Search This Blog

Tuesday, 23 October 2018


Bob Mitchell of Shofar Ministries draws attention to end time bible prophecy as it relates to our own times. (Daniel 2:31-43).

Sunday, 21 October 2018


I have previously warned that Jacob Prasch will be sharing a platform with ecumenical "prophet" David Noakes whom he regards as a "valid prophetic voice", at Moriel's Scottish Conference in November. {1} Noakes' first person extra-biblical prophecies should be of great concern to anyone supporting Moriel. We know that the canon of scripture is complete and that any prophecy should be tested against the scriptures. (1 John 4:4) These extra-biblical "revelations" from Noakes concerning Britain are highly irregular for two reasons. Firstly he is ecumenical, which as many will appreciate, precludes him from the office of "prophet" and in fact even puts doubt upon his faith as a genuine believer. Secondly, Noakes' prophecy concerning Britain has no foundation in the scriptures. The Bible contains all the revelation we need for life and godliness (2 Peter 1:3). The Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword (Hebrews 4:12). The Bible is “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). 

This is not the first time that Prasch has supported an ecumenical teacher! He openly supports ecumenist and false prophet Clifford Hill, founder of Issachar Ministries and Prophecy Today. His baffling endorsement of ecumenist Chuck Smith is another blatant case in point. {2} More recently, Prasch's endorsement of Billy Graham's false ministry as portrayed by Jackie Alnor is also inexplicable considering his previous criticism of Graham. {3}

The Plank in Jacob Prasch's Eye

Apart from his ecumenical associations, Jacob Prasch's intra seal theory is a preposterous denial of the gospel! Intra-seal is a perverse doctrine that cuts unbelievers off from God during the final seven years of history, the period known as Daniel's seventieth week. Intra-seal has been taught by Prasch several times dogmatically. It is important to make the distinction that David Nathan (Bread of Life Ministries South Africa) proposed his millennium theory as his own opinion. He has repeated this proviso on a number of occasions. Intra-seal is more dangerous than Nathan's millennium error since it concerns the salvation of unbelievers in this age. Prasch teaches John Nelson Darby's pre-trib error that the Holy Spirit is the "restrainer" of 2 Thessalonians 2:2-3. There is absolutely no foundation for this view in the scriptures. Prasch also teaches that the Holy Spirit will be taken from the world, that there will be no church (since when did believers cease to be the church?), there will be no gospel, grace will come to an end, there will be no conviction of sin etc. for these final seven years. How then will unbelievers be saved during the 70th week, and where does it say any of these things in the scriptures? Shall we write off unbelievers during the 70th week on Prasch's say so?

As far as I am aware, David Nathan has not challenged intra-seal directly. However, on at least one occasion he categorically stated that the "restrainer" of 2 Thessalonians 2:2-4 is the Archangel Michael and not the Holy Spirit. On a past video recording, he explained the phrase: "At that time", confirming that Daniel 12:1 refers to Israel and the end times, and that Michael will “stand aside” (Hebrew amad): "That is who is restraining, it is Michael, the angel that God has set over his people Israel." David Nathan not only confirmed the pre-wrath position, he also confirmed that a seven year tribulation is definitely not found in the scriptures. As such he has rejected intra-seal by default. The YouTube video in question has unfortunately been deleted: Eschataology Part 7 (The seven seals). {4}

David Nathan's lack of support for intra-seal may be a factor explaining why he really fell out of favour with Prasch who does not like to be gainsaid. This very subject was brought up by Lifestyle C who no longer endorse David Nathan since Prasch's termination of their association:

Danie Strydom, Lifestyle C: "With this response by Jacob we concur although we personally have more questions outstanding currently that have not been answered to satisfaction in our own context in South Africa on teachings on Prayer as well as Reformed Theology and the Angel as Restrainer with which we differ with David and which has also led to this decision!" {5}

It would be very helpful to get clarification from David Nathan  about his intra-seal views, although perhaps he considers that a counter attack upon Prasch's dubious eschatology is unwise at this time (?)

