An online statement, though overall benefitting the body of Christ, defines apostle in a dangerous way. It is titled NAR and Christian Nationalism and was issued October 10, 2022. (Updated on Oct. 8, 2025)

I am just now getting around to analyzing it because … well … I have been busy writing on other topics. But the NAR Movement and Christian Nationalism are still going strong, so this post is still relevant. I’m not too late.

I wish the statement had been split in two–one on NAR and the other on Christian Nationalism, but here we are.

I also use the statement as a springboard to analyze other ideas and movements circulating throughout the American church. Examples: What is Christian or theological dominionism? What is the seven mountain mandate? What is an apostle? What is a prophet? What is patriotism? What about secure national borders?

I write as a sympathetic insider to the Renewal Movements, not a hostile outsider. But I don’t write as an insider to the NAR or Christian Nationalism, as the rest of this post will show.

I use the NIV here. If you would like to see many other translations, please click on biblegateway.com.

Let’s begin.

New Apostolic Reformation

Let me first briefly distinguish between some terms, for clarity. The Renewal Movements ≠ NAR (or Christian Nationalism for that matter), though NAR does seem to have grown out of the Charismatic Movement. However, please don’t confuse NAR and the Charismatic Movement; they are not identical. Critics need to use more nuance and clarity. Beginning in the 1980s, NAR seems to be a more recent runaway and breakaway and later movement from the larger movement, which has been around since 1960.

However, a question: has NAR taken over the Charismatic Movement? I don’t think so, because I had never heard of it until youtubers made a big thing of it. But I can be persuaded if the evidence is there. I don’t deny, however, that this movement exists. It does.

Warning, though. I have also observed that heresy hunters can paint with a broad brush. As the rest of this post will prove, though, I in no way approve of NAR.

Here’s my take on NAR’s beginning, just from my observations, without formally studying it.

As I understand things, C. Peter Wagner (d. 2016), professor and missionary and church growth consultant (and probably other leaders), got the idea from Ephesians 4:11, which shows the need for apostles and prophets. So he looked around for them, but spread his net too widely and appointed men who were not really apostles or prophets. Yet the NAR Movement is still going on, probably because men (and women) like the titles apostle and prophet. Confusion and defective Bible interpretations are difficult to uproot from churches.

This movement is based squarely, as I see things, on the big ideas and dreams of certain leaders with a weak exegesis of Scripture, so it has a very weak foundation. Therefore, this movement needs to be left behind. I don’t believe it was legitimate in the first place.

You can read a solid historical survey of NAR at Wikipedia here. It says NAR began and grew in the 1980s and 1990s. That sounds right to me.

The Statement on Apostles and Prophets

Now let me quote some of the points in the statement linked in the introduction, above.

First, I cannot affirm this next point because of some elements in the definition. They are a deal breaker for me.

• By “apostolic,” we are referring to visionary leaders who are missional, fathering, and pioneering, such as church planters, networkers, or movement leaders, often marked by their focus on gospel expansion beyond one local region. Such leaders are identified by their function, whether or not they use the term apostolic and whether or not they are Pentecostal or charismatic.

I like the terms “church planters,” “missional,” and “pioneering,” but only in a specialized sense, which I will explain below in the section on defining apostles (What Are Apostles?).

“Fathering” may be okay if it is used narrowly for a founder or church planter. Paul called himself this term (father) in 1 Corinthians 4:15, but the context was his founding the church in Corinth, a city which had been unevangelized. He did not use it as a permanent title (see Matt. 23:9).

Categorically, however, apostles are not “visionary leaders,” because anyone can have big ideas and grand schemes and “wow dreams!” Anyone can say, “The Lord spoke to me that I’m a visionary leader! Here’s my vision for the church! I dream big! Therefore I believe I’m now an apostle! Now lay hands on me to appoint me in public!” No. Too vague.

Over the years I have observed that so-called visionary leaders have promoted bad and inflated ideas, as the previous section showed. NAR is a bad and inflated idea by a big dreamer or dreamers.

