“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed,
which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Revelation 12:17
The Warfare
of
Vernon Howell (a.k.a. David Koresh) and others
against the
Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists
Copyright ©
September 2003, Douglas Francis Mitchell
All Rights Reserved
Original Copyright: 1993
Revised: February 2005
Written by
Douglas Francis Mitchell
Printed in the United States of America
TABLE OF CONTENTS
"The revelator, looking down the ages to the close of time, has declared, 'The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.' Revelation 12:17. Some who today are living on the earth will see these words fulfilled. The same spirit that in ages past led men to persecute the true church, will in the future lead to the pursuance of a similar course toward those who maintain their loyalty to God. Even now preparations are being made for this last great conflict." Prophets and Kings, pg. 605.
PREFACE
The following is presented to set straight the facts of the matter, and as a
warning and an appeal. No attempt is made herein to supply the behind the scene facts unknown to
this author. That will remain for others who have access to those facts. The basic aim of this
testimony is to show that Vernon Howell* (later known as David Koresh*) and his followers left the
authentic Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists Association (aka, "The Branch"), headquartered
at New Mt. Carmel Center, Waco, Texas, in 1983-84 as a new, distinct movement which abandoned
most of the fundamental principles and practices of the true movement. At the time Howell started
his distinct movement he named it the "Davidian Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists," (see
Appendix 1). About four years later Howell dropped that name and unlawfully usurped the name
and property of the true Church. The name "Branch Davidians" came into use by the media during
the notorious 1993 events involving David Koresh and his followers.
*Note: For the sake of accuracy, I will be referring to him (Howell/Koresh)
by the name he was going by at the time the events which are being related occurred.
It will also be shown herein that Howell's (Koresh's) control of New Mt.
Carmel Center was clearly unlawful. His coming there was neither accidental nor coincidental, but
rather was staged, as were the results of his actions. He was not alone in his warfare against the true
Church.
In order to show the depth of the controversy heretofore not fully disclosed,
many different aspects involved will be discussed. Though there have been numerous articles and
books written on the subject, and even a few movies made, most have ignored or distorted the true
facts of the matter. Some have done this due to their unfamiliarity with issues involved, while others
have done so with the specific purpose of using the situation to express their animosity against the
true Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists, and particularly the doctrines and practices we
espouse and promulgate, to, as it were, bury us alive. There are even others who used the opportunity
to strike out against Christianity, in general, the Bible, and even God, and to promote their atheistic
philosophies and politics.
The facts and incidents revealed herein will be seen to be more than mere
coincidences. God allowed Vernon Howell to bring in his heresies in order to separate the wheat
from the chaff, as it were. It will also be seen that those who ended up with Koresh had ample
opportunities to see the error of their ways and avoid the tragedy they eventually experienced. Those
who were old enough to know better were not innocent, as they wished themselves to be portrayed.
It is written, "Woe unto the world because of offenses [scandals]! for it must
needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" Matthew 18:7.
Such was Koresh's standing when he closed his probation – in a position of woe. Regarding the fact
that he led many little ones to their destruction, as did his followers who gave their minor-aged
daughters to be his wives or concubines, it is also written, "Whoso shall offend [put a stumbling
block or impediment in the way of] one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for
him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
(verse 6).
"Hear ye, O mountains, the LORD'S controversy, and ye strong foundations
of the earth: for the LORD hath a controversy with his people, and he will plead with Israel." Micah
6:2.
"They are not all Israel, which are of Israel:" Roman 9:6. Neither are they all
Christian who profess Christ. It is the whole house of Israel (Ezekiel 37:11), those home born, and
those grafted in, whom the Creator of heaven and earth has a controversy with.
Though the world has witnessed the controversy between Koresh and his
followers who professed to be following God, and those who were supposed to be representing the
law of the land in a country which professes to trust in God, the real controversy which God has is
with His people who are disregarding His laws, and are leaning on the arm of flesh (Jeremiah 17:5),
by trusting in man for their peace and safety, welfare and happiness, and knowledge of His will and
word.
While the testimony herein concerns the theft of the identity and property
rights of a seemingly small and relatively disregarded congregation, the real warfare which underlies
it involves God's rights to rule his people and His world his way, and to be represented in truth and
righteousness. So though we have the right to protest against the way we have been abused through
the situation with Koresh, God has an infinitely greater right to raise His objections to the whole
matter. "But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers
among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them,
and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason
of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned
words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their
damnation slumbereth not." 2 Peter 2:1-3.
TESTIMONY
AUTHOR'S HISTORY
I came in contact with the Seventh Day Adventist Church (S.D.A.) in the
summer of 1977, and was baptized later that year. A few months later I came in contact with the
teachings of the Davidian Seventh Day Adventists (a.k.a. "Shepherd's Rod," or "Davidians"), a
reform movement within the Church. In the early fall of 1978 I came in contact with The Branch
Davidian Seventh Day Adventists (a.k.a., "The Branch"), the successor reform movement to the
Davidians. I joined the movement shortly before the death of Ben Roden (who was then president
of the Church) in the fall of 1978, and have been an active member ever since then. I moved to Texas
in late 1982 at the request of Lois Roden (Ben's wife), who was the successor president of the
Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists. I was a firsthand witness to the malicious scheme to
defame and destroy the work of Ben and Lois Roden, their predecessors, and the work of the Branch
movement, itself, by Vernon Howell (David Koresh), and others.
I first met Vernon Howell in September 1981, at Mrs. Roden's daughter's
house in the Riverside area of Southern California. He had driven her to some meetings she had in
the area. Shortly before this time Vernon had come to New Mt. Carmel Center, in Waco, Texas, and
offered his labors to Mrs. Roden. He seemed like a nice person, but overconfident in his knowledge
of the Scriptures, which appeared to be rather broad. I can't say the same about his respect and
appreciation of them or of God of which they testify and Who inspired them.
Shortly after that time he said that he felt that he had a message for the Branch
members, but it was not received then by those to whom it was presented at New Mt. Carmel Center.
Rejected in his attempts to gain a following at that time, he left our fellowship. He came and went
over the next year, only to return in early 1983, and then again in the fall of 1983 to try again.
Never at any time did he actually accept any of the basic moral teachings and
practices of the Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists, as time has well proven. He was
disfellowshipped from the Seventh Day Adventist Church for moral reasons shortly before he came
to The Branch movement, and never amended his pernicious ways. Each time he returned to Mt.