The primary requirement for anyone pronouncing judgement on another is that the "judge" does not have the same or a worse sin in their own lives. In fact Matthew 7:1-5 promises that hypocritical judgements upon others will bring about judgement upon ourselves. Jacob Prasch has put himself in a very perilous position before God a number of times, but it seems to have peaked out in his attack upon David Nathan. Considering Prasch's undeniable ecumenical associations and his own false intra-seal theory that he teaches dogmatically, is Prasch in a position to judge David Nathan on any level? He is clearly not qualified to take the "splinter" out of David Nathan's eye. Even if he were in a position to expose Nathan's error, which he is not, the manner this has been executed has reinforced him as a particularly unpleasant character together with his henchman Servus Christi aka Joshua Chavez. Moriel already has a reputation as an abusive ministry. An abuser is called a "reviler" in the scriptures and Christians are warned against associations with such people. (1 Corinthians 5:11)

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.
(Matthew 7:1-5).

Pulpit Commentary: "..the passage as a whole does not say that we never ought to try to remove such "motes," but that this is monstrous and almost impossible so long as we ourselves have a fault of so much magnitude as censoriousness."

Gill's Exposition: "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye,.... Very rightly does our Lord call such a man an hypocrite, who is very free in remarking and reproving other men's sins, and covering his own; and indeed, one end of his critical observations, rigid censures, and rash judgments is, that he might be thought to be holier than he is."

Matthew Poole's Commentary: "That it is notorious impudence to pretend to censure and judge others for sins in which we live ourselves." 

"a perverse judge.." {6}

Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. (Romans 2:1 cf. John 8:7).

I do have reservations about the ministry of David Nathan due to the views he proposed about animal sacrifices and the Blood of Christ in the Millennium, albeit that he has now modified those views. Critically, David Nathans Right of Reply {7} omitted Bill Randles voiced concern: "It is inconceivable for me to believe that anyone could be reconciled to God on any level other than by the blood of Jesus." {8} This edited video by GV247.tv was misleading, and the resulting response by Jacob Prasch puts both Stewart Menelaws and David Nathan in a bad light. Regarding David Nathan's teaching about clothing/cloths being infused with healing power, apparently this was retracted some years ago (?) Clearly there have been (or still are) doctrinal errors within Bread of Life Ministries that cannot easily be dismissed. (James 3:1).

In spite of my reservations, David Nathan's full apology on Bill Randles blog does show a humility I have rarely, if ever, seen in a bible teacher. I think he deserves credit and encouragement for this. True followers of Jesus Christ surely do not want him to be completely cast down beyond measure. None of us are without sin.. we would not want our own failings aired in such a vicious manner! The Lord's blessing and help will surely be there for anyone who is willing to humble himself so publicly and completely. I have to admire David Nathan for this.

15th October 2018

Dear Pastor Bill

Thank you for the spirit in which your open letter has been written and the grace extended to me, to publically express my position and understanding of animal sacrifices and the Blood of Christ in the Millennium which has caused much unwanted consternation and strife amongst the brethren. This was never my intention and if I could, I would turn the clock back and do things very differently. I also want to apologise publicly if I appeared to come across in the teachings as arrogant and prideful as I certainly never intended to be, for my desire is to reflect Jesus at all times although I am aware I often fall short.

Sadly this unpleasant circumstance has exposed the hearts of numerous believers and many have brought a serious indictment against the Church of Jesus because of their conduct and responses, I do not exclude myself.

For this, I cannot take the blame exclusively as there is a correct and biblical way to deal with disagreement and error which was not followed. I do not write this as a justification or a defence but rather as a warning that what has transpired between myself and Moriel must never be repeated again for sake of our testimony to the world and those of the flock who have been badly shaken.

To begin with, I want to acknowledge that I made some very dogmatic statements which instead of giving emphasis to what I was try to explain, had the complete opposite effect and misconstrued what I was trying to convey. For this, I want to unreservedly and wholeheartedly apologise.

I am extremely grateful that you acknowledge that I do not teach that there is salvation except through the shed blood of Jesus and that the whole concern is regarding the Blood of Jesus and salvation in the Millennium alone.

The statement which I should not have made but rather should have sought to express myself very differently and that folk have objected to is, “The Blood of Jesus will not profit anyone, anything in the Millennium.”