Nor are apostles “networkers,” or “movement leaders.” Then what are they, biblically? (See the section below, titled, What Are Apostles?)

All of these latter terms are much too broad and vague and open the door for many people to walk through, even though they are not qualified to be apostles. When they misjudge God’s call on their lives and think more highly of themselves than they should, they open themselves to God himself judging them. He himself opposes the proud, and he himself gives favor to and exalts the humble. Too many leaders in the Charismatic Movement strut around like they own God’s Son’s church. They don’t. When God himself opposes them, they may come under satanic attack and deception. This explains, to a large degree, why there is so much error and tomfoolery coming from the Charismatic Movement. I believe the NAR Movement is one such manifestation of foolishness. There is no biblical foundation, just some novel and big ideas. Weak and unstable.

³ Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. (Phil. 2:3)

³ For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the faith God has distributed to each of you. (Rom. 12:3)

[…] All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because,

⁶ Humble yourselves, therefore, under God’s mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. […] (1 Peter 5:5b-6, citing Prov. 3:34)

The solution is for everyone to humble themselves and stay in their biblical lanes–the true calling of God on their lives.

This next point is spot on:

WE REJECT the belief that contemporary apostles carry the same authority as did the original Twelve Apostles.

The twelve are in a special class all their own, true. But let’s be clearer still. The only way that today’s apostles can possibly carry the same weight as Paul and Barnabas or Silas (none are members of the twelve) is to live like they did: itinerant, pioneering missionaries who lived uncomfortable lives and suffered persecution. Somehow I don’t believe today’s American apostles, who are now popping up everywhere, are willing to live like that.

These two points are also true:

WE REJECT the belief that every church must be submitted to apostles and prophets to be in right order before the Lord.

WE FURTHER OPPOSE the possible abuse of ecclesial titles that manifests itself in self-proclaimed apostles and prophets claiming territorial authority over pastors in a community, city, or nation.

If an apostle or prophet shows up at your church and demands to be in charge, tell him no. N-O, no.

Jesus to the church at Ephesus:

I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. (Rev. 2:2, emphasis added)

I agree with this point in the statement:

WE REJECT the belief that contemporary prophets have the exact same function or carry the exact same authority as did Old Testament prophets.

New Testament prophets (and therefore today’s prophets) must belong to a local church and submit to 1 Corinthians 14. Their words from the Lord are to be judged by others (v. 29). They cannot dominate the church service (vv. 31-33). The congregation is to test everything (1 Thess. 5:21). The people are also to test human spirits because many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).

New Testament Restricts Authority of Modern Prophets

First and 2 Timothy and Titus are long job descriptions about church governance. In no verse does Paul appoint apostles and prophets to lead the church. Elders. Always and only elders. And Paul gives special honor to the elders who work hard at the word and doctrine (or preaching and teaching) (1 Tim. 5:17). Barnabas and Paul appointed elders, not other apostles, nor prophets, in the churches in their first missionary journey.

Paul also appointed elders in the thriving and large church in Ephesus (Acts 20:13-38). Overseers and deacons governed (that is, served) the church at Philippi (Phil. 1:1). Paul commissioned Titus to complete what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town on Crete (Titus 1:5-9). And he commissioned Timothy to do the same in Ephesus, including male and female deacons (1 Timothy 3:1-13).

As to why Paul did not appear to have appointed elders in Corinth in his two surviving letters, go to this post and scroll down to point no. 23:

Check Out What Two Genuine Apostles Did and How They Lived

And this is partly true:

WE AFFIRM that the spirit of true apostles and prophets should exemplify the attitude and lifestyle of Jesus (Philippians 2:4-12), coming alongside other church and workplace leaders to serve them, not replace them.

However, since I don’t believe that an American Christian leader can be an apostle because America is already evangelized–the gospel saturates the airwaves and churches stand almost on every corner–an American apostle can easily be rejected, unless he can prove that he spent years on the mission field evangelizing in unreached areas. In that case, he can claim to be an apostle. As noted, the man who seeks the title in America is probably an evangelist who needs to keep evangelizing the lost in a saturated area. Not every soul is saved there. We need evangelists to help us reach the lost.