Carmel Center, he would relate to us how he had just gotten in trouble (usually with a girl friend),
and would draw sympathy from people.
He didn't put in print the substance of his special message (sic), though he did
publish a few short items. Most of his teaching was oral. He emphasized the difference between the
oral manner of his message, and the printed manner of all the former leaders. This, in and of itself,
made it easy for him to set forth an illusion before his listeners, for they weren't able to readily
review the foundations of his teachings in a setting isolated from his direct influence, and where they
could prayerfully commune with God regarding what he was teaching. Some of his studies were tape
recorded. But neither did any of those contain anything with a sound foundation. He would pull
things from here and there, and then would continually say "see, see." It was all smoke and mirrors.
He would attempt to intimidate people into seeing things that weren't there by belittling them
because of their alleged spiritual blindness, and by noting the supposed spiritual insight of those who
had swallowed up his hook, line, and sinker.
To understand why he came to The Branch at that time, and how he was able
to take unlawful control of the Church's property and identity it is necessary to understand what was
transpiring in the movement during that time. An understanding of how the Church is structured and
functions is also necessary. And, as many who disagree with our doctrines and practices have
misrepresented such and have labeled us as a cult (in the negative sense of the word), it is incumbent
upon us to defend such slanderous misrepresentations by
A BASIC STATEMENT OF OUR BELIEFS
In general, we are what may be called Protestant Fundamentalists. This simply
means that we stand in protest to many of the peculiar claims of the so-called Catholic churches
(Roman, Orthodox/Greek, Anglican, etc.), and that we embrace the fundamental principles of the
Gospel as revealed in the Bible. I say so-called Catholic churches because the term catholic
(meaning universal) was applied to the general Christian Church long before the peculiar claims of
the now-named Catholic fellowships came to dominate by force of arms those who disagreed with
those claims. The term catholic was originally used only in an adjectival sense, and not as a proper
noun. When using the term "Catholic Church" herein the meaning is generally referring to the
Roman Catholic Church, but is not excluding the other "Catholic" fellowships.
The same is true in regards to the word Christianity. That is, the doctrines,
rites, and practices of what is today known as Christianity are so far removed from those of the early
Church that that name no longer identifies that which it did when it first came into usage. More on
this later.
We also stand in succession to those who are known as the Protestant
Reformers – Luther, Knox, Wesley, Campbell, etc. That is, we acknowledge that there has not only
been a falling away from the purity of the Gospel religion of the Bible in the centuries following the
times of Christ and the Apostles, but there has also been an ongoing prophetically definable work
of restoration to the purity of doctrine and practice of the religion of the Bible by means of those
aforementioned reformers and those who have followed thereafter.
We may also be identified as Judeo-Christians. Meaning that we accept the
Old and New Testaments and the divinely inspired traditional principles and practices revealed
therein as guiding in our beliefs and practices. This also means that we reject the traditional
principles and practices which were the fundamentals of the Babylonian, Egyptian, Persian, Greek,
Roman, and uninspired Jewish cultures which have found their way into what is commonly known
as the Christian Church, and which to one degree or another still exist in the various congregations
of Protestants, Catholics, and those fellowships which technically do not fall into either category
(such as Universalists, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Messianic Jews, etc.).
One of those heathen/pagan fundamentals is hero/ancestor worship which is
expressed towards the living as well as the dead. This consists not only of the legends and lore
surrounding the exalted ones, but also in the erection of monuments, shrines, temples, gardens, and
other places and things whereby to draw attention to men and their thinking rather than to God and
His will. This also includes the giving of flattering titles to men, and assigning them positions
unfounded in the word of God, thus separating brethren.
Another of those fundamentals is the invention of times and manners of
celebration which excite the sensual and selfish natures while stifling the true spiritual experiences,
and which weaken the moral obligations of love. Paramount among those inventions are
Christmas-keeping and the common Easter celebrations. And not the least bit behind the others is
the mysticising of basic fundamentals of life, and the deep things of God by the things which take
place in the customary Sunday worship hour practices, including the traditional observances of the
Lord's Supper in the various forms practiced by the different denominations.
We are also distinguished by our acceptance of what in the Bible is termed
THE SPIRIT OF PROPHECY – THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS
It is a fundamental teaching of the Seventh Day Adventists (S.D.A.), Davidian
Seventh Day Adventists (D.S.D.A.), and the Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists (B.D.S.D.A.), that
the gift of prophecy (the Spirit of prophecy – Revelation 12:17, 19:10) spoken of in the Bible is to
exist in the Church to bring her, and keep her in unity until the second coming of Christ (Isaiah 62:1,
Ephesians 4:11-16). The truth of the work of the Spirit of prophecy in the Christian Church, and
what it actually is (and isn't) has been greatly confused and misrepresented, and remains in great
controversy. As true prophecy is a gift of God, it is His responsibility to clear the misunderstanding
and misuse of the gift if He is to continue to employ it as a means of communicating with His
children (Amos 3:7). Howell/Koresh took advantage of the church's need for the gift of prophecy by
counterfeiting it, and thereby brought himself and others to destruction thereby. It is equally true that
he was not the first to abuse this need, nor, sad to say, will he be the last (Matthew 24:11, 24).
How this relates to the situation under discussion can be discerned through
an understanding of why the Church is named as it is. First, we have the name
ADVENTISTS
In the early 1800's a movement began within the Christian Church worldwide
based on events which were then believed to be the fulfillment of certain Bible prophecies which
pointed to the second coming of Christ. Foremost among those prophecies were ones in chapters 7
& 8 of the book of Daniel, regarding the "2300 days" prophecy and the "cleansing of the sanctuary."
Numerous Bible students in various places throughout the world and in many different fellowships
had noticed that certain recent events fit into the "2300 days" time line set forth in Daniel. At first
that period was thought to extend to 1843, but was later found to extend to October 22, 1844.
[For a more detailed exposition of those events and the determining of the beginning
and ending of the 2300 days prophecy please see the book entitled, The Great
Controversy, by Ellen G. White, and available through the Seventh Day Adventist
Church, and online at The Great Controversy].
One of the most prominent of those events occurred in 1798. At that time,
during the French Revolution, France's General Berthier had gone to Rome, captured the Pope, and
took him to the mountains of France where he later died. This led to the destruction of the local civil
power of the Roman Catholic Church in 1870, when Italy took away the Church's sovereign land which it did not regain until 1929 when Mussolini gave that organization the area less than one
square mile that it now has and operates as the independent City/State known as The Vatican. This
act of restoration was seen by many Christians and others of that time (1929) as one of the signs of
the fulfillment of another prophecy – that of the healing of the wounded head on the leopard-like
beast (Revelation 13:3) which was inflicted by the Protestant Reformation, and which was healed
by the backslidings of the Protestants.
