Search This Blog

Saturday, 23 July 2016

jacob prasch moriel ministries: the gagging of the sisters!

We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ..... (2 Corinthians 10:5)

As before, I shall quote Jacob Prasch verbatim in order to avoid any accusation of quoting him out of context.

Jacob Prasch: "Did God use Deborah to bring victory to Israel? Yes, He did. But her head was covered by Barak....."  https://www.moriel.org/component/k2/item/1822-daughters-of-zion.html

"Hebrews 11:32 names four judges, it does not name Deborah. The judge that was named in the New Testament was Barak." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHAiwIE5EVI

"Women must have their head covered.... Can God use women without their head covered? No - things are going to go wrong. The serpent beguiled the woman and the serpent still beguiles the woman."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP6x2hhAzEI

Things are not quite so clear cut as Jacob Prasch would have us believe. An unbalanced and distorted view of the scriptures is always very dangerous as I am sure he well knows. Pat Roberts aptly points out: "Too many heads, too many coverings, the murky teachings of Jacob Prasch." {1} 

Was Deborah's head "covered" by Barak?

The Canaanites were defeated under the prophetic leadership of Deborah and the military leadership of Barak.. but make no mistake about it, Deborah was calling the shots. Deborah summoned Barak, the son of Abinoam, from his home at Kedesh in Naphtali, and ordered him, in the name of Yahweh, to take ten thousand men to Mount Tabor. He agreed, on condition that Deborah accompanied him (Judges 4:4-10). 

Deborah was judging Israel in her own right without any reference to a man.. the people of Israel came up to her for judgement (Judges 4:4-5). Barak was the next judge of Israel AFTER Deborah and he preceded Gideon. The scriptures make very clear that Barak would not get the honour for the victory over the Canaanites led by Sisera: .....the honor will not be yours, for the LORD will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman." (Judges 4:9). In fact the honour did not go to Deborah either, it went to Jael (Judges 5:24).

A few examples of judges, prophets and kings are given in Hebrews 11:32, Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets—  but we should not read more into this than we ought to. It is true that Barak achieved the military victory over the Canaanites, but this was before he actually became judge, and it was under the prophetic ministry of Deborah. However unpalatable JP finds it, Deborah was acting directly under God without a human male "covering". Technically of course Deborah's "head" should have been her husband and not Barak. It is very interesting that Deborah's role as a "prophetess" takes priority over her role as a wife!

Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. (Judges 4:4)

Deborah may have been an exception to the rule, but nevertheless, there she is, as large as life acting without a male "covering". How very inconvenient!

Examples of "prophetess" as an identifier ahead of familial connections:

Isaiah referred to his wife as "the prophetess": And I went to the prophetess, and she conceived and bore a son. Then the LORD said to me, “Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz; (Isaiah 8:3)

So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asaiah went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe (now she lived in Jerusalem in the Second Quarter), and they talked with her. And she said to them, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel: ‘Tell the man who sent you to me, Thus says the Lord, Behold, I will bring disaster upon this place and upon its inhabitants, all the words of the book that the king of Judah has read.....'" (2 Kings 22:14-20 cf. 2 Chronicles 34:22)

Then Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a tambourine in her hand, and all the women went out after her with tambourines and dancing. (Exodus 15:20)

And there was a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher..... And coming up at that very hour she began to give thanks to God and to speak of him to all who were waiting for the redemption of Jerusalem. (Luke 2:36).

Biblically, it appears that spiritual authority is closely linked with hearing from God and being commissioned by Him for ministry and service. Deborah is a clear example of this. From the above examples, a woman's role as "prophetess" takes precedence over her relationship to male family members. This of course contradicts JP's insistence that every woman needs a Mordecai and be subject to various male family members or church elders.{2} In my own experience, male elders will attempt to crush such a gift rather than offering their support, JP being a case in point. Whilst it is true that Eve was deceived, Adam was not deceived and transgressed (Romans 5:17). All of this nonsense about women having long antennae and men having short antennae is unbiblical. If women are more easily deceived, then men are more likely to willfully disobey.

Actually the Bible contains several accounts where God bypassed husbands and male guardians and spoke to women directly with messages of vital significance. 