I agree that a prophet can contribute his ministry to a local church. Prophesy? Yes (1 Cor. 14:31-33). But be the head leader? No way.

Who Are Apostles?

Update:

At this link here:

Apostleship

I concluded that the NT describes only these apostles. I cannot find where the broad NAR definition or the one at the NAR and Christian Nationalism fit.

1.. Jesus: he is the sent one from heaven and commissioned by the Father. He is the Apostle of his church.

2.. The twelve: they form an exclusive class. They were foundational. They became itinerant, after leaving Jerusalem

After their time in Jerusalem, establishing doctrine and planting the church there, they became missionaries. Even Peter traveled outside Jerusalem to preach the gospel (Acts 9:32-10:48). No doubt other apostles did too, even much like evangelist Philip did (Acts 8:5-13; 26-40), even though their travels were unrecorded in Acts.

3.. Apostles of Christ: Some of them were foundational; Paul, Barnabas, James (Lord’s brother), and Silas?, Andronicus and Junia? They were itinerant, possibly except James

4.. Messengers of the churches: they were sent out by the churches to deliver messages and letters and establish order, under apostles and the sending churches.

The first three are out of reach for anyone today. The fourth one may not appeal to modern apostles because it takes away their “extraordinary authority.” “Apostles” today. must also meet the additional criteria under IV and avoid the bad criteria under VI.C and D, at the above link. Fulfilling these stringent requirements is extraordinarily rare. They must not see themselves as foundational, either.

The one factor that unites all of them is that they were on the move. Even Jesus crisscrossed Israel, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, building his early movement (“The Son of Man has no place to lay his head”; Matt. 8:20). Do apostles today want to be itinerant missionaries and plant churches, living in discomfort and deprivation that comes from an unsettled life? Do they meet the other criteria?

Update ends

As I see things, NAR has gone off the rails and should never have been started at all because the founders apparently did not correctly define what an apostle is. Even the excerpt from the statement, the first bulleted paragraph in the previous section, swung and missed.

Then which term should we use to describe networkers and movement leaders?

The answer is leaders in Romans 12:8 and 1 Corinthians 12:28.

As to Romans 12 8, BDAG, a thick Greek lexicon, defines the term leader as follows (edited to fit this format): (1) “To exercise a position of leadership, rule, direct, be at the head (of)“; (2) “to have an interest in, show concern for, care for, give aid.” The first definition fits v. 8 here. Nearly every translation says leads or leader or leadership. One says administrative ability. Older ones say ruleth or rules. An older one even says sovereign (!).  (Source).

In 1 Corinthians 12:28 the Greek word has been translated as follows: guidance, guides, administrators, administrating, administrations, governors, government, organizers, organizational gifts, managers, and of course leaders and leadership.

Gifts of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 and 12:28

Gifts of the Spirit in Romans 12:6-8

Therefore, let’s narrow down and reserve the term apostle only for pioneering missionaries who plant churches in unevangelized regions. Networkers or movement leaders or those who exercise general leadership in organizations or denominations in America or other gospel-saturated regions are not apostles or apostolic. You can pick the terms listed above to apply to these leaders. Not even church planters in evangelized areas are apostles. They are probably pastor-evangelists.

Don’t casually dismiss the two terms Paul offers us and hungrily claim the confusing title of apostle or apostolic.

Maybe the name of the movement or network should be called the New Leadership Reformation or the New Leadership Revolution, and not the New Apostolic Reformation (or even the New Apostolic Revolution/s or Movement/s).

Please see these two links.

Do New Testament Apostles Exist Today?

Check Out What Two Genuine Apostles Did and How They Lived

Two Sources of Confusion

Many prophets and apostles are confused because they do not understand the three sources that guide them. One is right, the other two are wrong.

1. Right: The Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7-11)

2. Wrong: Their own mind and imagination (Jer. 23 and Ezek. 13)

3. Wrong: Lying or deceiving spirits (1 Kings 22; 2 Chron. 18)

See this post for more information and quoted Scripture:

Three Sources of Prophecy

Therefore, they and their prophecies must be tested, as noted above.