Those Bible students in the early 1800s also noticed that the period from the
time the Roman Catholic Church gained its civil dominance (538 A.D.) until 1798 (when the pope
was taken captive – Revelation 13:10) was exactly 1260 years. Applying the Biblical rule of
interpretation that a day in prophecy can be symbolical of a year (Ezekiel 4:6), this corresponded
exactly to the first part of Daniel's prophecy (Daniel 12:7 – "time" [360], "times" [720], "dividing
of time" [180]). They further saw that the prophecy also pointed out that at the end of a 1290 and a
1335 year period (Daniel 12:11, 12) (commencing from a different point in time – that of the "taking
away of the daily" – which occurred in 508 A.D.) another event was to transpire. This prophecy also
was seen to point to 1843, and was to run parallel with the 2300 days prophecy of Daniel 8:14, and
was actually a part of the longer 2300 days prophecy.
The prophecy declared that at the end of said period "the sanctuary" was to
be cleansed. Here is where a problem arose. The Christian Church at that time didn't have a clear
and accurate understanding of what was meant by the phrase "the sanctuary shall be cleansed." The
majority of those leading in the movement presumed that the "sanctuary" meant the earth, itself, as
this opinion had been widely held by Churchmen for centuries. Even though they didn't have any
sound Biblical reasoning for that conclusion, nor any specific revelation from God to that effect, this
idea became prominent in the movement. For centuries the Roman Catholic Church had been
teaching that the earth (and particularly Rome) was the center of the universe, and that general notion
carried on into the Protestant churches. Thus, the phrase "the cleansing of the sanctuary" was
generally understood to mean that Jesus would return to the earth to "cleanse" it from sin and
sinners. Thus the name "Adventists" was placed upon those who were expecting the advent (coming)
of Christ.
At this time in history it was generally believed among the churches that God
was no longer communicating with mankind by means of direct inspiration – i.e., prophecy. For
example, some of the devout men who were prominent in the founding of the United States were
what is known as Deists. That is, though they believed in God, they only saw God as the original
Creator and that He was no longer directly active in the affairs of the world. Many of the popular
churches of the time taught that the gifts of the Spirit, such as the gift of prophecy, were only for the
Old testament and the early Church times, and that they ceased forever shortly after the time of the
Apostles.
During the 1800s, the Christian world was still coming out of what has been
called The Dark Ages. It was only a few hundred years prior to that time that the Bibles were chained
up in monasteries with only a very few allowed access to them. The people were led to look to the
leaders of the churches to know God's will. Anyone who would state that they had a revelation from
God which was contrary to the opinions of the church leaders was in jeopardy of facing a charge of
heresy and death.
The Protestants, who since the early 1500s had severed their connections with
the Roman Catholic Church, were by the 1800s divided into four major groups – Lutherans,
Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists. Though there were other prominent non-Catholic groups
around, their basic doctrines and practices stemmed from one of those four major groups of thinking.
Then, as today, those groups were generally relying on their leaders and scholars to interpret for them
the meaning of the prophecies (how they apply), and what are the true Bible doctrines. They
presumed that their prominent leaders were actually inspired by God in all things. Great intellect,
scholarship, oratory skills, and persona were presumptively accepted as evidence that one held the
truth in righteousness. Most fellowships accepted the opinions of their own leaders, while rejecting
the leaders of the other churches. Such is still the situation today, though they are now uniting for
common purposes without giving up the particulars which identify each as distinct from the other.
Though the founders of these groups were inspired in their work of restoring
many of the Biblical truths and reforming many of the practices which were supplanted during the
Dark Ages, all of their movements eventually became polluted with private interpretations and
theories, some of which came from within themselves, and some from without. After the death of
the inspired leaders, the fundamental principles which led to the acceptance of the revelation of
clearer light on the Bible which the reformers brought to their various congregations were generally
set aside by those who followed after them, being replaced with formalism and the idolizing of the
leaders and the customs they espoused.
The Advent Movement of the early 1800s brought a means of unity among
those of the various denominations who participated in it as they were willing to put away their
private opinions and practices in their common goal of understanding what were their true duties in
preparing to meet their Savior. There was a true revival of spirituality and brotherly love brought
forth by the hope of Christ's expected coming and the realization of each persons need of personal
preparation for such. In America during that time around 50,000 people had left the world-loving
fellowships to which they had formerly belonged to take part in the Advent movement. The leaders
of the Advent movement had no intentions of forming a new denomination, but were united in the
work of preparing to meet their Lord and Savior.
Then came what was later to be known as The Great Disappointment. October
22, 1844 came and went. Jesus had not returned, nor was the earth cleansed. Some of those who had
not learned to appreciate God's willingness and desire to lead His people into all truth, and who were
satisfied with the interpretations of their so-called scholars and other leaders were led into accepting
different dates, only to be disappointed again and again. Others, influenced by their unbelieving
families, friends, or associates, or who still longed for the things of the world ( the lusts of the eyes,
the lusts of the flesh, and the pride of life), just abandoned their hopes, and denounced the
movement. Yet, others were unable to so easily cast away the blessed hope which had so enlightened
their lives. From among these came those who were later to be known as
SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS
A number of those who were confirmed on the certainty of the date of October
22, 1844 humbly sought God for an explanation of the situation, and received an answer. It wasn't
the date that was wrong, it was the uninspired interpretation of the nature of the event – the cleansing
of the sanctuary. The true nature of the event was revealed by means of visions given to at least two
different people which produced deep study into the subject. Said study confirmed what was revealed
in the visions.
The visions revealed that it was the Sanctuary in heaven (of which the earthly
sanctuary of the ancient Israelites was an image, a type – Hebrews 8:2) that was to be cleansed. The
people were led to understand that the heavenly Sanctuary was truly a real place with a literal
ministration. They were brought to understand that as under the directions given to Moses the sins
of the people were transferred to the earthly Sanctuary by means of a sacrifice by which they were
atoned for, making it necessary to cleanse that Sanctuary itself of the record of those sins, and that
said cleansing was the purpose of the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16). Just so were (and are) the
sins of repentant people, in reality, transferred to the heavenly Sanctuary, there to be atoned for, and
that it also requires a cleansing in the end of the age – in the antitypical Day of Atonement.