In using this phrase, which I regret, I was not stating that the Blood of Jesus does not cleanse in all ages as this would be a clear violation of scripture. His blood alone can take away sin and every sacrifice from Genesis 3:21, when the Lord clothed Adam and Eve in tunics of skin to the sacrifices of the Millennium all point to Jesus. In the teaching I kept using the word atone to describe the purpose of the millennial sacrifices in the sense that they do not remove sin but cover sin. I reiterate again that I do not teach nor believe that the sin of an animal or animals can ever remove sin. Not under the Old Testament, not now nor in the age to come. Only the Blood of Jesus can remove sin both now and forever, including the millennium. This is and has always been what I have believed though I did not express it succinctly in the series on Eschatology.

I only offer the above as an explanation of why I used the phrase and not as an excuse for trying to justify using it. I was wrong to use it as it does not, nor ever did convey what I actually believe regarding the eternal cleansing power of the Blood of Jesus which alone removes sin for all ages.

I sincerely apologise for misrepresenting my beliefs and using a phrase that instead of explaining what I believed rather distorted them and led to confusion among believers and dissension between myself and Moriel Ministries. Moriel TV very unfortunately produced a highly edited video that took various statements that I had made out of context which only exasperated the issue. (They have done this on more than one occasion since Tim Wirth was replaced)

The motive for this remains unclear as in response to my meeting with Jacob in May, Jacob Prasch himself admitted in an email dated 22 July 2018, and I quote, “The best I could gauge the situation personally was that he partially misrepresented his own actual beliefs in the manner he addressed an important theological issue and was to some degree misunderstood. David Nathan does subscribe to the Moriel statement of Faith that The Blood of Christ cleanses from all Sin.”

I add this not as an excuse for poorly communicating my beliefs as already mentioned but rather to evidence that for reasons never disclosed, Moriel TV sought fit to produce a biased video that exaggerated the error out of context.

I have already and will continue to re-edit these teachings to remove anything that contradicts what I have conveyed above.

Regarding Moriel’s video comparing me to Benny Hinn in an old teaching I did in 2009. I want to state that I no longer believe what I taught and berate myself for still even believing that in 2009.

I can categorically state that I absolutely do not teach this anymore and I have edited the video in question to reflect this and will go through old teachings to make sure that this does not appear. I have issued an apology already for this and gladly do it again.

I do hope that this letter serves to remind us all that none of us is above correction nor do any one of us know all truth as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:12 but we are all to be teachable and be willing to learn. Where we err we must repent and apologise where necessary.

Thank you Pastor Bill for making this platform available.

May the Lord continue to mature us and keep us by His grace until we all come to the knowledge of the truth.

Blessings in Jesus who alone bore our sins and purchased eternal life for them that will believe,

David Nathan.

Perhaps this is the right time to clarify that I do not have a "vendetta" against Jacob Prasch as has been circulated by some. I have simply exposed the errors contained within intra-seal, Prasch's ecumenical associations and his hypocrisy. I do not like false teachers, particularly those who are enemies of the remnant church. Other than the above, I have no interest in Jacob Prasch whatsoever.

{1} https://www.moriel.org/
{2} https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2018/08/was-chuck-smith-ecumenical-jacob-prasch.html
{3} http://christiansentinel.com/2018/02/22/legacy-billy-graham/
{4} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmUbFG064X8
{5} http://lifestylec.com/a-scriptural-response-to-david-nathan-his-proponents-by-jacob-prasch/
{6} https://biblehub.com/matthew/7-5.htm
{7} https://www.gv247.tv/movies/shepherd/she_right2reply1.htm
{8} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeRUtdJpuXE    @ 23:00 minutes
{9} https://www.facebook.com/john8v32/posts/2779900135357176

Thursday, 18 October 2018


Halloween: A sinister celebration of death and darkness

Halloween has grown in popularity over recent years – it is associated with activities like trick-or-treat, ghoulish masks and costumes, jack-o’-lanterns, bonfires, apple bobbing etc. The paraphernalia of Halloween has evolved into a multi-billion-pound, global annual celebration for all ages. In the UK, various events are being advertised, ranging from ghost tours, ghost trains, hauntfests, séances etc.


The current celebrations of Halloween are derived directly from ancient druidic Baal rituals which took place about 2000 years ago. Baal is a synonym for Satan in the New Testament. Samhain (pronounced sah-win) was a three day fire festival when the Druids performed human sacrifice and other vile satanic rituals. The night of October the 31st was dedicated to Samhain, the Lord of the Dead, symbolised by the horned god and the stag god. It was believed that on this night the boundary between the living and the dead was obscured and the spirits of the dead returned to the earth. Bonfires were lit to honour the dead, to aid them on their journey and to keep them away from the living. It was believed that all kinds of ghoulish creatures like ghosts, witches, monsters, ogres, vampires, hobgoblins and demons roamed about on this night.

