is, I have to wonder if true anti-s would want Jews in their religion. Same question as you, I guess.
@theeternalsbeliever1779 Luther followed the Christ whom he believed in his own words was "... God and man in one person. He has neither sinned nor died, and He is not condemned; His righteousness, life, and salvation are unconquerable, eternal, omnipotent." Of his Christian experience, Luther stated, "I admit that I deserve death and hell, what of it? For I know one who suffered and made satisfaction on my behalf. His name is Jesus Christ, Son of God, and where He is there I shall be also!"
Concerning the Law, in his the Freedom of the Christian Luther wrote, “For the Law has its terminus defining how far it is to go and what it is to achieve, namely, to terrify the impenitent with the wrath and displeasure of God and drive them to Christ.”
Luther held the prophets in such high regard that he wrote, "Know that no one can have indulged in the Holy Writers sufficiently, unless he has governed churches for a hundred years with the prophets, such as Elijah and Elisha, John the Baptist, Christ and the apostles... We are beggars: this is true." He also said, "[Our] plan is to follow the example of the prophets and the ancient fathers of the church, and to compose psalms...so that the Word of God may be among the people also in the form of music."
1779
I don't think you understand Luther. do you have an exact quote by him that says the law is wrong and should never be followed?
Thank you for including this video.
I think of all the sinful men God used in the old testament. When God called them to repentance they repented and mourned. I believe Luther would do likewise. When Copeland, Hinn and Osteen are called to repentance... they roll around in their cash and say "don't touch me or God will make you sick" -- See the difference? -- Now since Dr.Brown says Luther sinned... Is he willing to admit Copeland and Hinn are currently in sin? Me thinks not.
The whole problem with Michael brown’s comments is that he is taking the easy route of condemning someone’s sin who is long gone and refuses to condemn others who are committing horrific sins now which is happening right now in front of his eyes and this is something that he will have to give an account before Christ. The only one who is downplaying any sin right now is dr Michael brown for his charismatic friends like Sid Roth and Keneth Copeland who have destroyed so many lives with their actions.
9:07 "I don't think Luther was aware that what he was saying was sinful"
What a terrible excuse. You can advocate killing innocent people as long as you arent aware its sinful?
Obviously that doesn't make it less of a sin but I bet if he was explained from scripture why it was wrong he'd repent. I hope you watch the short video on this channel that chris did on Martin Luther he explains it in more detail there. Also, remember that Luther is dead and not many people actually read church history but Benny Hinn is alive and very popular. Brown only brought this topic up to move away from that.
Hypocrisy??? Are you joking Dr. Brown? You who has constantly claimed that you don't know abut the NAR? You who supports Sid Roth and his nonsense? You who behaved as you did at Brownsville? Dr. Brown should address those issues before you attack others for their supposed hypocrisy! And how can you Dr. Brown state that you are prepared to sit with Chris Rosebrough and speak with him when you have refused to debate these issues in public with him in the past? Debate in public if you have the courage of your convictions!
and dr brown bans EVERYONE who posts on his youtube channel things he disagrees with. Ive called out his hypocracy on israel and got banned.
How did he behave at Brownsville?
CR said that he would meet with Dr Brown, but no cameras.
@@e.m.8094 A generous offer from Pastor Rosebrough given the history of Brown''s refusal to debate with him in the past. The history of this is important but perhaps many are not aware.
@@conceptualclarity The videos are available and it is better if you do your own research rather than hear others' versions.
Samson had flaws. David had flaws. Everyone but Jesus had flaws what’s Browns point
There is a difference between having character flaws like a weakness for women and being an openly hostile racist who encouraged ppl to hate a certain group of ppl for no logical reason, especially as it pertains to the Jews. Someone who hates the Jews to the extent Luther did is not just suffering from a character flaw. They are reflecting Satan's own hatred for them.
By your comment, you can accept Kenneth Copeland, because he has flaws due to not being Jesus. (just putting it into perspective of what Brown's point most likely is)
Brown's point (from the round table discussion) is that why is it not enough to also say "Benny Hinn has flaws" and "Martin Luther has flaws" and still accept them as believers and brethren?
Brown only brought this up to deflect from Benny Hinn's false teachings. Brown said (in the Roundtable) that Luther was worse that Hinn.
Of course we all agree that Luther sinned but Brown isn't understanding why bringing that up doesn't excuse him from calling out Hinn. Because Brown thinks that people like Chris need to call out Luther if they call out Hinn.
