Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 3
Drew describes “apostles” from the U.S. telling Thai Christians their church was “deficient” because they lacked apostles in a network; what assumptions about God’s work, authority, and “revival” are being smuggled in when spiritual legitimacy is tied to imported leadership and affiliation?
Another way to ask: U.S. “apostles” told Thai Christians their church was lacking because it wasn’t in an apostolic network. What hidden beliefs about God’s work, authority, and “revival” show up when a church is seen as valid only with outside leaders and connections?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript suggests this smuggles in the assumption that God’s work and “revival” require a special, imported authority structure—often mediated through U.S.-based networks—rather than Christ working through Scripture, the Spirit, and local faithful churches. It also assumes legitimacy comes from affiliation and recognized “apostles,” not from obedience to Jesus.
- Drew: U.S. “apostles… wanted to… explain that the reason the Thai church was deficient was because they lacked the authority from the United States to establish apostles in this network.”
- They promoted “a loose network” and taught them “how to find apostles so you can then have revival in your church.”
- Drew says this kind of teaching felt “so contrary to scripture” and “counter to the kingdom principles” he was trying to share.
- Joel describes NAR apostles as speaking “for God” with God’s authority, “functionally” like the Twelve.
- Both describe a model where revelation and direction flow top-down from apostles/prophets, not organically like Jesus’ kingdom.