Historical documents from the works of Lucan, Julius Caesar, Suetonius and Cicero confirm that the Druids practiced human sacrifice. These documents were previously thought to be a biased view by the Romans; however they have been taken more seriously in recent years due to archaeological evidence of druidic cannibalism and human sacrifice. The Romans abhorred the rituals of the Druids and the Roman general Suetonius finally massacred them on the Isle of Anglesey around 60AD.

Julius Caesar - De Bello Gallico:
"All the people of Gaul are completely devoted to religion, and for this reason those who are greatly affected by diseases and in the dangers of battle either sacrifice human victims or vow to do so using the Druids as administrators of these sacrifices, since it is judged that unless for a man's life a man's life is given back, the will of the immortal gods cannot be placated. In public affairs they have instituted the same kind of sacrifice. Others have effigies of great size interwoven with twigs, the limbs of which are filled up with living people which are set on fire from below, and the people are deprived of life surrounded by flames. It is judged that the punishment of those who participated in theft or brigandage or other crimes are most pleasing to the immortal gods; but when the supplies of this kind fail, they even go so low as to inflict punishment on the innocent."

These days Halloween is a very important night for Satanists, Neo-Pagans, Witches, Illuminists and others. The "Witches Sabbath" and "Black Mass" is celebrated by the Church Of Satan on the 31st of October. This is a night when satanic rituals are performed and human blood sacrifices are offered on alters.

"I'm glad that Christian parents let their children worship the devil at least one night out of the year." ~ Anton LaVey, Founder of the Church of Satan (now deceased).

Some information about how modern day Halloween derived its practices:

TRICK OR TREAT: On Samhain the Druids would go into villages demanding human sacrifices from households. If the household complied then they believed that they would be protected from evil spirits. If they did not comply the Druids would curse the family and paint a hexagram symbol on the front door in human blood that would attract evil spirits.

JACK-O’-LANTERNS: Some accounts say that the original jack-o’lanterns were candle-lit human skulls. Other accounts say that they were hollowed out turnips carved with a demonic face and filled with a lighted candle of human fat. They are said to represent a damned soul and were thought to protect against evil spirits.

BONFIRES: The origin of the word bonfire is Bone-fire. The Druids burned human and animal sacrifices inside a wicker man to appease their gods.

WICKER MAN: A giant man shaped structure made out of wicker, twigs, branches, hay and straw. It had multiple compartments where sacrifices would be caged. The whole structure would be set on fire and burnt, killing everyone trapped inside and fulfilling the Druids sacrifice.

APPLE BOBBING: Before the ceremony began the human sacrifices were given the chance to live if they could get an apple out of a cauldron of boiling liquid on their first attempt without using their hands. If they were successful then they would be freed, although they would receive severe burns to the face and neck which would likely have a life-long affect. If they were unsuccessful then they would be killed on the spot.

FANCY DRESS: Known as “guising” (disguising oneself). The Druid priests would dress up in hideous masks and costumes to ward off evil spirits.

As you can see, every appearance of Halloween is associated with evil. Halloween has its origins in satanic Druid rituals involving blood, death and evil spirits. Halloween is at best unwholesome and at worst demonic.  Why would anyone want their children to participate in activities which glorify death and darkness? By wearing masks and costumes, people can take on the characteristics of the thing they represent and children are particularly vulnerable. When combined with spells, rhymes, divination and other occult activities Halloween is particularly dangerous. Halloween may seem like harmless fun, but it can create an opening for the demonic. 

These days a growing number of secular people are speaking out against Halloween. Some find it to be a mild nuisance, while others, particularly the elderly and vulnerable have experienced outright intimidation and speak about being frightened in their own homes, particularly if they reject trick or treaters.  

The authorities in the UK are now offering some resources to help with this problem: 

The No Trick or Treat" poster can be downloaded on the internet or posters can be collected from many police stations and local council offices. Shopkeepers also have the option of displaying a poster saying that they will not sell flour and eggs to young people during Halloween.

