CLOSINGSTAGES: PUBLIC APOLOGY
The Matthew 18:15-17 Process:
Partiality
When I asked Bill Randles to read my intra-seal critique on Prasch, he agreed, but he did not keep his word. His partiality was obvious when he asked: "What are the implications of Jacob not getting the counting of the Omer exactly right?" {1}
Concerning David Nathan:
Bill Randles: "In my view, the original issue which triggered all of this boils down to two statements of David Nathan’s;
CLOSINGSTAGES: BILL RANDLES RESOLUTION
https://closingstages.net/2019/11/18/randles-resolution/
Following Mike and Pat Rogers' public apology to Bill Randles, I have to say that Randles irrational behaviour is quite something to behold! Unsurprisingly, his illogical suggestion that they follow the Matthew 18 process in order to resolve their differences has resulted in further issues.
Following Mike and Pat Rogers' public apology to Bill Randles, I have to say that Randles irrational behaviour is quite something to behold! Unsurprisingly, his illogical suggestion that they follow the Matthew 18 process in order to resolve their differences has resulted in further issues.
The Matthew 18:15-17 Process:
Stage 1: If your brother sins against you, go and confront him privately. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. (v15)
Stage 2: But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. (v 16)
Stage 2: But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. (v 16)
Stage 3: If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. (v 17a)
Stage 4: And if he refuses to listen even to the church, regard him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. (v17b)
Some thoughts: All this has taken place in the public domain. As such it is not an issue that can realistically be settled privately by the Matthew 18 process. Nevertheless Mike and Pat did listen to Bill Randles and took appropriate action (stage 1). However, Bill does not listen to their grievances, which necessitates the involvement of one or two others (stage 2). If Bill will not listen to one or two others, and as they are not in a church setting, Mike and Pat cannot “tell it to the church”. As such stage 3 does not apply. At stage 2 if there is no resolution, I think they would need to decide whether to regard Bill as a “pagan or a tax collector”. In a church setting that would necessitate that Bill's company is to be shunned. (Stage 4).
In any event, Bill invalidated the whole process when he vilified Mike and Pat publicly after Matthew 18 was initiated and after he had agreed to await their response.
[William Randles Tim
Wirth it is not true what they posted about how”vile” Kris and I, and these hypocrites repost from Jacobs website when it
serves their interest in sliming my name, such as when they posted Sergio’s lying rant ... none of it is”hard truth”].
A further violation of the process occurred when Bill copied another person into his email responses to Mike and Pat erratically without consulting them and without their permission.
Bill continues to flout the Matthew 18 process by adding to his list of original grievances.
In my view, resolution with such an unstable person will be very difficult indeed!
Further Problems
In my view, resolution with such an unstable person will be very difficult indeed!
Further Problems
Both Bill and Kristin have broken the scriptures by making ad hominem remarks and accusations they are not prepared to back up with specific examples and facts. (2 Corinthians 13:1).
In my own case, Bill has accused me of being a "feminist", as well as making other false accusations against me.* However he failed to produce any evidence to substantiate those lies. He subsequently followed up by calling me a an "abusive reviler”. Despite being challenged by me, Bill completely ignores me and refuses to acknowledge my grievances against him. Is that scriptural?
* UPDATE 22/11/2019: I have accepted Bill's recent apology on a previous obscure post of mine for calling me a "feminist".
When I asked Bill Randles to read my intra-seal critique on Prasch, he agreed, but he did not keep his word. His partiality was obvious when he asked: "What are the implications of Jacob not getting the counting of the Omer exactly right?" {1}
Concerning David Nathan:
Bill Randles: "In my view, the original issue which triggered all of this boils down to two statements of David Nathan’s;
'The blood of Jesus will not profit anyone anything in the Millennium' and the twin statement in which Nathan strongly asserts that the blood sacrifices offered in the Millennium are in no way memorial. In other words, they do not point back to the cross of Jesus, as the Lord’s Supper does.