Further Examples:

Samson's mother: The Angel of the Lord entrusted God’s plan for Israel’s deliverance to a woman (Judges 13:1-24)

The Wise Woman of Abel Beth Maacah: The woman was clearly a person of influence, possibly even the leader of the fortified town of Abel Beth Maacah in Israel. As a civil leader in Israel, this women, like Deborah, would also have had a degree of spiritual authority. Through her wise use of authority and peaceful persuasion she rescued her town from being destroyed by Joab, the commander of King David’s army. (2 Samuel 20:14 ff esp v22). {3} 

If God so wishes, He can speak through a donkey! (Numbers 22:28-30)

Even the apostles rejected the message of Mary Magdalene and the women who had seen Jesus after he had risen from the dead. This perhaps demonstrates the male trait of dishonoring women and denying them a voice. 

She (Mary Magdalene) went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it. (Mark 16:10-11)

Now it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told these things to the apostles, but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them. (Luke 24:10-11)

I am not suggesting that we swing to the other end of the spectrum and give women authority over men. What I am saying, is that scripturally, women should not be denied a voice under the pretext that they are "easily deceived". Many men are also deceived as we daily witness in the apostate church! I am not suggesting either that anyone, man or woman, should speak into a vacuum without any safeguards: Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said. (1 Corinthians 14:29).  

Some questions on this subject were put to Jacob Prasch in a very respectful way by Pat Rogers some weeks ago. JP has refused to answer her questions point blank, and he refuses to even enter into a discussion! He dismisses her questions as "feminism coming into the church".  Some red flags should be going up here ladies! Mike Rogers has a blog called Closingstages where all this is recorded in detail.{2} Pat Rogers goes into the technicalities of "covering" and "headship" and asks some very pertinent questions, for instance:

".....Jacob pointed out women can prophesy, again the question remains; who are they prophesying to?"  {4}

Two issues here have been obscured by JP.. the “head” and the “covering”. These are addressed in two separate passages of scripture:

For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Saviour. (Ephesians 5:23) Ephesians 5 speaks specifically about the relationship between wives and husbands, it does not address any practices within the congregation.

1 Corinthians 11:3 reiterates the husband and wife relationship: …..the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Paul then goes on to address the cultural issue of literal head coverings at Corinth (1 Corinthians 11:1-16). JP has distorted and merged the two meanings of head and covering and has tacked on that all women need a "covering"....  if not a husband, then a father or the male leadership of the church. This is very remiscent of the Shepherding error and it is unscriptural.

In an older teaching below, JP speaks about 1 Corinthians 11 being a local cultural issue Paul was addressing: "Paul wanting silence from women in the congregation. There was a local cultural issue in the churches... around Corinth at that time because the people were bringing the influences of the pagan world with them from the Delphic Oracle into the church.....We see there are prophetesses, we see there were places where women did prophesy. We see the daughters of Philip were prophetesses. Obviously they spoke in the congregation...." 

Judges 4 demonstrates that occasionally women are legitimately called to take on a role that appears to be outside God's stated patriarchal order. When that occurs it is a serious indictment against weak men! (Judges 4:8). 

As M'Kayla Kelly aptly points out: ".....don’t insist we wear the spiritual burqa, as I for one, will not. There is too much at stake." {5}

I have recently published a full exposure of Prasch's Intra-Seal rapture invention. Intra-Seal is Prasch's systematic denial of the gospel and the ministry of the Holy Spirit during the 70th week of Daniel no less!{6} Beware of this man, his teachings are demonstrably a serious perversion of the scriptures in a number of instances.

{1} https://closingstages.net/2016/08/05/to-many-heads-to-many-coverings-the-murky-teachings-of-jacob-prasch/comment-page-1/#comment-11808
{2} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHAiwIE5EVI
{3} http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/bible-women-with-spiritual-authority/ 
{4} https://closingstages.net/
{5} https://mkayla.wordpress.com/
{6} https://www.amazon.co.uk/INTRA-SEAL-RAPTURE-DECEPTION-EXPOSED-devised-ebook/dp/B06X6N2JJT/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1489250710&sr=8-1&keywords=treena+gisborn

Recommended Links: 



  1. You can't really call Jacob Prasch a "Wolf in sheep's clothing" because his clothing isn't exactly sheep-like-especially the way he reviles!