Dr. Brown had a lot of grace in that convo, when he knows how mocked he is by Chris. I must say, both men handled that very well, and I think I can see how both are trying to honour the holiness of God, in different ways.
It seems Dr. Brown honours God's holiness by being extremely (too) careful when it comes to judging by fruits (unless as bad as Bickel), because only God knows peoples' hearts and can know 100% if they're a wolf. And Chris seems to honour God's holiness by holding teachers to a high standard and calling them out when they don't respect God's word and the Gospel (clear sign of a wolf).
I fall more to the latter, but after realising the above, I have more respect for Dr. Brown now. Like Piper, he wants to be loving and not tear down someone who may be a brother, for fear of God.
Respect on your self control, Chris. Respect.
It’s the first time it’s ever been displayed
Dr. Brown sure knows how to strain out a gnat and swallow a camel. He steadfastly refuses to call out false teachers in the charismatic movement for the sake of "unity".
Denouncing Luther for calling for the murder of Jews is straining at a gnat? Seriously?
@@markkozlowski3674good point.
When you think about it, they're actually saying that calling for the killing of Jews in mass is actually a lesser evil than the "heresies" spoken by the Charismatic leaders they don't agree with.
So, Charismatic "heresies" will break the camel's back for sure, but not calling for the murder of entire Jewish communities. That will never break the camel's back, that only makes Luther "a man of his times".
And they still can't see the hypocrisy of it all????
Brown has unity with the devil and is a false teacher. Brownsville fake revival to a host of sad obvious deceptions of chaos that he affirms from near every false teacher of note.
There was two cases in the bible where Paul lashed out and let go when it comes to preaching/teaching the bible: the Judaizers adding to the gospel message, Paul rebuked fiercely in Acts 1 with the requirement of circumcision to be saved and the group who preached the gospel but with wrong motivation and even so, Paul rejoices (Phil 1:15-18).
The problem with the NAR is they are more like the Judaizers, adding to scripture saying that salvation must come with healing and prophecy or whatever. Paul would rebuke this fiercely. People like Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn not only adds to scripture but their motives are also very questionable. For Luther, his hate towards the jews is kinda like Paul's strong language against the Judaizers in Gal 5:12 but taken to the logical end where it's become way too much to the point of wishing them death and condemnation where as Paul would gladly switch places with his Jewish brothers if he had the choice. At the end of the day, Luther and the NAR leaders are not "equal" as Dr. Brown claims.
NAR preaches and teaches dangerous doctrine and even heresey which can lead people to damnation though they themselves may believe they're doing God's work and have the best intentions. So did the Judaizers. Luther preached and taught right doctrine for most of his life and it was sad to see his zealous-ness lead him down a dark path like Jonah who did not wish the Ninevites be saved. I would see Luther as a Jonah at the end of his life, someone God sent who helped the church but had deep character flaws while the NAR leaders are the Judaizers who are, in their own ignorance, harming the church with poisonous doctrine.
You explained this very well. Thank you for sharing ☺️
I remember reading Luther's, "On the Jews and their Lies," and I totally agree with my brother, Chris Rosebrough.
Luther's book was PRIMARILY a Theological Treatise!
Read it for THAT reason alone; no other!
Luther lived in a time where the Church and State were ENMESHED for so long (over 1,000 YEARS), that unraveling that enmeshment took a long time.
The USA (the "lamb like beast" of Rev. 13:11-17) tried to clear that up.
*Soli Deo Gloria*
As an historical observation, in the 16th Century they still had blasphemy laws, and rabbis both practiced and taught that Jewish people ought to daily blaspheme Christ, who is God. The sanction for unrepentant, intentional, and persistent blasphemy was the death penalty. It had nothing to do with race. The Torah itself prescribes the death penalty for blasphemy. The idea of the death penalty for blasphemy is historical and Scriptural.
I couldn't agree with you more, Dr. Brown.
I’ve been immensely blessed by Dr. Brown and his ministry and love for the Lord. I hope he and Chris can follow through on this get together and, by God’s grace, bring some unity to two parts of the body that love to attack each other.
So glad that the Bible gives us so much guidance on how to live our lives. Thankful that Paul and Peter called error by giving the church the truth. I imagine they wouldn’t spend a lot of time on social media calling out people but would invest in building up the church relationally and discipling them rather than a drive-by shooting.
But Paul spent night and day calling out false teachers.🤔
Maybe you forgot about that part?