The Bible strongly condemns all forms of the occult:

When you come into the land that the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominable practices of those nations. There shall not be found among you anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens, or a sorcerer or a charmer or a medium or a necromancer or one who inquires of the dead, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD. And because of these abominations the LORD your God is driving them out before you. You shall be blameless before the LORD your God, for these nations, which you are about to dispossess, listen to fortune-tellers and to diviners. But as for you, the LORD your God has not allowed you to do this. (Deuteronomy 18:9-14 See also 2 Kings 1:17, 21:6; 2 Chronicles 33:6; Leviticus 19:26, Exodus 22:18)

Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. (Ephesians 5:11)


This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. (1 John 1:5)

Jesus Christ: “I am the light of the world.”

When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." (John 8:12, 3:19)

I have come into the world as light, so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness.
(John 12:46)

So Jesus said to them, “The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” (John 5:35-36)

The New Testament repeatedly tells us to “repent” – this means to change one’s mind or purpose.

God desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
(1 Timothy 2:4).

Tragically many people love darkness and will not come to the light:

This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. (John 3:19)

This short video by Paul Washer explains salvation

A word of warning:

Many churches today are false churches; they do not teach the true Gospel of Jesus Christ or follow Him. They have all the outward appearance of godliness and they may seem to be successful, but in fact they are mere stooges of Satan (Matthew 23:27). To become involved with any of these false churches would be catastrophic.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’ (Matthew 7:21-23)



Sunday, 14 October 2018


The following is an excerpt from The Reason Files:

"In the third and final part of this article series concerning Mr. Joshua Chavez (aka: “Servus Christi”), we will take a look at his hypocritical “Do As I Say, Not As I Do” methodology for determining who is an apostate.

Please see the latest on this three part series: Servus Christi Updated, where I respond to a lengthy defense of Servus Christi, written at his behest by one of his friends.

Concerns, Part Three
D. Hypocrisy
In addition to presenting Mr. Chavez with all of the above evidence of his sin, I also attempted to demonstrate to him the hypocrisy of his actions by applying the standards and logic he applies to the numerous Christian brothers mentioned above, to himself.
As noted in the introduction, Mr. Chavez claims he is exposing apostasy in the Church. However, as also shown, he has not done this. Not once. In fact, his exposés are nothing more than strawman arguments and ad hominem red herring fallacies. He condemns person A because they appear at a conference or in a photo with person B, who in turn has appeared at a conference or in a photo with person C who may or may not be a false teacher, or is somehow affiliated with a false teacher. This is guilt by association twice removed. As faulty a methodology as this is, it is the methodology Mr. Chavez has chosen to employ; and, in doing so he has exposed his own hypocrisy.
I have dubbed the red-herring methodology used by Mr. Chavez the “Servus Christi Rule of Partnerships and Affiliations.” As you will see, when Mr. Chavez and his own affiliations and partnerships are examined by using his own methodology, his hypocrisy becomes glaringly evident.
On his website, Beginning of Sorrows, Mr. Chavez recommends both Jacob Prasch and Moriel Ministries, as well as Beresford Job.

Now, as it just so happens, Beresford Job, on his Truth According to Scripture website, promotes John Piper, Paul Washer, and John MacArthur. By employing the “Servus Christi Rule of Partnerships and Affiliations,” we see Mr. Chavez, is therefore partnered with John Piper, Paul Washer, and John MacArthur via Beresford Job. Of course, Mr. Chavez has soundly (and falsely) condemned these men as apostates, frauds, false teachers, deceivers, hypocrites, and more; so his apparent partnership with them is not only hypocritical, but somewhat schizophrenic as well.