  2. JP fails to give an exegesis of the Deborah/Barak episode. These short "questions" for the "guru" on YouTube are just an opportunity for JP to assert his own forceful opinions. The ones about women are particularly obnoxious and have caused a real problem. I have now distanced myself from JP along with others. I do not say he is an out and out wolf... but he is a verbal abuser (reviler)(1 Corinthians 5:11), and his "doctrine of the Holy Spirit" is definitely off (Matthew 15:9). As such he is someone to be avoided. God bless.

  3. Thank you Treena, I read your article on closingstages.net, where I had entered the discussion about JP and his "woman problems." For someone who teaches the right use of context, I was amazed he totally left out 1Cor 11:16, and the fact the issue was hair, and the order of creation, not a doctrine of a "man must cover a woman, or she is illegitimate as a human being and cannot function in the body of Christ correctly"
    He does not understand what the text says. When I heard all 4 of his latest rants on women, it was so twisted, I was thinking maybe the medication he has taken for his illness is really affecting his mind. However, I have heard his bitter mouth and seen his sour countenance from years ago, when he ranted about women's long "antennas".
    So sad.
    I am looking forward to reading more of your work.

  4. Thank you very much for your comment narrowisthegate. JP's distortion of the scriptures is very troubling indeed. God bless.

  5. Unfortunately, the statement below from Moriel is typical of what happens when you question the teachings of cultish leaders who have become unscriptural and unanswerable. All of a sudden you are the villain and are attacked, reviled, invalidated and belittled. This is a very bad attempt to deflect from Pat Rogers original questions that never were answered by Jacob Prasch.

    "From the same mouth come blessing and cursing. My brothers, these things ought not to be so." (James 3:10)

    If Moriel are referring to the apology I received, it had nothing to do with women's roles at all - I am astonished by the connection!

    God bless



    Contrary to baseless reports being circulated on feminist blog sites calling themselves "christian" , neither Moriel or its leadership have issued any apology for our doctrinal opposition to this feminism of the secular world infiltrating the
    Body of Christ under the clear influence of Satan. The doctrinal ignorance reflected on these feminist blogs is unmistakably evident as is the fact that their feminist rants are fueled by emotionally charged outbursts reflecting the demonic Jezebel spirit where the husbands submit to their wives in an abrogation of God's order.

    Moriel recognizes the indispensable role of women in ministry in the Body of Christ, including in leadership and teaching ministry to other women as well as in deaconship, and exercising charismatic gifts in scriptural order which includes ministering under the authority of protective male covering, and as help mates to their husbands. To this end, Moriel additionally has also funded the ministry of various women and sponsored women's conference events and continues to do so. There are in fact also two Moriel branches administrated by women whom we doctrinally classify as deaconesses. We also continue to sanction the excellent women's ministries of notable figures such as Johanna Michaelson, Caryl Matriciana, and a number of Precept women discipled by the teaching of Kay Arthur. There are indeed a number of women's ministries who deserve our prayers, support, and endorsement - but neither the Paula White, Cindy Jacobs, and Joyce Meyer houses of heresy, the lunatic fringe "Women's Aglow" or the cultic "Hand Maidens of The Lord" movement, or their first cousins - the blogging pseudo Christian feminist Jezabel clubs are among them.

    We also however stand by the unambiguous scriptural teaching that leadership is male and that women cannot teach doctrine to mixed congregations or function as pastors. When God uses an Esther, there is always a Mordecai. When God uses a Deborah, there is always a Barak, and when God uses a Priscilla, there is an Aquila. Where there is an Ahab however, there is also a Jezebel.

    The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is head of the church (Ephesians 5:22-23). This is God's position, and thus it is therefore also ours. This is the unambiguous teaching of God's Word and we unapologetically abide by it.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. I have become very concerned about JP's teaching of late Nev. It is not only this issue, but his teaching about the restrainer which I suggest you give some time to in study. I always did support JP very strongly and I believed he was a prophetic voice - you are quite right. Recently however there have been a few question marks which I have been unable to resolve with JP and Moriel. I also suggest that you listen to his teaching about suicide - that is also quite concerning. I don't know if you have read his extended response to me about the restrainer, but it is very abusive. I certainly did not merit that degree of maltreatment from a few simple questions which I had put to him very politely.