As I see things, NAR has produced bad fruit, on balance. People are now confused as to whether they are apostles or not. They are not, unless they are pioneering missionaries in totally unevangelized regions. Did the American visionary founders and leaders of NAR listen to their own imagination or mind or even a lying spirit? I cannot affirm that they did not listen to those bad sources. I can only hope they did not.

Christian Nationalism

Now let’s shift gears into broader Evangelicalism. If I read things correctly, NAR can get political, but Christian Nationalism goes far beyond NAR.

I kind of like these two bullet points.

As for “Christian nationalism,” WE RECOGNIZE  that for some, this simply refers to a healthy form of Christian patriotism, of loving God and loving one’s country. In that sense, the term is benign. 

WE RECOGNIZE that America has a rich Christian heritage, despite its many historic failings, and that to the extent we have honored that heritage, the nation has been blessed. And we applaud those who encourage other Americans to pattern their lives after Christian principles that have helped bring God’s favor to our nation through the generations.

To me, gratitude for one’s country adds up to patriotism. I am grateful to God for the country I live in, but I don’t take things farther than that. I personally do not put the two terms Christian and Nationalism together. I prefer just being a grateful citizen of the American Republic, without joining a controversial movement. I like simplicity.

And I say yes to secure borders:

In addition, WE BELIEVE that nationalism is a biblical concept in the sense of nations having defined borders and identities, as mentioned by Paul in Acts 17 and by Moses in Deuteronomy 32. God sets national borders and governments and authority spheres for a purpose. 

I believe in sovereign borders, so we can protect our American identity. I am willing to accept legal immigrants, but a flood of illegal ones goes too far.

No Top-Down Takeovers

I agree on this point because it rejects Christian or theological dominionism.

WE REJECT the triumphalist, top-down, take-over of society as part of a so-called “dominion mandate,” also noting that we do not know of any major Christian movement that espouses such a top-down, take-over mentality.

I further do not believe in the seven-mountain mandate, which says to take over seven areas of society: family, religion, education, media, arts & entertainment, business, and government.

I wonder where medicine is on the list. And how do “arts & entertainment” become one unit? So we see there is already a problem even with forming this list in the first place. Maybe the number seven was chosen because of its biblical significance. That’s possibly why the visionary leader or leaders linked “arts and entertainment” as one unit and skipped medicine. Wonky and needless.

There is no need to follow a mandate, an idea concocted by even more visionary leaders. And no, Matthew 28:18, which says to make disciples of all nations, does not mean to take over entire nations by some quixotic quest.

Discipling nations ≠ Taking over nations.

The term “nation” is an abstraction without individual people. And so the clause in Matthew 28:18 simply means to go and preach and disciple people, individually, in all nations. Just focus on souls and get them saved and discipled, one at a time.

Even the apostles, who led thousands to the true Messiah, Jesus, in Jerusalem (Acts 2:41, 4:4, 6:7 [a large number of priests], 21:20), did not attempt to take over the temple or the Sanhedrin, the highest court and council in Judaism. Instead, they formed their own council (Acts 15) and preached their own message about the resurrected Son of God, the Messiah.

This path is more biblical and simpler: Christians just need to find jobs where they have skills. If they are teachers, let them teach. If they are business men or women, let them prosper. If they are doctors or nurses, let them practice their helping, healing gift. If they are called to run for political office, then may they succeed–if they really are called. Then everyone evangelizes at their jobs when the doors open up and wisdom is used.

No need for top-down takeovers.

Conclusion

Time to wrap this up.

I did not sign on to the statement because I believe the authors got the function of apostle wrong. Their broad definition leaves the door too wide open for abuse of the title, though I cannot claim to know that there is a direct link between the statement and the abuse. Rather, I don’t know where the authors got some of the elements in their definition in the first place. The elements don’t appear to come from Scripture, but from American culture and some innovative, visionary leaders and networkers and movement leaders dreaming up yet another novelty.