Far more interesting (and telling) is Mr. Chavez's personal, intimate, and open partnership with James Jacob Prasch and Moriel Ministries. Since Mr. Chavez recommends Mr. Prasch on his website, we can again employ the “Servus Christi Rule of Partnerships and Affiliations” to ascertain his actual involvement with Jacob Prasch. I have noted that throughout his various internet venues (blog, YouTube, Twitter, Facebook) Mr. Chavez speaks glowingly of his close personal friend Jacob Prasch. To quote Mr. Chavez, “I highly recommend following/supporting the ministry of Moriel TV and James Jacob Prasch.” Mr. Chavez calls him, “Balanced and indespensible,” “without compromise,” “Excellent teaching,” and “I don't recommend people lightly.” To further remind you of the importance of your intimate partnership with Jacob Prasch, I offer another verbatim quote from Mr. Chavez: “There is no guilt by 'association' but by APPROVAL. WATCH!” and his approval and recommendation of James Jacob Prasch defines his approval, recommendation and partnership with those Mr. Prasch is partnered with.
To begin with, let's look at Chuck Smith of Calvary Chapel. Jacob Prasch calls Chuck Smith his “friend and brother,” “solidly supporting” Chuck Smith's positions, defending him against any and all critics. It should also be noted that Mr. Chavez also speaks glowingly of Chuck Smith as well. On his blog he writes of Chuck Smith, “Smith was known for being a verse by verse bible teacher.” Based on his approval of Chuck Smith, Mr. Chavez has clearly aligned himself with Chuck Smith as well; and that brings us back to the “Servus Christi Rule of Partnerships and Affiliations,”
Chuck Smith held Rick Warren in high regard, calling Warren a “brother in Christ,” and stating that he had no problem sharing a stage with him. This is the same Rick Warren who has affiliated himself with both Islam and the Vatican. That places Mr. Chavez only one degree of separation away from Rick Warren. The fact that Mr. Chavez judges and condemns others for doing the same thing that he himself has done exposes Mr. Chavez as a hypocrite.
In his last email to me, Mr. Chavez tried to explain away Chuck Smith's affiliation with Rick Warren by saying, “As for Chuck Smith, he entertained Rick Warren ONCE in 2009 at 82 years of age a few years before his death at a time when Rick Warren was not well known nor established in his ecumenism.” And yet, this isn't true. In fact, it is a bald-faced lie. Rick Warren was quite well known when he shared a stage with Chuck Smith at the Calvary Chapel 20 year anniversary “Harvest Crusade” on August 16, 2009. Warren had published his best selling book, The Purpose Driven Church, in 1995. He followed this up with another best seller, The Purpose Driven Life, in 2002. To say Chuck Smith was unaware of Rick Warren would also be untrue, as Smith denounced Rick Warren in 2006. A statement released by Smith's church stated, “The teachings and positions of Rick Warren have come into conflict with us at Calvary Chapel. Pastor Chuck has directed us to discontinue this product [Purpose Driven Life] effective immediately.”
Furthermore, on April 17, 2005 Rick Warren launched his ecumenical “Global P.E.A.C.E. Plan” before a crowd of 30,000 people in Angel's stadium in Anaheim, California. On January 20, 2009 Rick Warren appeared at President Barack Obama's inauguration where he publicly prayed to the Islamic “Isa;” and, on July 4, 2009 Warren appeared at the 2009 ISNA Conference addressing upward of 40,000 Muslims. By the time Chuck Smith shared a stage with Rick Warren on August 16, 2009, Rick Warren and his ecumenism were both well known and well established. And yet, none of this served to dissuade Chuck Smith, a man whom both Mr. Chavez and his close friend Jacob Prasch held in high regard (and whom Prasch was intimate friends with), from reversing his condemnation of Rick Warren, and embracing Warren as a Christian brother and a friend.."

Further parts can be seen on  https://reasonfiles.weebly.com/blog

Wednesday, 10 October 2018


Servus Christi is one of those unfortunate people who takes great glee in causing trouble and distorting information in order to hurt others. One of his latest efforts:

"John MacArthur has decided to unite with Pastor Rick Warren and many other heretical deceivers at an upcoming conference. John MacArthur's compromises are many and now it is becoming apparent to everyone. Apostasy is upon us and waxing worse daily."

John MacArthur IS NOT sharing a platform or partnering with Rick Warren. However, Jacob Prasch DEFINITELY IS sharing a platform with ecumenist David Noakes at Moriel's Scottish Conference in November. {1}

I loathe Calvinism and I am no fan of John MacArthur. However, to make slanderous accusations against anyone is to dishonour the name of Jesus Christ.

I originally thought that Servus Christi aka Joshua Chavez was delusional in his support for Jacob Prasch/Moriel whom he now works for as an administrator. I have changed my mind. Chavez is just the right person to carry out Moriel's dirty work. Chavez's speculative "guilt by association", is nothing more than mischief making. The same is true of Moriel TV's depiction of David Nathan whom Chavez compares with Benny Hinn complete with photoshopped image. Once again, I do not like David Nathan's teaching, but these tactics are deliberately destructive. If we are going to accuse anyone, we need at least two or three witnesses, not photoshopped pictures and distorted information. These things do not glorify God! (Colossians 3:17).