"God the Father did not Create anything” {2}
"God the Father did not Create anything” {2}
Can Bill Randles clarify why precisely he will not “forgive” David Nathan? If it concerns the millennium question, then it is not for Bill Randles to “forgive” a doctrinal error.. only the Lord can do that. We forgive one another our sins against each other, not doctrinal error. (Colossians 3:13). We “expose” false teaching – that is all. Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. Ephesians 5:1.
Bill Randles: "So what is my problem? WHY HAVEN'T I 'FORGIVEN' HIM?"
I have all kinds of problems with these two issues, but DON'T ASSUME I HAVEN'T FORGIVEN or don’t love David Nathan because it isn’t true..
DOCTRINAL ISSUES ARE NOT PRIMARILY A MATTER OF FORGIVENESS … they are matters of the determination of truth.."
DOCTRINAL ISSUES ARE NOT PRIMARILY A MATTER OF FORGIVENESS … they are matters of the determination of truth.."
This particular example of Bill's double speak had the effect of muddying the waters, and it prolonged an already unpleasant episode. In my view, it was a deliberate attempt to further damage David Nathan's reputation.
Further evidence of Bill Randles duplicity:
Further evidence of Bill Randles duplicity:
"We don’t have to get personal. If we could just be objective people, take a look at Scripture, put aside personalities put aside people being rude, this or that or the other. Do you really want to promote a man, who says the Father didn’t create anything? Or that the blood of Christ has no profit AT ANY DISPENSATION.. People have to remember where their true loyalty lies, it lies with the Word." https://youtu.be/fPzfy83U5Y0 (1:17 mark).
To state that David Nathan was referring to ANY DISPENSATION is a complete fabrication! The original question concerned the MILLENIUM, and in that respect David Nathan has clarified his position.
David Nathan: "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." {3}
David Nathan: "The bible is absolutely clear that God is the creator. The Father ordained creation. Jesus was the creator in perfect unity with the Father.. not that God the Father was not involved in creation.." {4}
Critically, Bill seems oblivious to the fact that Jacob Prasch thoroughly agreed with David Nathan’s millennial views. Bill has never acknowledged that fact – and that was his main bone of contention!
Kristin Randles has said all kinds of wicked things against David Nathan, as recorded on my previous post {5} .
All these are the actions of a "pastor" who boasts of 40 years in the ministry!
Better is a poor person who walks in his integrity than one who is crooked in speech and is a fool. (Proverbs 19:1).
1. https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2018/11/jacob-prasch-moriel-ministries-counting.html
2. https://billrandles.wordpress.com/2018/12/30/why-there-is-still-a-question-david-nathan/
3. https://www.bolm.co.za/index_htm_files/Response%20to%20Bill%20Randles%20-%20Open%20Letter.pdf
4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGuCiRUvriM&t=851s
5. https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-vile-arrogance-of-bill-and-kristin.html
1. https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2018/11/jacob-prasch-moriel-ministries-counting.html
2. https://billrandles.wordpress.com/2018/12/30/why-there-is-still-a-question-david-nathan/
3. https://www.bolm.co.za/index_htm_files/Response%20to%20Bill%20Randles%20-%20Open%20Letter.pdf
4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGuCiRUvriM&t=851s
5. https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2019/10/the-vile-arrogance-of-bill-and-kristin.html
It's interesting the more I revisit some of this information the more lies I hear. In reading your article and quoting David Nathan:
ReplyDelete"I actually believe regarding the eternal cleansing power of the Blood of Jesus which alone removes sin for all ages." {2}
I then remembered Bill Randles stating that David believes and taught the opposite. In the video where Haller, Randles, Huxham and Farrell "respond" to David Nathan.
https://youtu.be/fPzfy83U5Y0
Quote at the 1:39 mark:
“We don’t have to get personal. If we could just be objective people, take a look at Scripture, put aside personalities put aside people being rude, this or that or the other. Do you really want to promote a man, who says the Father didn’t create anything? Or that the blood of Christ has no prophet AT ANY DISPENSATION?......People have to remember where their true loyalty lies, it lies with the Word."
Certainly what Bill said concerning David, is blatantly false.Notice how there is truth in some of Bill's statements and how it surrounds the lie? Very intentional laying truth along side of error.
Pat
Thank you for pointing this out Pat.