By my observation, no one living in America is a pioneering missionary who plants churches in unevangelized regions. I sure hope the authors of the statement, who were probably never pioneering missionaries in unevangelized regions, did not define apostle so broadly just to join an exclusive club or keep their high status. I have to trust, however, that their motives were good. They just need to study more on what an apostle is. I urge them to drop their title of apostle or apostolic.

The NAR Movement needs to be left behind. The man or men who started it had no mandate from God, nor do those who keep it alive. How do I know this? They did not follow Scripture in defining what an apostle is. Now the floodgates are open to all sorts of apostles who are  popping up everywhere in American Christianity and elsewhere around the globe, poisoned by American Christianity. Confusion and arrogance. Everyone needs to stay in their lane. Then the self-deception and demonic attacks will diminish.

I’m patriotic (= grateful) about living in my home country, but I don’t need the movement called Christian Nationalism to express my gratitude.

Christian or theological dominionism and the seven-mountain mandate are just some inflated ideas from innovative, visionary leaders (again!).They should have kept things simple and told Christians to follow the pure gospel and to be good witnesses at their jobs. Let’s ignore these mandates, so that they can just go away. American church leaders, especially of the charismatic variety, look for the Next Big Thing, but this relentless search is misguided.

The best way to influence society for righteousness is to build up the churches and evangelize the lost, so that they come to church. Then when we instruct the people in our churches on salvation and sanctification and evangelism, society will gradually change, one soul at a time. This is how I read Scripture.

The fatal flaw in these various movements is novelty. Busy, over-active American leaders fish around for new and exciting things, which lead them to wildly misinterpret the Bible. Innovation and dreaming big and experimenting with the church are leading all of us astray. So-called creative teams at church also need to be disbanded. Let’s return to the well-trodden paths and gospel simplicity and standard interpretations of Scripture. I prefer biblical exegetes over visionary leaders with their new ideas and big dreams.

I would like to see the Charismatic Movement reformed or maybe simply be left behind, if it is too late to be reformed. We shall see what the near future holds.

But I cannot, biblically speaking, abandon the gifts of the Spirit, mentioned throughout Acts and epistles (and the Gospels, if you know where and how to look). They’re biblical and bless the body of Christ, when they are exercised appropriately and without excess. That’s why God gave them to his Son’s church. And that’s why Paul clamped down on the excesses in 1 Corinthians 14. The gifts had to clarified yet retained. He didn’t throw them out. By God’s grace, I follow the Bible, not my experiences. Therefore, I cannot allow the abuse of the gifts to dissuade me from their biblical foundation and validity.

We need the gifts to fight the world, the flesh, and the devil (and disease) in our lives, and to help unredeemed people who need rescuing from the world, the flesh, and the devil (and disease). That’s the church’s mission: growth in Christ (sanctification) through Bible teaching and more infillings with the Spirit and then outreach.

Bottom line: overall, the statement, when read judiciously, benefits the body of Christ. The statement brought clarity in most points.

FINAL NOTE: I cannot cover all the points in the statement. But I agree with many of them not analyzed here, and I disagree with a few elements in other ones. But the points I did analyze should suffice to express my opinions about NAR and Christian Nationalism. I don’t see the need for either movement or any kind of dominionism. So at the end of the day I have to vote thumbs down on them.

RELATED

Observations on the Early Vineyard Movement

Analyzing the New Apostolic Reformation

Review of C. Peter Wagner’s Book ‘Churchquake’

Review of C. Peter Wagner’s Book ‘Apostles and Prophets’

Review of C. Peter Wagner’s Book ‘Apostles Today’

Review of Joseph Mattera’s Book ‘The Global Apostolic Movement and the Progress of the Gospel’

Calling Leaders by Name to Repent

Three Sources of Prophecy

Do New Testament Apostles Exist Today?

Check Out What Two Genuine Apostles Did and How They Lived

Do New Testament Prophets and Prophecy Exist Today?

New Testament Restricts Authority of Modern Prophets

False Prophets in Sinai Covenant and Imperfect Prophets in New Covenant: Life and Death Differences

What 1 Corinthians 14 Really Teaches

6. Gifts of the Spirit: Prophecy