They learned that the Bible taught of the reality that there are books of records
in heaven which contain the deeds (good and bad) of all, and the names of those who sought
forgiveness for their evil deeds through God's mercy (Daniel 7:10; Revelations 20:12, 21:27). They
saw that these books are kept so that during the final judgment those who sit in judgment may
review them to understand God's final decisions, and so that those who are judged may see their own
history and God's attempts to redeem them. Also, that the inhabitants of the multitude of the unfallen
worlds and the angels in heaven may fully understand the great controversy between sin and
righteousness, and that God's final dealings with sinners and the rebellion which began in heaven
are the outcome of their own free will choices.
They also learned that during the time of the cleansing of the heavenly
sanctuary (in its initial phase) those books would be reviewed in order to determine who would come
up in the resurrection of the just (1 Thessalonians 4:14-17), and who would come up in the
resurrection of the unjust (Revelation 20:5-7). This phase of the cleansing of the sanctuary is known
as the Judgment of the Dead. It was also revealed that at a certain point in time (which would not
be made known until it actually occurred) the judgment would pass from a review of those who
were dead to those who were then living. This Judgment of (or, for) the Living is necessary to
determine who among the living are worthy of translation to heaven at Christ's personal return
without having experienced death (1 Thessalonians 4:15, 17). This decision is based on how the
individual responds to truth as it is revealed to him or her – how one's life conforms to the standard
of righteousness revealed during this time of the restoration of all things. The judgment of the dead
and the living is the same except that those who are alive receive their reward without having to first
die and then be resurrected.
They further saw that as the typical service of the cleansing of the Sanctuary
under the Mosaic law involved a judgment which resulted in the blotting out of the sins of the
accused, and the transferring of the sins from the sanctuary where the record of them had been stored
onto the one who was to finally bear them (i.e., the scapegoat – Leviticus 16:8), so it will be in the
fulfillment of the real (antitypical) events. That is, though God and His followers have been accused
by the devil of many things in exercising His divine will and law in the universe, God will ultimately
be justified in all matters, and the devil will bear the fruits of his pride – his own sins, and the sins
of those he tempted but who have repented and had them blotted out of the books of records by
Christ's intercession. It is notable that the scapegoat (Satan) only bears the sins of the repentant
which were first transferred to the sanctuary by means of the blood of the appointed Intercessor,
while those who have not repented bear their own sins upon themselves.
Before the fall and rebellion of Lucifer and his sympathizers, and the later fall
of Adam and Eve, all of the intelligent beings in the universe were under the control of the Holy
Spirit. The divine principles of love were written within the hearts of all. Those laws of truth, justice,
and submission to the will of God (who is the source of love), have nothing in common with pride
and self-sufficiency which were embraced by the devil and his followers. Those who joined in the
rebellion were no longer under the influence of the Holy Spirit.
Those who attain to the resurrection of the just or the translation of the living
will have demonstrated in their lives that they have faith that there truly is a pure motivating force
and intelligence in the universe, and that they have voluntarily chosen to allow such to control their
lives. Those who have sealed their hearts and minds against the power of pure love will have
demonstrated that they would not and could not be happy in the presence of those who have chosen
otherwise. And, as it has always been God's intention to have life filled only with pure love, those
who choose rebellion will have demonstrated that they prefer nonexistence (death) to life (Revelation 2:11; 20:6, 14; 21:8). Thus God will give those who cling to rebellion the effect of their choice rather
than to force them to be something different from what they have freely chosen to be. This will be
most painful to God.
It's important to note that in this pre-millennial judgment only the names of
those who have professed faith in God are considered. Those who have never professed allegiance
to God are to be judged during the millennium (Revelation 20:11-13). In the typical service on the
day of atonement, only those whose sins were transferred to the sanctuary received the cleansing on
that day. So it is in the antitype – the true cleansing – only those whose have professed repentance
will be judged on said profession. As only God can judge the heart, and know whether or not one's
repentance has been genuine, so during the judgment the names of those who are in review will
either be retained in the Lamb's Book of Life, or blotted out of it. Such investigation will determine
their final reward or punishment (Exodus 32:32, 33; Revelation 3:5).
This doctrine of the cleansing of the Sanctuary, which began on October 22,
1844, became a distinguishing feature of the Seventh Day Adventists. Though other Christians have
discounted this doctrine, none have put forth any sound Biblical argument to disprove it. Along with
the new understanding of the doctrine of the cleansing of the Sanctuary, which partially explained
the cause of the Great Disappointment experienced in October of 1844, was the understanding shown
them from the prophecy which directly related to their whole situation. And that prophecy is in
Revelation chapter 10, particularly verses 8-11:
"And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me
again, and said, Go and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel
which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. And I went unto the angel, and said
unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and
it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. And I took
the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as
honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter. And he said unto me, Thou
must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings."
Those early Adventists understood that the "little book" which was in the hand
of the angel was the book of Daniel which had brought them to the end of the prophetic time periods
relating to the cleansing of the Sanctuary. But what they didn't see beforehand was there was to be
a disappointment such as revealed in the foregoing verses. That is, while the little book was being
eaten its taste was sweet, but that it eventually produced a bitterness in the belly – a great
disappointment. But such was not to be the end of their experience, as it was revealed to them in the
prophecy that they were to "prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and
kings." What they were to prophecy again about was the true nature of the cleansing of the sanctuary
which took place at the end of the "2300 days." And so it has been since then.
Not only was the book work aspect of the judgment in the heavenly Sanctuary
brought to light, but more importantly was the nature and effect of Christ's own work therein as it
relates to His sacrifice. That is, His ongoing work as High Priest who ever lives to make intercession
by His blood for the redemption of sinners. They were led to the realization that the true
understanding of Christ's continuing intercession had been lost sight of and displaced ("cast down"
and "taken away" – Daniel 8:11) by the "man of sin." (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4). That the true
experience of the early Christian Church (the doctrines and practices), had been supplanted by the
introduction of pagan philosophies and customs which cumulated in the bringing in of, and the
perpetuation of the performance of the Mass. How this particular issue is at the heart of the matter
involving Koresh; how it relates to why Koresh and others engaged in this warfare against the
Branch; how it was influential in the way the 1993 incident and its aftermath have transpired will
be discussed further on.