Servus Christi means Servant of Christ. However in this particular instance nothing could be further from the truth. 

For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. (Matthew 15:19-20).

Phil Johnson quoted on Wretched Radio 

{1} https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2018/09/jacob-prasch-david-noakes-moriel.html

Monday, 1 October 2018


     September of 2018 has come and gone.

     But it has increased my faith in pretrib rapture date-setters - faith that they will lose no time in date-revising what they have predicted in recent weeks, all of which have fizzled in front of their faces, followed by nary a word from any of them admitting they have been wrong!

     (If you'd like to see what rapture date-setters feast on, Google "Jewish Feasts Symbolize Christ's Return.")

     Since much of their recent guesswork has been focused on Leviticus 23's Jewish feasts, let's look at the history of such interpretation.

     We now know that although many have earnestly expected and longed for the Lord 's return since Christ left the earth, only since 1830 is there documentation of what is known as the "any-moment pretribulation rapture" which began with Margaret Macdonald of Scotland, was soon adopted by Rev. Edward Irving of London and his followers, then later on by John Darby and his Plymouth Brethren.

     (Darby idolizers like R. A Huebner, Thomas Ice, and Paul Wilkinson have either ignored or deliberately twisted the innovative Irvingites, the very first ones to publicly air the new pretrib rapture view after visiting Margaret, the pretrib originator, in her Port Glasgow home in mid-1830. Doubters are invited to Google "X-Raying Margaret," "Margaret Macdonald's Rapture Chart," and "Margaret Macdonald's Main Point.")

     Even before 1830 Irving and his followers had been seriously engaged in trying to decipher the order of end-time events - and much of this was based on the same Jewish feasts we've heard so much about in recent days via videos and articles on the internet.

     Following is a portion of the incredible Irvingite development (which was years ahead of Darby's development) which is extensively covered in my book "The Rapture Plot."

     In March,1829 in Irving's journal "The Morning Watch" (hereafter: TMW), John Tudor, the editor, introduced what he called the "times and seasons" theme. He wrote that "there is scarcely a prophecy in which some reference to agriculture does not occur...." Connected with this "are the great festivals of the Jewish year....Christ's death, resurrection, and ascension, are likened to...Passover, First-fruits, and Day of Atonement. The only remaining solemnity in the Jewish year is the Feast of Tabernacles...when 'he shall appear the second time' (Heb. ix. 28)...."

     A few months later in Sep. 1829 Tudor referred to several Revelation chapters and wrote that "we only waited for some general principle...which, I verily believe, we have now received, in the system of Times and Seasons....I take to myself no other merit than that of endeavouring to apply this important discovery....A little further examination shews that a certain classification is observed:--that the seasons of the year, namely, first-fruits, harvest, and vintage are kept together in one series, as xiv.; that the allusions to the tabernacle or temple are kept distinct from the seasons, as xi. xii. xiii; and that it is in this tabernacle series only that dates are given....During this time series of 1260 days, the church is represented as in the wilderness...."

     In Dec. of 1829 Tudor emphasized that the countless multitude of Rev. 7:9 is "gathered" at the "Feast of Tabernacles" ("15th Tisri") while the "sealed ones are gathered when Christ comes from without the veil (Heb. ix. 28)" at the prior "Day of Atonement" ("10th Tisri").

     Considering all of the above, it's easy to see why many in Margaret's day were "harvest"-minded. As early as 1826 many had been praying for the "latter rain" (Zech. 10:1) - the end-time outpouring of the Spirit (Acts 2:17) that would produce the final "harvest." In Margaret's first "revelation," which preceded her famous (pretrib) one, she mentioned "a great ingathering" in the future - a possible reference to the feast of in-gathering (Feast of Tabernacles).

     Her pretrib "revelation" didn't single out any Jewish feast. But she expressed the "first fruits" idea without using the term. She said that "only those that are alive in him" - identified as "those...filled with the Spirit" - "will be caught up to meet him in the air."

     Unlike Darby who saw a distinction between the "heavenly" church and "earthly" Jews, she saw (in the partial rapture form of her pretrib view) a distinction between "heavenly" Christians and "earthly" Christians; the "worthy" part of the church would be "firstfruited" before the rest of the church would be left behind and merely "harvested."