Dr Brown made an extremely relevant point at the round table discussion. Many people go round nit picking, looking for sound bites, and generally painting every ‘charismatic’ with the same brush. When the absolutely abominable behaviour of Luther is raised, it gets brushed aside. That’s unequal measure. Wake up!
I totally agree.
It’s a prime example of Godwin’s Law coupled with a tu quoque
@ahall3823 you disagree with the historical context of how Chris replied to that?
@@jeffk4355 to be honest, I’d prefer not to get into the historical context too much. I believe there is some truth to what Chris is saying. But putting my beliefs aside, even if Chris is 100% correct about the historical context, the point still remains. Luther had some unquestionably heretical teachings. God doesn’t change with ‘historical context’. Today, some people are so quick to yell ‘false teacher’ via their platform without knowing the details. Then, worse still, they paint all ‘charasmatic’ Christian’s with the same brush. I’ve heard so many straw-man arguments. It’s an unequal measure. God hates it.
@@ahall3823baloney, I've not seen Chris paint ALL charismatics with the same brush. And then you procede to tell us what God hates...
I'll tell you that what Benny hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Paula white and others like them are doing is downright evil. And destroying people's lives and faith, pushing some away from God and into an eternity in hell.
I've gone through some hellish, horrible times as a result of the influence of Charismatic and so called "spirit filled" churches.
You and Doc Brown need to think long and hard about what YOU trivialize.
As an expat who has been outside the United States for over 25 years, I feel fortunate to only have to endure this debate from a distance. And as someone who still reads 1 Corinthians 14:1 literally (As well as the rest of the NT). I cannot recall even one of Dr. Roth's guests, or the guest's of Remnant Radio, or your guest's Dr. Brown, to have that gift. Would that they had, Isa 50:4-5. I find it ironic that Dr. Brown such an ardent defender of the gift of prophecy, would be so incensed when God chooses instruments like Chris Rosebrough and Steve Kozar to speak to those who listen, Rev 2:16-17. A plain reading of 1 Cor 5:11 "covetous" and Paul's demand to judge, and the Apostle John's warning to not go beyond the doctrine of Christ 2 John 9-11 (I would add in either word or practice)...might prick the conscience of those devastated by the indignation of Christ, Rev 21:7. It is Ken Copeland's mansion, not Luther's grave that the current debate is about. It is Bill Johnson's school (2 John 9-11), not history's crimes that are our generation's concern. The dead have no ears to listen to your rebuke Dr. Brown. Would that you have ears to hear the living word that comes to you, Prov 12:1, Prov 9:7-8. And I do not hesitate to call you "Dr. Obfuscation". Because that is what you are, and that is what you do. If you had equal weights in your bag of criticisms how relieved I would be.
Well said. I agree.
Well stated!
I watched the original round table discussion ( that was an epic watch I had to do over 3-4 sittings). I found that Sam and Michael are very much caught up in Post Modernism, as there language was peppered with it all through the discussion. Justin was very gracious and a true example of kindness when he referred to Michael as having a huge deficit in his discernment. I wander how long it will be before both men realize that maybe they should trust the word of God as Justin and Jim do, especially after they put out a written statement that they were highly deceived by Mike Bickle and really didn't really know him as well as they had.
Frankly I found Jim's response to be a bit lackluster towards Luther's failings(One thing not mentioned is that some of Luther's comments on the book of James that would be fairly heterodox[Desiring to reject it from the canon]). As for the others, Michael Brown was quite evasive(Which somewhat fits with his aptitude for not checking out the people he carries water for), and Justin Peters's conflation of the people promoting the blab it and grab it "gospel"(Word of Faith, Name it and claim it...etc), the Prosperity gospel, and the NAR with the charismatic movement by putting forward the notion that the heretics are the mainstream within the movement(He did handle this particular excursion fairly well though otherwise), and thereby writing off the others as also being aberrant by association(Which to give him credit, he was far more distinct in this on this occasion than many others). Sam Storms did far better than Michael Brown on his side of the table, although I'm really not fond of his associations with Mike Bickle. It will be interesting to see what ends up happening with him going through the lot of Ihop's propaganda over the years and see what comes of that.
I feel like this is a thing now: find the most impressive flaw you can in a past Christian hero (Luther, Edwards), read the flaw through a modern lens in order to maximize how bad it looks, and then use the whole thing to avoid calling out gross current sins in current Christian leaders. I'm sure it's fair to point out Luther's horrible rants. But at some point you have to land the plane and give some criteria for when you WILL call out a modern leader. At some point, you will do that, right? I mean, if you would've rebuked Luther when he was alive, won't you rebuke Hinn and Copeland now?