Much of the Seventh Day Adventists' understanding about the nature and
latter day events of the cleansing of the Sanctuary came by means of the gift of the Spirit of
prophecy manifested primarily through one person,
ELLEN G. WHITE
Seventh Day Adventists believe that the gift of prophecy was manifested in
Ellen G. White, and the S.D.A. Church was raised up and led by her counsel and those who worked
with her. As the Church followed her inspired counsel they prospered, and when they didn't, they
suffered loss. The early S.D.A.s firmly believed and taught that the Bible clearly taught that this gift
of God, prophecy (1 Corinthians 12:10, 28; Ephesians 4:11), along with all of the other gifts, must
exist in the Church "until that which is perfect is come." (1 Corinthians 13:10).
Though Ellen White taught that her inspired writings and counsels (much of
which were based on dreams and visions) are a "lesser light" pointing to the greater light of the Holy
Bible, she believed and taught that the inspired testimonies which she was given to bear were to be
considered by her brethren (and herself) as the "voice of God" to the people. That is, she taught that
the counsels which she was given to communicate would bear evidence of their divine origin in the
people being blessed by their taking to heart the testimonies and by personally drawing closer to God
for confirmation of the same, or by being cursed by their rejection thereof.
She never claimed infallibility, as she believed that God was progressively
revealing truth in the restoration of all things (Isaiah 42:19-21). She stated that:
"We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and Heaven
alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never
have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and
opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed." Christian
Experience and Teachings, p. 203.
It is her writings, and, most importantly, the Bible texts which are the
foundational supports of her testimonies, that are the main foundation for the S.D.A.'s teachings and
practices which are distinguished from the other Christian churches. When the brethren would come
to a place where they were not clear on a point of doctrine or practice they would engage in prayer
(often with fasting) and the Spirit would come upon Ellen White by means of a dream or vision
enlightening her on the matter at hand. She had over two thousand dreams and visions which
involved church matters in her life.
Regarding the reason for the testimonies she was called to bear she compared
ancient Israel with the professed followers of God of the present age. Speaking of ancient Israel she
said,
"God gave them His law, but they would not obey it. He then gave them
ceremonies and ordinances, that, in the performance of these, God might be kept in remembrance.
They were so prone to forget Him and His claims upon them that it was necessary to keep their
minds stirred up to realize their obligations to obey and honor their Creator. Had they been obedient,
and loved to keep God's commandments, the multitude of ceremonies and ordinances would not
have been required.
"If the people who now profess to be God's peculiar treasure would obey His
requirements, as specified in His word, special testimonies would not be given to awaken them to
their duty and impress upon them their sinfulness and their fearful danger in neglecting to obey the
word of God."
Though she has written around 2 million words, and is the most widely
published woman in the world, most people have never heard of her. Her formal education extended
only through the third grade, yet she wrote on virtually every facet of the human experience – natural
science and psychological phenomenon; education and marital relations; health reform and church
organization; sacred history and sacred prophecy, and much more. Her inspired counsels were both
of a general nature and specific to individuals and groups.
Over ten years ago, Ellen White was given an award posthumously by a
prominent health organization in America for being 100 years ahead of her time in regard to her
teachings on healthful living. Though she was a firm believer in divine healing, she consistently
espoused temperate living as one's duty to God. She went from being a very sickly young girl who
was in extreme pain when traveling, who had what she termed a voracious appetite for meat, and
who said that she could not eat a piece of bread the size of a silver dollar, to a mature woman who
was very active in writing, traveling, public speaking, and was a prominent advocate of balanced
vegetarianism, and of abstinence from all harmful foods, drinks, tobacco, alcohol, narcotics, patented
medicines (except in extreme circumstances), and other harmful practices. Along with her teachings
on the judgment and the Christian lifestyle, she was given precious light on
THE SEVENTH DAY SABBATH
The beginning of the 1800s was a time of great general revival in the Christian
world. The English and American Bible Societies were extremely active in distributing the Bible
throughout the world. Due to the desire for religious liberty which motivated the Puritan Pilgrims
to settle in America, and which reason also motivated many others after them to seek refuge here,
this country became the main place for the examination and the exercise of religious doctrines and
practices which had been repressed by the political powers in the Old World.
Among those doctrines which received renewed attention was that of the
seventh day Sabbath. That is, Which day is the true Sabbath of God – Saturday (the 7th day of the
week), or Sunday (the first day of the week)? Shortly after The Great Disappointment of 1844, a
woman named Rachel Oakes, a Seventh Day Baptist, brought to one of the leaders of what was to
later become known as the Seventh Day Adventists, Joseph Bates, the truth of the seventh day
Sabbath. He, in turn, brought that truth to Ellen White and others in their fellowship. Shortly
thereafter Ellen White was given a vision of the heavenly sanctuary in which she saw the Ark of the
Covenant, and the Ten Commandments therein. The Sabbath Commandment (the fourth) had a halo
around it. By means of this vision and other direct revelations on the subject, along with much study
on the history of the controversy over, and the perpetuity of, God's law, the Holy Spirit convinced
those Adventists to begin to observe the seventh day Sabbath, and to teach the binding obligations
of all of God's law as applicable under the New Covenant.
It is written, "And he [Jesus] said unto them, The sabbath was made for man."
(Mark 2:27). This statement, along with the many others on the blessings which are in the Sabbath,
shows that there is a purpose in the keeping of the seventh day which doesn't exist in any other day
of the God-created week. As it was first ordained as a memorial of the creation and its Creator,
Christ Himself, then there would be neither purpose nor necessity to change its memorial qualities
to another day, for Christ Himself honored the day when He rested on it between His crucifixion
when He stated that His work was "finished" (John 19:30), and His resurrection on the first day of
the week when He took up His work again.
The keeping of Sunday as the so-called Sabbath had become a prominent
feature of what became known as the Catholic Church. The leaders of the Catholic Church boast that
they, on their own authority, changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday in honor of the
resurrection of Christ, which took place on the first day of the week, Sunday. This change is said to
have been made official in the 4th century A.D. But today we also have those who do not consider
themselves Catholics but who still keep Sunday as a special day of worship. These give different
reasons for doing such, but are nonetheless basically united with Catholics in their opposition to
keeping the true seventh day Sabbath, Saturday.
Following are some statements from the Catholic Church on the matter:
"Protestantism, in disregarding the authority of the [Catholic] Church has no
good reason for its Sunday theory, and ought, logically, to keep Saturday as the Sabbath." John
Gilmary Shae, "The Observance of Sunday and Civil Law For Its Enforcement," The American
Catholic Quarterly Review, 8 (January, 1883), p. 152. [brackets added]
"If the Bible is the only guide for the Christians, then the Seventh-day
Adventist is right in observing the Saturday with the Jew." Bertrand L. Conway, "The Question Box
Answers" (New York: The Columbus Press, 1900), p. 254.