ReplyDeleteCertainly Randles comments at the end of this video are a misrepresentation. To say that David Nathan was referring to "ANY DISPENSATION" is a complete lie. The original question concerned the MILLENIUM.. and in that respect David has clarified his position.
God bless.
Actually Pat, I think this lie of Bill Randles is very telling indeed. I have added it to the main body of the post.
ReplyDeleteGod bless.
If Bill Randells started out as a WoF pastor as I read someone post, Bill should not be a pastor at all! We know God did not call him to teach lies and then midway through his teaching false hood, suddenly God said “OK, even though you’ve been a false teacher, unproven by the guide lines I’ve commanded in the pastoral epistles, behold, now you’re a called pastor.”
ReplyDeleteTo many people today have stepped into roles they’ve NO business being in, and make no mistake - they will give an account for this evil.
Quite so Brian.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that Bill embellishes often. In our recent back and forth correspondence with Bill, he accused us of several untruths, which can clearly be seen within the correspondence themselves. I don’t know how someone can completely ignore a black and white factual statement (in print) and say the opposite it true. I believe that Bill needs prayer and certainly to be held accountable for his actions such as in this article, which is a very serious error on his part. No believer rather they be a congregant or Pastor should be void of repentance. If Bill would simply acknowledge his error and publicly repent people are very supple and forgiving to true repentance. And by repentance the fruits which follow.
ReplyDeleteThat is the problem Mike. He simply refuses to repent but rather shifts the blame onto others. I am praying.
ReplyDeleteGod bless.
POST UPDATED 22/11/2019
ReplyDeleteI have accepted Bill's recent apology calling me a "feminist" on a previous rather obscure post. Still outstanding are the other accusations he made against me: "lunatic", "angry", "liar" and "abusive railer". https://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.com/2019/11/powerplaypause-jacob-prasch-shameful.html#comments
Catching up on this sorry debacle, it seems that'apologies' are now flying around all over the place on this ere blog at the moment! But how sincere are they all?
ReplyDeleteI scratch my head as it were in disbelief that one who goes over the top in proclaiming himself to be a pastor (FORTY years!!! as he does) of God's little flock should use such language, and resort to name-calling as he has done? But then, being previously under the yoke of Moriel/Prasch I suppose we shouldn't be too surprised about this?
But, whatever, at least MR Randles has shown some grace in apologizing-maybe more will follow?
God bless.
re tbckawaii’s video “Lynching Bill Randles”
ReplyDeletehttps://vimeo.com/345492408
To echo Tammy's comment on Closingstages:
Bill called me a lunatic, an angry feminist and a liar. He called Mike a liar and a moral midget. He called tbckawaii a “gal”, a woman, a coward, and told him to “man up”. Bill called everyone as a group, many names, like false witnesses, liars, slanderers, etc. He REALLY went after Tim calling him selfish, self absorbed, vicious, a know it all, a liar, pathetic, a sniper, hateful, a rebel, Tim was also told to “be a man”, and Bill said Tim was like a rebellious teen aged drummer stuck in the seventies.
I am lost for words!
God bless.
Sandy Simpson has now entered the fray and has defended Prasch. Sandy has given Brian a good telling off - but he needs to provide solid EVIDENCE. Certainly OUR EVIDENCE that Prasch is a fake Jew and a false teacher is compelling.
ReplyDeletehttps://closingstages.net/2019/11/19/bill-randles-irrational-behaviour-is-something-to-behold-treena-gisborn/
When you put it altogether it does leave you rather speechless, especially because Bill consistently plays victim. It would serve him better and actually benefit the body of Christ if he would just step up and address the issues,from scripture.The issues have been presented to him over and over during past several months, and again just recently, concerning David Nathan. He refuses, and continues to call David heretic among other insinuations and insults. Bill's resistance in addressing this is actually his answer. He is in serious error and chooses to remain there. The bridge isn't just on fire it has burnt to the ground. We've already discovered more lies, as we see with the updated information in this article. Bill is not sound in his doctrine on restoration, he along with Moriel and crew have mutilated the Scriptural process of that from the beginning.
ReplyDeletePat