And isn't there a difference between rage + church/state theology (Luther) and cold, calculated fleecing of the flock (Hinn, Copeland)? Both sins, but... And why didn't Brown acknowledge Chris's point about the difference between racism and violent religious opposition? If we call Luther a racist, aren't we actually confirming the way his stuff is used to support modern racism? But if we point out that his sin was actually religious violence and not racism, won't we accomplish a good thing by removing him as a potential support for modern antisemitism?
And don't we also need to separate a man's guilt from the historical effect of his sin? If participating in state-enforced theology damns you to hell, then you'll have to gut the middle half of church history--you'd have to consign most Christians, Eastern and Western, to hell between Constantin to the Reformation... right?
A modern lens? At what point in history do you think it was proper to call for the murder of non-Christians?
It's very interesting the sudden conversation between charismatics and cessationists. I do hope another round table discussion takes place with Chris.
I am a charismatic but when I came out of NAR it was Chris and Justin that taught me so much of the wrong teaching of the NAR world.
I've never heard this part about Luther but I do have to wonder why it's Browns main argument?
Like why he is not judging the obvious false teachers of today but uses a single 400 yr old man as his argument.
I don't think this round table did him any favors at all for it has exposed his biased towards false teachers who are his friends and colleagues.
Brown’s ministry is to his fellow Jews, which is why he knows so much about Luther. Also, in the roundtable he admitted that Hinn and others were false teachers based on what he was told about them, which is something the Calvinists on the panel would not admit regarding Luther.
@@TheAhull15 I didn't know any of this about Luther which I find shocking now. Seems a very important piece of Intel that is rather hidden.
Justin and Osman did agree that they'd call Luther a false teacher today.
Brown's wording was more like ..... 'if the teachers are in fact doing as you say then I would call that a false teaching... but you have to know the man's life. And I don't watch their ministry vids.
It doesn't take doing deep dives into personal lives to see Hinn, Copeland, Johnson and Bickle as teaching false. He never said his friends were false teachers. He seemed to be stuck on the idea that calling them false teachers meant he was sentencing them to hell. He was dogmatic and ridiculously stubborn on the issue.
Brown frustrated me so much I didn't listen to last 25 minutes. It's because of this good ol boys club that false teachers have been robbing, lying to, and doing massive damage to the body of Christ for past 30 years!!
@@destinycoach5
I missed the part where Justin and Osman agreed that Luther was a false teacher. I didn't watch the entire 4 hour roundtable, however. Did that happen towards then end of the video? I know when it was initially brought up they refused to admit it.
@@TheAhull15 that's right they would not say that. Then they talked around the circle few more times and brown bright it right back and asked them. Peters said if Luther was here today and doing saying those things then yes id call him false.
@@destinycoach5 I heard that too. I disagree. He, Luther, may have a strong idea but he sure isn't a false teacher. Luther still had a lot of popish influence regarding the Jews.
Misdirection, Godwin's Law, and a tu quoque all in one. Bravo, Brown
I thought that was very gracious on both parties!
Thank The Lord!
There's an important distinction to be made here. Martin Luther is dead and his works are complete : we can now look back on what he taught, compare it to Scripture. On the other hand, in our current time, we have people alive today with big platforms who are teaching and prophetising falsely and who continue to do damage to the body of Christ.
Most people on the side of Dr Michael Brown will agree that God used Martin Luther to shine a light on the Gospel. But what he said and did in his later life is to some extent irrelevant, since our standard is the Bible, not the life of Luther, and we only accept Lutheran teachings in as much as they agree with Holy Scripture. Indeed, that fact that he was far from perfect puts us on guard against uncritically accepting his teachings, but incites us to measure his teachings against the Bible.
As for those who are preaching false doctines and spouting false prophecies, they must be urgently called out and stopped before they do more damage. That sense of urgency and outrage among their critics may be abrasive at times. At the same time these false teachers have many friends and relationships and there is a tendency within this wider circle to refrain from criticising, which creates a barrier around the false teachers.
The invitation to have discussions between the opposing camps is excellent news which will certainly favor the truth over relationships.
Very well said.
Typical Brown, always answering with a question. All he ever does is skirt the issue.
that's all apologists for you,. not one is honest. never trust a christian is my motto.
So Chris is saying Martin Luther did not have the Holy Spirit if he did not know what he was saying in condemning the Jews... I experience immediate conviction and I hope to never loose this...