    I have never been a feminist and I am astounded to be called such a thing. I do believe that it is biblical for women to have a voice in the church... There are many arguments in favour of this biblically, but briefly prophets include women and the examples I have given in this post also need to be considered. I do not think that women should have authority over men as I have said in my post.

    It is a shame that JP has had to resort to villifying and belittling those who question him rather than address reasonable questions in a godly manner... It is a very sad state of affairs and I do think it signifies cultish behaviour.

    God bless you.

  8. Totally agree with your response to Neville Stephens. Manipulating scripture, or twisting scripture to suit yourself, then vilifying those who pull you up on it, is definitely how cults are formed.

    I think Neville is too close to the person concerned to be totally objective, hence the questioning of your spiritual discernment and judgement.

    No doubt my comments will be totally changed and appear as a fabricated post over at Ziontalywain like last time if Neville doesn't agree with me supporting you.

    Bless you,

    James Pollard

  9. Lovely to hear from you again James, and thank you for your comment. I do hope that Nev will not let his dislike of me colour his view of things. I did hesitate to contradict JP for a long time about his teaching on the restrainer because I had a certain loyalty towards him.. These problems just started out as a few polite questions. I have tried to keep the peace with Moriel and JP but very sadly it has not been possible. God bless.

  10. Your theology is based on the Bible, Treena and I have no doubt you agonised before posting about Prasch and his ideas. I gave it a lot of thought too. Prasch has used John 16 out of context, he's stated the Restrainer is absolutely not an angel and though there are different opinions on the role of women and men in terms of ministry I cannot think where Scripture teaches this hypersensitive women and insensitive men idea. Maybe I'm wrong and he's right but I have to observe that Prasch hasn't come up with chapter and verse to support his argument.

  11. That is the problem Monopode - there is absolutely NO exegesis! Pat Roberts https://closingstages.net/ is researching this area further and there will be more to come from her. I believe the Lord has given her the ability and a gift to do this work and I shall be fully supporting her. Pat has been similarly attacked by JP for asking a few simple questions. I shall be continuing my work on the Restrainer as there is more to be said on this subject. God bless

  12. I have just read Moriel's FB statement above.
    Are Moriel saying your blog is a feminist blog?
    I certainly haven't noticed any 'feminist' writings/blogging here!
    Some ten years ago a Methodist "Precept" woman invited me to her Kay Arthur teaching circle: Her theology is way off-line!
    These Pentecostals always talk about the Jezebel spirit, and "exercising charismatic gifts" (So Moriel are charismatic?), but then, the modern Pentecostal movement came from a bad source (Azusa Street). JP ought to give some serious consideration to what exactly it is in Pentecostal theology that gives rise to the "lunatic fringe" and "cultics" among them-that he talks about? I know! They believe the charismatic gifts are for today? He now ranks your blog, and others among them! O dear, I'd better be off!

    The husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. Certainly true!
    I have no idea of your marital status, but would it be a crime for a single woman to study her Bible at home and post her work online via a blog? Apparently so! I am sure if you were writing about how wonderful JP/Moriel are, they would be singing an altogether different tune! Hypocrites!
    Iron sharpeneth iron, so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. Proverbs 27.17.
    God bless.

  13. A clear mark of a ministry or church leader on the slide downward is when they revile and bully those who ask those questions. They also associate those they attack with those who are clearly apostate.

    JP has obscured and merged the two meanings of "head" and "covering" from Ephesians 5 and 1 Corinthians 11, and he has tacked on that all women need a "covering".... if not a husband, then a father or the male leadership of the church. This is very remiscent of the Shepherding error and is not scriptural. The "head" applies to marriage only, husband and wife, and the head of the congregation is Christ. To say anything further is to add to the scriptures. This distortion of the scriptures is very subtle. I have slightly updated my post today in an attempt to explain this in a little more detail.

    Pat Robers posted this yesterday: