Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend. (Proverbs 27:17)
I have not been eager to enter into the very public differences between two men whom I very much admire, Jacob Prasch and David Nathan. Over the years, I have gained much from my interaction with these two men, and even now that there is a disagreement between them, I believe that we can all benefit if we see this as a “teachable ” moment.
Because Truth (with a capitol “T”) is important, it doesn’t surprise me that we find ourselves here. There are some things very much worth arguing about, we cannot compromise on issues of Salvation, the nature of God and Christology, nor can we agree to disagree. It is right to have differences and to seek to hammer them out.
Obviously we would hope that the argument could be conducted in a fair and generous manner, but we are all flawed vessels, so lets try to look past the personal things and focus on the actual issues at hand. Both David and Jacob have stressed that they have a high regard for each other. I believe that they really do, they both said so. We should take them both at face value when they insist that this isn’t personal and go on to the actual issues being contested.
As far as I can tell the most significant problematic issue is David’s teaching about the nature of Millennial sacrifices. David has said that in the Millennium, “the blood of Jesus isn’t going to do anyone any good at all”,* And it seems that He is teaching that those who turn and are faithful to the LORD during the Millennium are not saved by the blood of Christ, but their sins are atoned for by sacrifice in the Millennial Temple.
It sounds like David’s teaching is that the entire sacrificial apparatus will be re-instituted and will be effectual in the Millennial age. I may be wrong and hope David clarifies himself. Here is a quotation from a clip of David’s teaching , as republished by Jacob recently,
“There will come a time when the grace of God comes to an end. For the Gentile mind it is difficult to conceive of, for you have been brought up in a Church culture which says that the blood of Jesus Christ is eternal to save mankind for eternity. It is not a biblical concept it is a gentile concept not a biblical one…The blood of Jesus will save until the end of the age of Grace,whn the age of Grace comes to an end, the blood of Christ will not profit anyone!
During a Q/A at out church, Believers In Grace, David made the following points, when asked if people could be saved in the Millennium;
*Christ comes for his Bride (before the Millennium)
* There is only One Bride (Saved by the blood of Jesus)
* There will be people who turn and are faithful to the LORD during the Millennium, and “We Know that their sins are atoned for,hence animal sacrifices…”.
It could be that David is being awkward in his speech, and or lending himself to some kind of misinterpretation, perhaps he has a satisfactory answer. But it sure looks like he is attributing saving efficacy to the blood of animals during the Millennium. David Nathan insists that those sacrifices offered by Levites in the Millennial temple are not commemorative. So what are they?
This is no trivial issue, for it is about the nature of salvation, and involves the Blood of Jesus, who “washed us from our sins in His own blood”. Most people involved in this debate do not plan on waiting for the Millennium to be saved, but that doesn’t mean it is a meaningless argument.
Personally I see why Jacob is troubled by what looks like a deviance from the doctrine of salvation. Does David Nathan believe that the blood of animals will be the means of atonement in the Age to come, and not the blood of Jesus? Brother Nathan, my friend I hope you clarify your teaching and satisfy us that that is not your position.
We who love both men are in a conundrum only on the issue of how the matter was handled, because there is disagreement between them about that. People can disagree about those kind of details without having to assume one is lying and the other is not, we are all human and have different ,limited perspectives, confusion is always a possibility. I will let that be an issue between Jacob and David.
As far as so many of us who have left the apostasy, and have been fed in the wilderness by the likes of David Nathan, Jacob Prasch and others, I don’t see this argument as being problematic. (Unless it becomes a personal thing).
We thank God for our teachers, who have certainly been gifts to us in these dark days, but we do not follow man! Not any man! Both Jacob and David believe, rightly that you are to be Bereans, and to be proficient enough in scripture to decide for yourself who to believe. No one is ever far from defection, we must cling to Jesus and pray for those who teach and preach. It is normal to have to have our teachings criticized, as James says, “Let us not be many teachers brothers, knowing we shall receive the greater condemnation”.
David and Jacob, I welcome any input and dialogue for the edification of all.
- I cautioned my friend David about that quote, warning him that such a statement was shocking to the sensibilities. He wrote back saying my point was well taken.