That's not what he said at all. If you are a christian you have the Holy Spirit. He's talking more along the lines of he didn't understand that it was sinful (because of the time he lived in) but I bet if he did understand he would repent. Please watch Chris' video that is on this channel about Martin Luther he explains it in detail.
Brown has zero discernment. Defending the blasphemous heresies of Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, Bill Johnson and others is evil.
Did you watch the video? Because he didn't defend any claims of Kenneth Copeland. He explicitely mentioned, several times, that if Justin Peters was accurate in his discriptions of Kenneth Copeland, then it is absolutely heresy.
The only thing he seemed to "defend" was the fact that he hasn't researched enough to make a claim about anyone's salvation.
It's being slow to speak, and quick to listen.
And this is the point, it is in some senses sad that there was a kind of tit for tat scoring Luther against Hinn, etc. I think that there needs to be a bit more grace offered, lets not straw man or make ad hominem attacks.
I like both these brothers. I feel like that is as sharp as disagreement between brothers with respect as it gets. Well done both of you. I hope good things come from this.
Luther was also dealing with the fact that the Jews had been altering the Hebrew text and outlawed the LXX since about 100AD. Contextually he was just saying what the Bible said about people who opposed Jesus Christ Messiah whether by theology or deed.
You say this was being done by "the Jews"? All of them? And that therefore all Jews are responsible for this alleged altering?
Not adhering to the strict Oral Laws of the Pharisees-Scribes imposed, Traditions of the Elders, (Oral Laws that were added) found in Book of Matthew. The Pharisees also changed the Feast Days and calendar. Exodus 11 ? PASSOVER was to be the beginning of months -( Nisan- Spring-March-April) per the LORD to Moses and Aaron. Not the Fall. 🤷🏽
Not a Scholar, but a listener- reader of the Word.
According to Sam Storms and Brown everyone has a good heart and cannot be judged, unless you see them face to face. These men are full of 'Hot Air'. Mike Bickle, Benny Hinn, Todd White, in their eyes cannot do anything wrong and their theology is perfect. You know why? Because he believe the same garbage as they do. I'm with you Pastor Chris and I'm glad you stand for truth.
WHAT A GRACIOUS OFFER DR. BROWN.
Maybe they'll smoke a peace pipe!
Dr. Michael Brown seems to be using Martin Luther as a distraction from the fact that he has many false teachers in his inner circle. I think we can all agree that Martin Luther was sinning in many things he said, calling for the deaths of anyone for any purpose, and was a false teacher in that regard. That goes without saying. But it seems as though Dr. Brown's argument is "my friends don't teach anything as bad as Martin Luther did, so it's not as important." Whether or not Martin Luther is a false teacher has nothing to do with Dr. Brown's partnership with false teachers.
It seems as though he's trying to discredit his critics by making them out to be hypocrites while simultaneously showing himself to be one. He refuses to call people false teachers solely on the basis of their teachings if he doesn't have a personal relationship with them. Then he turns around and condems Osman, Peters, and Roseborough for their comments on Luther based solely on Luther's teachings. By Dr. Brown's logic, he cannot call Luther a false teacher because he didn't know him personally. He wants people to judge Luther on his teachings but refuses to do the same for his own friends like Sid Roth, for example.
Well stated!
Pray that this beef fruitful for the two of them. If these two could come to some sort of reconciliation, or common understanding, with one or the other being able, or willing to admit that he was wrong about something, they could be a powerful duo. But the Lord will do What he will do.
@Clouseauish that is a great question. I don’t want to say that he’s lost, but I can’t disagree that your logic is pretty sound. Either way, pray that God help him.
Holy moly all these comments seep with such elitism and arrogance. We get it, your camp loves to think youre the only ones with discernment and sound teaching. Such disrespect for Dr Brown who has labored for the Lord in many ways for so long.
I'm a cessationist who actually agrees with you. The more of the nasty comments I read about Brown the sadder I'm getting. "A new commandment I give unto you, that you love one another as I have loved you. By THIS shall all men know that you are my disciples, for you have love one for another."
There is a way to disagree without seeming like you'd run the person over if you got the chance.
Also, to compare Luther to Benny Hinn is insane. Only mr brown can do that.
It is insane.
Why don’t people see the hypocrisy and double standard the American gospel guys put forward when they try to protect Luther from his “blind sins” yet aren’t charitable to Benny Hinn for his blind sins? Why can’t they be consistent in condemning both Luther and Hinn as false teachers/non Christians or give charity to both as brothers in the Lord with blind spots?