"If Protestants would follow the Bible, they should worship God on the
Sabbath day. In keeping Sunday they are following a law of the Catholic Church." Albert Smith
(Chancellor of the Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore), replying for the Cardinal in a letter of
February 10, 1920).
"The [Catholic] Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by
right of their divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant,
claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, had no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter
the Seventh-Day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant." "The Question Box," The Catholic
Universe Bulletin, 69 (August 14, 1942), p. 4 [brackets added]
"Nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the
Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses
to keep holy the Sabbath day [Exodus 20:8-11], that is the Seventh-day of the week, Saturday. Today
most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Catholic] Church outside the
Bible." "To Tell You The Truth," The Catholic Virginian, 22 October 3, 1947), p. 9. [brackets
added]
While in one position there are those who feel that they have the authority to
change God's laws according to their will, in another there are those who are known as antinomians.
Those are they who believe in "the theological doctrine that by faith and God's gift of grace through
the gospel a Christian is freed not only from the Old Testament law of Moses [but from] all forms
of legalism...." Merriam-Webster's Dictionary, "antinomianism." [brackets added].
This doctrine is embraced in all or in part by many Protestant churches, and
particularly among the Baptists (who, technically, are not properly called Protestants, as they trace
their doctrinal lineage through groups which were not accepted as being in fellowship with the
Roman Catholic Churches). Their answer to the Sabbath controversy is basically that we are not
"under law," but "under grace," and that the Sabbath was nailed to the cross, along with all the law.
The relevance of this matter to the situation with Koresh and the attitude towards the Branch
Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Church's presence in Waco may be partially understood by the facts
that Baptists are quite numerous and influential in Texas, and particularly in Waco because of the
presence there of one of their main institutes of higher education, Baylor University. More on this
matter will be discussed further on. Also, bear in mind that under one of the six flags which have
flown over Texas throughout its history, Roman Catholicism was the mandatory religion of the state.
Yet in another position are those, such as the Church of England, who say that
the law is still binding, but that the change was not made on the authority of the Roman Catholic
Church, but rather by Christ, Himself. These wrest the Scriptures out of their context to make it
appear that the keeping of the seventh day as the Sabbath was only for the Jews, being only a
provision of the Mosaic law specifically for them, and thus was changed with the death of Christ.
Regarding the controversy over the Sabbath (the 7th day), it is of note that the
calendar which is in common use in Western countries starts with Sunday (the 1st day) and ends with
Saturday (the 7th day). Though the dates assigned to the days of the weeks have been changed at
times through the course of history, the actual weekly cycle has been uninterrupted since its
inception.
It is notable that in the last couple of decades there has been an active
movement in Germany (which has historically held an anti-Jewish attitude) to change their calendar
so that Monday becomes the first day of their calendar week, and Sunday the seventh day. With a
change like this, and the education of a new generation or two to forget the true history of the
controversy, the German society (and others whom they influence) would be believing that Sunday
was the seventh day of the Bible, and thus the true Sabbath. Some are even trying to make a ten day
week, further obliterating the memory of the seven day week established at creation by a wise
Creator.
The Catholic leaders say that they had the authority to have made the change
from Saturday to Sunday, though there is nothing in the Bible which sanctioned such a change. They
base their claim on Christ's words, "whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven:
and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." This statement was made both
to Peter (Matthew 16:19), and to the church (Matthew 18:18). The controversy arises over to whom
exactly does the promise apply – those who are truly acting in accordance with God's will, or those
who are only pretending to do so.
By the fourth century A.D., the church was so flooded with pagans and their
philosophies through associations with, and concessions from the Roman government, and through
compromises due to persecution, that she could scarcely be recognized as the congregation which
originated in the Hebrew/Judean, Biblical culture. It wasn't the few remaining faithful followers of
Jesus of Nazareth who attempted to bind a change in the law of God on earth or heaven, it was those
who "forsake the holy covenant [God's law]" Daniel 11:30.
There is a prophecy which states that there was to be a power thus described,
"And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most
High, and think to change times and laws." Daniel 7:25. This text has been understood to apply to
the Catholic Church to one degree or another by many in the Protestant Reformation, and by others.
As stated, the term catholic means universal. According to Merriam-Webster's
Dictionary, "Universal is likely to suggest that which is worldwide rather than pertinent to or
characteristic of the whole universe; it is often further narrowed to refer to the world of men and
human affairs or to important or significant parts of this world. It is likely to indicate a unanimity
or conformity of practice or belief or a broad comprehensiveness" (emphasis added).
At no time in history was Judeo-Christianity ever considered as being
universal (worldwide). But there is another worship system whose influence has truly been universal.
That is, sun worship, as it was propagated in ancient Babylon and was spread throughout the whole
world (Revelation 14:8; 17:2; & 18:3). The heart of sun worship doesn't lie in the symbols and other
things (idols) variously used to express it, but in the principles which underlie it. The early
Christians, who were primarily Israelites, kept the seventh day Sabbath (Saturday) while the rest of
the world which observed a day of rest from labor, or a day of worship did so on the first day of the
week, Sunday, after the custom of sun worship. The customs of those who observed Sunday had
little or nothing in common with those truly kept the Sabbath. Sunday-keeping was more a time for
festivities than for religious expression. As Christianity experienced its rapid growth, the
Sunday-keeping customs of the non-Judaic peoples, and those of the Israelites who had abandoned
God's covenant, were found to be in conflict with the seventh day Sabbath-keeping Christians.
At the same time, the hostilities between the pagan Romans and the Jews were
intensifying. The Romans were making laws against the practices of the Jews because of the Jews
revolting against Roman rule. As early as the year 135, Roman emperors were making laws against
the observance of the Sabbath, and the use of the Hebrew calendar. The Christians (Jew and Gentile)
were being negatively affected by these Roman laws designed to put down the Jewish uprisings.