     I have shown in my books and articles that Irving and his followers taught all of the chief aspects of dispensationalism long before Darby did. In 1832 Darby was still a historicist and not yet a futurist; in an 1832 paper which reviewed some writings by futurist William Burgh, Darby was concerned "that Mr. Burgh's views divert the attention of Christians from the present antichristian principles...to some supposed or future actings of a personal Antichrist...."

     In 1834 we find Darby (and the Jews) waiting for the SAME day: the day Christ comes forth, the day when Christ "will not tarry" (Heb. 10:37)!

     In "The Christian Witness" (Apr., 1837) Darby's article saw the Christian church "going in with Him to the marriage, to wit, with Jerusalem and the Jews"!

     Not until 1839 in his "Notes on the Revelation" can we find Darby expressing the pretrib view; his pretrib basis then (and for many more years) rested on the symbol of the "man child" that is "caught up" in Rev. 12:5 - but he was only plagiarizing Irving who had used the same symbol for the same purpose in his journal "The Morning Watch" (Edward Irving, "Interpretation of the Old-Testament Prophecies quoted in the New," June, 1831, p. 301)!

     Concerning the Jewish feasts, Darby is almost totally silent on them. In the "Letters of J.N.D." which includes in several volumes his letters from 1832 to 1882 (a total of 1557 pages) there is only one listing in his Scripture Index to Leviticus 23 which leads to a brief paragraph on pp. 399-400 on "firstfruits" that he applied only to "Jews on earth" in the Old Testament as symbolical of "Christ risen" and "perfect to be offered to God."

     In it Darby said nothing about a rapture or the second coming and this brief reference to Lev. 23 is dated 1868 - several decades AFTER the incredible, informative, and innovative Irvingites who said they had been inspired initially by a certain young Scottish lassie!

     Allow me to wrap up by quoting, as a summary, a bit of my "Rapture Plot" book"

     "But I've saved, for this moment, an even more exciting suggestion someone made while these Irvingites were having a "field day" with the harvest/feasts of Leviticus 23; in June of 1831 the unknown writer based the prior rapture on the feast of "First-fruits"! He said the first resurrection covered the firstfruits and a slightly later harvest.

     "So within a few years the Irvingites shifted their rapture from feast No. 6...to feast No. 5 to feast No. 4 and even to feast No. 3! But how could the "firstfruits" (No. 3) be caught up before they were "waved" (No. 4) and before the trumpet sounds (No. 5, I Thess. 4:16)?"

     Well, present day dispensationalists have had the same disagreement.

     C. I. Scofield (1917) based his pretrib rapture on the feast of the firstfruits, No. 3.

     Although John Walvoord sees a sharp distinction between the church and Old Testament saints, and says that there is nothing in the Old Testament suggestive of a pretrib rapture, his 1966 book based a pretrib aspect of the first resurrection on feast No. 3.

     Hal Lindsey's 1983 book has a pretrib rapture chart based on the same feasts. Even though he doesn't reveal which feast is the significant one, his pretrib rapture lies between feast No. 3 and feast No. 7.

     Another pretrib rapture date-setter, Edgar Whisenant, said in 1988 that the rapture would happen in 1988. His rapture was based on feast No. 5.

     Whether or not Christ returns on some Jewish feast day or holy day isn't important to me. What really matters to me is that pretrib was never a part of Christian theology or any organized church before 1830.

     Maybe Christians should feast more on clear passages of scripture and less on unclear passages while wearing pretrib dispensational spectacles.

     That is, if they don't wish to make spectacles of themselves!

     POSTSCRIPT: I have more evidence that pretrib is losing its grip. Readers of this blog will recall my article last Jan. titled "Moody Leaders Suddenly 'Raptured.' " Well, later on (July 5th) leading pretrib teacher Dr. Erwin Lutzer, while preaching at the famous Moody Church in Chicago, discussed the differences between pretrib and posttrib. He then gave this (post-July Fourth) "bombshell":

     "Here at the Moody Church we have decided not to draw a line in the sand about these two views. We have pretribulationists among us...but also there are posttribulationists and many of them love the Lord and many of them are very fine scholars, and so you can be a pretrib or you can be a posttrib here at the Moody Church." (You can add your own exclamation points here.)