I am of the view that God chastened Luther by removing him from this life following his diatribe against the Jews. I read it and was astonished at the venom that dripped from his pen. But my issue with Hinn stems from an incident in 1997 when he appeared on TBN at Billy Joe Daugherty's conference in Tulsa. That might a huge face demon appeared in my living room laughing at me. Hinn's message was a contributing factor in my mental battle that I was dealing with. I am convinced that the enemy used his ministry to target my mind as a 18 year-old Christian who was about two years old in the Faith.
And I will add that I am Charismatic, although I no longer subscribe to word faith doctrine like I used to
That's very interesting, Chris. I knew a man who loved the Lord so much he gave most of his income to a missionary he'd befriended online. He went to India several times to help his family build things for his community and little church there. But when the man I knew married his ex wife again, after both had been married and divorced to other people, my friend got very ill and died within a year from an aggressive cancer.
I wondered if it was God's chastening, and still do to this day. I wonder if God did the same thing with Luther.
I am not a Dr. Brown fan and I find he constantly obfuscates on issues that he knows to be problematic and refuses to confront the constant problematic and sinful issues of charismatic church however There is no way Pastor Chris can defend anything Luther said. Let what Luther said be where it is, awful and disgusting
Have you seen Roseborough’s video? He says Luther’s comments and sentiments were sinful.
@@1momsway His video was way too long for that to have been his message. He said a lot of other words to soften the sinfulness of those comments.
See, I'm actually not a fan of CR. At all. The only thing I've ever heard him do is point of figurative finger at everyone else. I have yet to learn anything new from him or gain anything positive from his ministry whatsoever. Does he have any full-length videos where he doesn't throw shade on someone else?
@@e.m.8094that’s what I’m saying too. CR is totally divisive and not helpful. Anyone can tear down verbally things they oppose that doesn’t take any character. But to thoughtfully edify the Body of Christ does. To that point I have seen Brown rebuke many many excesses of charismania and written volumes of articles and stories in the topic that are actually helpful.
@@bobs8005I don't know if Brown is an apologist. That may not be his area of expertise. But whatever he has written I honestly doubt is forceful enough to get the attention of those causing harm within the Charismatic community
Appear on a show with Pastor Chris, Dr. Brown. Stop ignoring his emails.😂
It's interesting that the Doc knows all of Chris' nicknames for him, but is ignorant to all of the heresies and cons propogated by some of the giants in the charismatic faith. I'm not sure why Brown will go to the mattresses to besmirch the name of Martin Luther but can't spot a false teacher in Sid Roth!!!! Are we going to have to live another 400 years so that we can compare the rotten fruit coming from modern day charismania to the fruit that came from the protestant reformation started by Martin Luther? (insert singing) "One of these things is not like the others. One of these things does not belong." Great job Chris!!! You are right in this matter all the way. There is something very dark about needing Martin Luther to be "not a Christian". This guy....
Bingoooo. Even when video evidence was giving. It was still "well he's a good guy, I sat down with him". I cannot take him & Sam seriously after that round table.
Dr. Brown, based on this discussion, doesn't believe in the gospel. He believes in works righteousness and that every individual sin must be confessed like the Catholics. He doesn't believe in God's pure grace in forgiveness of sins, even the ones we are not aware of for ourselves. This is a result of rejecting Jesus' giving of the Holy Spirit in baptism.
Mattew chapter 3. John says he needs to be baptized by Jesus, and
that Jesus' baptism is with the Holy Spirit. Baptism is Jesus' work that is a need for us, and it gives the Holy Spirit for the forgiveness of sins. We are free from sin, and our conscience is clear from our sin, known and unknown, because we trust in Jesus and his work and free gifts to us.
Jenn in da house!!!! Marry me!!
@@joabthejavelin5119he believes salvation by grace alone through faith alone but that true Christian’s bear fruit. Same thing MacArthur, Peter’s, and I think Roseborough believe usually I thought…
dr browns number 1 goal is to get support for israel, IMO he is an israeli agent. he REFUSES to call out israels sins from abortion to the current genocide of the palastinian people. he clearly values Jews above all non jews. he correctly opposes white christian nationalism but supports jewish nationalism in israel. BOTH are supremacists movements .
Dr Brown does not like anybody to speak. He interrupts everybody. Especially when he doesn't like what they're saying. He never lets anybody finish.