Those persecutions were among the things which caused the weak in faith to "forsake the holy
covenant" (Daniel 11:28-39) – the law of God as expressed in the Bible. Many Christians fell away
from the pure faith due to the cruel enforcement of anti-Sabbath keeping laws, and proceeded to
compromise their principles by accepting the pagan manners and times of worship, which included
Sunday. It wasn't until a couple of centuries later that those who thought to "change times and laws"
(Daniel 9:25) attempted to convey any Sabbath qualities to Sunday. (For further reading on this
matter see Three Sabbaths)
In many of the countries where the doctrines of Christ were preached the
ancient animosities against anything that had its roots in Biblical Judaism (such as Christianity) were
so great that even those who embraced Christianity were unable to overcome their previously held
prejudices. A good example of this was the Egyptians. Due to their experience with Moses which
resulted in the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and its general destruction, some Egyptians at the
time of Christianity's spread were in the custom of fasting on the seventh day (Saturday). This was
done in antagonism to the law of God which declared the seventh day Sabbath to be a feast day
(Leviticus 23). Thus, many of the Egyptians who professed to accept Christianity would not even
partake of the Lord's Supper (originally a fellowship meal) on the seventh day, but rather would fast,
clinging to their ancient custom of animosity to God's law. The Egyptians were certainly not alone
in such antagonistic practices.
It was in the fourth century (321 A.D.) that the emperor of Rome, Constantine,
made what is believed to be the first national Sunday law. That law provided pains of civil penalties
for failure to observe a rest from labor on Sunday in the cities (not in the countryside). A few years
later (324 A.D., at the first Council of Nicea), many of the so-called Christian bishops who were
actively forsaking God's covenant decided to supplant the Jewish calendar which had been used for
reckoning the time of the annual celebration of Christ's resurrection with the Roman (Julian)
calendar. A look at the prevailing sentiments of the time regarding the time of the observance of the
memorial of Christ's resurrection will provide an insight into what prompted the outlawing of the
observance of the seventh day Sabbath a few years later at the Synod of Laodecia (327 A.D.), to wit,
"...the Council addresses the Church of Alexandria,...'All the brethren
in the east who formerly celebrated Easter with the Jews [at the same time], will henceforth
keep it at the same time as the Romans, with us, and with all those who from ancient times
have celebrated the feast at the same time with us....
"The Emperor Constantine made the following announcement in his
letter to all who were not present at the Council: '...It was declared to be particularly
unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom (the calculation) of the
Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were
blinded....We ought not therefore to have anything in common with the Jews....we desire,
dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly
shameful to us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast....it
would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such a wicked
people....As, on the one hand, it is our duty not to have anything in common with the
murderers of our Lord, and as, on the other, the custom now followed by the Churches of the
West, of the South, and of the North and by some of those of the East, is the most
acceptable....You should consider not only that the number of Churches in these provinces
make a majority, but also that it is right to demand what our reason approves, and that we
should have nothing in common with the Jews.... [and] accept joyfully the divine favour, and
this truly divine command; for all which takes place in the assemblies of the bishops ought
to be regarded as proceeding from the will of God....we can thus celebrate this holy Easter
day at the same time, if it is granted me, as I desire, to unite myself with you; we can rejoice
together, seeing that the divine power has made use of our instrumentality for destroying the
evil designs of the devil, and thus causing faith, peace,and unity to flourish amongst us...."
History of the Councils p. 322-4 [brackets added]
How widely this varies from Christ's own words, "The scribes and the
Pharisees sit in Moses seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but
do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not." Matthew 23:2,3. Or of Paul's attitude in
Romans chapters 9-11, and 2 Corinthians 3:16. The antagonism noted above, though said to be
against the Jewish leaders who would have been the ones announcing the times for the feast days
(which times the Christians had also been observing) had another underlying motive – that is, the
very nature and character of the feast keeping itself.
Regarding the Biblical feast days, and particularly the Sabbath, it is written
that "no work" is to be done on them (Leviticus 23). Though there were notable exceptions to said
commandment – minor work needed for eating purposes (Exodus 12:16), and doing good to preserve
life (Matthew 12:10-12) – the nature of said times is more fully delineated as being times to cease
from "doing thy pleasure, ... doing thine own ways, ... finding thine own pleasure, ... speaking thine
own words" (Isaiah 58:13), and to "call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and
to honour him." id.
Though there is a certain similar reverence observed in the keeping of Sunday
by the Catholic Church in general (at least in principle, if not in action), and also by many of those
others who believe that they have the authority from heaven to treat Sunday as the Sabbath, there is
readily observed one basic difference between the nature of the two practices. Sabbath keeping
involves a ceasing from self, while Sunday keeping involves an exaltation of self. Sabbath keeping
involves focusing on the works of God (both in creation and recreation), and Sunday keeping focuses
on the works of men.
The Lord has specifically stated the reasons for His people to enter into His
rest "If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call
the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own
ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Then shalt thou delight thyself
in the LORD; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the
heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it." Isaiah 58:13, 14. The
blessing contained therein cannot be transferred by the will of men to another day. Neither can
anyone meet the requirements of that covenant promise without the graces of Christ active in their
life. Those graces were also available to the world before Christ came in person by means of the
presence of the Holy Spirit. The sacrifice of Christ for the redemption of the world was made known
to Adam and Eve right after their fall, as witnessed and prefigured by Abel's sacrifice (Genesis 4:4),
and was thus carried down through the ages (though the truth of the matter was lost sight of due to
the introduction of private opinions and theories, and idolatry). The perpetuity of the Sabbath is also
declared in Isaiah 66:22, 23: "For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall
remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to
pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to
worship before me, saith the LORD."
In the Catholic Church the focus is on the performance of the Mass (in which
the communicants are also performers), and in the non-Catholic Sunday-keeping congregations the
focus is on going to church. In both of these the focus is on the work of those who lead out. In the
Catholic Church, and in those similar to it, those (the priests) who perform the Mass (i.e., the
sacrifice [sic] of Christ) which culminates in the making of the body and blood of Christ with their
own mouths (words), are the focus of the day. In non-Catholic Sunday keeping churches the focus
is similarly on the minister, pastor, or elder who blesses the bread and wine by which Christ is to be
remembered. In both of these is demonstrated the presumed authority to appoint and establish men
(and, rarely, women) to created positions of special privilege and authority. That is, it is only those
thus appointed who have the supposed authority to bless the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper,
and then only at the times and places also designated by the leaders of the tradition followed (all of
which are the contrivances of mere men).