I saw this and had to stop this video. I do not have any respect for Michael Brown. Though I am sure Chris Rosebrough can defend himself very well and I would put him in a biblical ring with Michael Brown and it would not even last one round and Michael Brown would get knocked out.
Though I tried to watch this video earlier the fact it started with Michael Brown going on and placing the sin of Martin Luther on a scale because his was worth and any other made me immediately think that Michael Brown is an ecumenist and that he determined that the sin of Martin Luther's sin was far greater than anyone else made me cringe and thought I was listening to a Roman Catholic priest.
The other thing that struck me is Michael Brown, the one who has defended those predators who have used their "spiritual" gifts to abuse women/men is berating Chris Rosebrough for defending Martin Luther's conduct and sin, and if you actually listened to the Chris Rosebrough video you would hear and see that there is context to be considered concerning the events of that era and Chris Rosebrough did not, from my point of view, excuse or brush off the sin of Martin Luther. What is Michael Brown trying to do? Remove the stain from defending the indefensible of his NAR brothers. If there was any credibility concerning this man Michael Brown he would remove himself from any ministry.
Bravo to Chris!! I've never seen Brown give the opposition so much UNINTERRUPTED time. He must be getting worn down by all the truth tellers coming out more & more & confronting his falsehoods.
Gracious to a fault!🙄😧
Believe me Kim, Dr. Brown is a truth teller. You are right though, the naysaying cessationists are wearing him down, but God is his strength. I will pray for Dr. Brown.
@@tammy9497Yes calling Benny hinn and Copeland a christian surely shows he is a truth teller (I am being sarcastic).
@@tammy9497pray for Chris too
Isn't it sad that he won't even watch Chris's work? I think that's pathetic. How could you actually know what somebody is saying about you if you have never watched their videos as brown claims? He's one of those"I don't know" type of guys. One that never stands for anything and doesn't know anything about anything.
The doc knew he had nicknames. I'm pretty sure he's watched a few. lol
"Never stands for anything"?! It sounds like you've never watched a Dr Brown video, lol.
Brown loves to revision history through a 21st century lens.
Example: If America had blasphemy laws, which we did, and punished those ,hypothetically, by death, then they would not be unlawful for enforcing the laws. Thus, under the Roman Empire, they were doing just that. I’m not saying that the laws for right, but they were, as the law stated it, lawful in caring out what they prescribed.
Yes, in the roundtable discussion one could easily get the impression that you Michael meant that Martin Luther was in hell. And even now, when you are asked a direct question about this, you cannot give a clear answer. You can only at most bring yourself to say: Only God knows. Yes, Martin Luther's anti-Semitic words were sinful. But your attempt to imply that Martin Luther is in hell is also both sinful and slanderous. In this you need to make a public repentance.
None of us knows where Martin Luther is. I hope he had genuinely repented of his sins and is therefore with the Lord
Chris might actually get something about Martin Luther wrong but his assessment of Michael Brown is spot on
I pray that both Dr Michael and Chris can become friends and work together to advance the gospel.
Dr Brown would never never do that..his ego is too big. Everyone else is wrong and he is correct on every.
I really don't think that's possible. Mr Brown defends his friends more than the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Amen to that prayer 🙏. I have learned so much from both of these men. I don't like Dr Brown's habit of deflecting sound criticism with whataboutism.
11:29 Brown to Rosebrough: "I just want to tell you this your video is going to be used for destructive purposes. It will, in the eyes of people, downplay the severity of the sins of Martin Luther."
Talk about slander. Brown is relying on his audience to NOT watch Rosberough's video. It's unbeliebale how he belittles the intelligence and activities of his audience.
11:40 Brown admits HE HAS A MORE GREATER KNOWLEDGE of Hinn and Copeland to the point he is able to compare them and dsiregard them to these selct few but horrific writings of Luther: "What he said and did is far more severe to me than anything anybody's brought to me about Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland or anybody in terms of the weight the magnitude, the ugliness, the horror of it."
11:00 Brown to Rosebrough: "I'm answering questions for decades, trying to be as [inaudible] what the Apostle of Obfuscation, whatever name. I think- I think it's stupid. I think it's petty. I think it's divisive. I think it's even slanderous and unhelpful."
But is the title for Brown as 'Apostle of Obfuscation' wrong? Not at all. Brown is an apostle. He lies. He is tricky. And he engages in deceitful/fallacious arguments and false theologies that demonise his critics. Wicked man.
Boy, Brown got destroyed on his own program! Love you both but Brown has no Cultural understanding at all.
The bigger question: Does Christ forgive us for unrepentant sin that we were unaware of and joined in with the rest of our generation in committing? Does his atonement cover that?
Chris actually answers that in his Martin Luther video that is on this channel. It's a short one if you are asking it because you don't know.
Sometimes I ask questions to get people to think and not because I don't know so I'm not sure which reason you asking ☺️
I hear what Brown is saying, but I don’t think anyone is trying to uphold Luther and act like what he did was acceptable.
I also don’t agree with Brown in his belief that in order to condemn someone for heresy and false teaching you must know them privately for a longer period of time. I almost think he is breaking his own rule by vehemently attacking Luther in the way Hinn was targeted by for his false teachings
Protestants do put Luther on a pedestal because they claim that he supposedly restored true biblical doctrines in spite of how evil he obviously was. Protestants are 100% guilty of idolizing Luther this way because they would never say the same thing about the pope. As an outsider, i have observed how Protestants universally characterize the pope as an antichrist while they try to lump Luther in the same boat as someone like King David.
Thank you Dr Brown I really appreciate you and thank God for you.
God hates unequal weights and measures because he hates lying.
How did Charles Stanley remain a preacher after the divorce. The baptist belief is a stumbling block for me to be an officer or deacon. I was divorced over 33 years ago.
In Luther's day there was no such entity of anti-semiticsm, It is a modern day creation. Why not call Paul and anti-semite
Paul, or at least the persons who made additions to Paul's Epistles after his death, was the founder of Christian Antisemitism.
Hm..great point!
Good discussion. Should have more. Have that convo off air.
AG Part V: Brown VS Roseborough
I honestly don't know if CR could remain calm enough to debate Dr Brown for 4 hours. 🤔
Even better title: Brown + Roseborough.
At 10:14, what Dr. Brown says about Martin Luther, if sin is sin regardless if one committing it is sincere in his beliefs, why is he not willing to apply that standard to Benny Hinn, Todd White, Kenneth Copeland? In the roundtable discussion he heard them teach heresy and error, but dismissed that by saying they may sincerely believe that, and that doesn't make them unsaved. How is that not double standard?
I am honestly trying to understand this, not stirring the pot. I respect all the ministers who participated in the roundtable discussion, am opened to listening to the best and the most sound continuationist proponents, and am not dogmatic about continuationism vs cessationism just yet (I am a Reformed Baptist), but there seems to be a bias here when it comes to the topic of Jews and Judaism. What deeply concerns me is that it seems like saying rank heresy about our Triune God and the Gospel gets a pass, but saying horrible things about Jews gets you condemned no questions asked (at 11:42, just wow)...
This is what I know for sure, the devil does not want unity between Christ following brothers and you two meeting together is a threat to the gates of Hell. I trust it will be profitable time together in the Lord.
Fantastic dialogue
Chris should of been at the round table
He probably wish he was.
I would love to see theologians from both camps come together and take a stand against heresies in both camps. Call them to the carpet, agreed in their desire to expose lies and heresies and abominable practices in both camps. I'd also like to see Jesus return today ;)
Way to go Chris.
Keep your eyes on Jesus. Love you all.
So, according to Brown: Martin Luther is bad and probably in hell; Kenneth Copeland (and his ilk) are prophets, healers and men of God. Ok, got it.
What Brown fails to take into account, like Chris said, it’s not our sins that condemn us to hell. But that come judgement day all our fruits will be tested. The bad fruit will be burned up and we will be rewarded on what remains. No human knows every sin they’ve committed. No human will die having repented of every sin they committed. Even Dr Brown.
Psalm 19:12-13, Who can discern his errors? Acquit me of hidden faults. Also, keep back Your slave from presumptuous sins. Let them not rule over me. Then I will be blameless and I shall be acquitted of great transgressions.
Michael Brown is not a man to be recommended. He will stand on his head, and tie himself in knots to protect all manner of weird, wacky, and dangerous behavior that we find in today's charismania.
I respect and support "The Dangerous Dr. Brown". LOL
I love Chris’s expositional teachings and tend to think Dr. Michael Brown turns a blind eye to nonsense on the Charismatic side of the church…however I think his stance here is fair. I think, however it should lean him more on the side of sayings Benny Hinn/etc’s teaching are harmful as well. I would love to see them sit down together for a conversation and show actual clips of disgraceful charismatic teachings so he can’t turn a blind eye to it and talk through where the line is. I would love to see both sides of the aisle end up agreeing honestly.