But this mistaken principle of focusing on the works of men, rather than on
the works of God was not a new thing in the Christian Church, for it existed in the days of the
apostles (3 John 1:9). Nor can it be honestly said that it was the heathen and pagan powers of
themselves that gained the advantage over the commandment-keeping Christians. But it must be
admitted that it was God, Himself, which allowed the serpent's flood to attempt to do away with the
true Church (Revelation 12:15), and who allowed the holy feasts to be taken away from the Church
at large (Hosea 2:11), and to be replaced by pagan things. This was not the first time God had found
it necessary to do such a thing. It is written of ancient Israel,
"I lifted up mine hand unto them also in the wilderness, that
I would scatter them among the heathen, and disperse them through the countries;
Because they had not executed my judgments, but had despised my statutes, and had
polluted my sabbaths, and their eyes were after their fathers' idols. Wherefore I gave
them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live."
(Ezekiel 20:23-25).
These things were allowed to happen to the Christians because they were
lowering the standard, despite the fact they were warned against doing so (1 Corinthians 11:17-34).
In wanting the approval of men, rather than the approval of God, backsliding leaders in the Christian
Church sought large congregations and political advantages which came only by compromising
God's holy laws. Even this backsliding was predicted in the early days of the church (2 Thessalonians 2:3,4). But though those things which are "not good" were allowed, God never intended for His
people to continue in them. It was His purpose to teach a lesson which would never be forgotten
(Nahum 1:9).
That lesson is that no matter what the degree, any transgression of God's
commandments, statutes, and judgments of love opens the door to that which eventually leads to
misery and death. The ancient Israelites, as a body, didn't learn this lesson even after their miraculous
deliverance from their bondage in Egypt. Neither did the early Christians, as a body, fully learn that
lesson after their miraculous deliverance from the bondage of sin by Christ's sacrifice. It wasn't long
after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost that two of the disciples were found
lying to God (Acts 5:1-11).
Due to of their acceptance of the truth regarding the seventh day Sabbath,
Adventists, in general, have been labeled "Judaizers," "legalists," "antichrists," and other similar
derogatory epithets. Most people don't understand how this controversy over the Sabbath has
affected life in America. One of the more recent developments is the contention regarding the
displaying of the Ten Commandments in public places such as schools and courtrooms.
One of the organizations which is against displaying the Ten Commandments
is the Roman Catholic Church, as strange as this may sound. The reason for this is that their version
of the Ten Commandments differs from that which is in the Bible, and which is accepted by most
Protestants. In the Catholic version, the second Commandment regarding the bowing down before
idols is eliminated, and the tenth Commandment is divided into two separate ones to make up for
the elimination of the second, thus still keeping the number at ten.
In their enumeration, the Sabbath commandment is the third in order, while
in the Bible it is the fourth. As the Catholic hierarchy would rather not have their adherents exposed
to the Protestant (Biblical) version of the Ten Commandments that have been historically displayed
in the public places of America, they, therefore, would rather have none displayed at all. It has long
been a general teaching in the Catholic Church for their members not to even talk with Protestants,
especially on matters of religious doctrine. Also, in their wording of the Sabbath commandment the
words concerning the Lord creating the world in six days and He Himself resting on the seventh day,
and therefore hallowing and sanctifying the seventh day in the original commandment are purposely
left out, thereby further attempting to obliterate the true meaning and nature of the Sabbath – that of
God's rest which men are invited to enter into.
This same antagonism towards the exposure of Catholic assumptions is also
manifest in the moves to make Spanish a second language in many or all of the States of America.
The Roman Catholic Church is seeking to prevent the Spanish-speaking Catholics in America from
being able to come in contact with the Protestant doctrines by means of the English-speaking
Americans under the guise of preserving the cultural heritage which was forced on them long ago
– Roman Catholicism, and their authority to enforce Sunday keeping by civil edict. Many are aware
that the free preaching of the Protestant doctrines in Catholic countries is not allowed by their
governments.
Yet the antagonism against Adventists, in general, by the Roman Catholic
hierarchy is not limited to the matter of the Sabbath. At the heart of the Sabbath controversy is the
matter of the leadership's authority to define doctrines and practices, and to ordain elders (priests,
bishops etc.). Foremost in the exercise of their assumed authority is their ability to vote in a new
pope. Even though a pope occupies the position of being the "Vicar of Christ," that is, Christ's
mouthpiece, His prophet, it only takes a vote of 2/3 of those who vote to make one of their own the
pope. That means that as many as 1/3 of the voting elders may not believe that the one elected pope
is not worthy of being what he is proclaimed to be. But it is necessary to keep a pope upon the throne
in order to keep up the appearance that Christ is in the church through the living Spirit of prophecy.
So without cheapening the matter, the controversy between the Adventists in general and the Roman
Catholics may be summed up in one phrase – dueling prophets, each representing diametrically
opposed principles. On the one hand is God's law and those He inspires to uphold it, and on the other
are men's private, satanically inspired interpretations of that law and those whom they elect to
propagate it.
This controversy, in principle, did not begin in the Christian era as Jesus,
Himself, condemned the practice as it was already existing among the Jews of His day (Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:7-13; Colossians 2:22; & Titus 1:14). Nor is it confined to the Roman Catholic Church,
but extends to all professed Sunday-keeping Christian churches (and even many Sabbath-keeping
ones). There is so much confusion in the so-called Christian churches regarding doctrines and
practices that such have become a veritable Babylon (The name "Babylon" has come to mean
"confusion" [mixing], because it was at the tower of Babel were man's language was confounded
[mixed] – Genesis 11:9).
Due to the fact that the condition of those organizations has been notably
deteriorating morally and spiritually (being mixed with countless private interpretations of the Bible
truths), the Adventists have come to recognize that God has just so designated those ministries – as
"Babylon." (Revelation 14:8; 18:2), and that God's true people within them will have to come out
of them if they do not want to partake of the judgments which will eventually fall on all who
constitute "Babylon."
The title of Babylon is given to those organizations not merely because of the
confusion they have brought to the world over the Sabbath, but also because of the many other
doctrines and practices which they have attempted to pass off as Christian – that is,
Christmas-keeping, Easter celebrating, etc. – while knowing all along that such things are of pagan
origin. It is written, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the
world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the
lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." 1 John 2:15, 16. One
does not have to long observe any of the popular churches to sense the presence of any or all of those
things in the ministry, and thereby in the congregations at large.
This should not be construed to imply that there are not sincere Christians in
those congregations, but is said to impress upon the seeker of truth the reality of why God has to call
His people out of those organizations, and the doctrines and practices they espouse, to wit, "Babylon
the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit,
and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of
her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants
of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies. And I heard another voice from
heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive
not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities."
Revelation 18:2-5.
Differences in doctrines and practices may have no great effect on those who
are opposed to them unless they enter the politics of everyday life and the laws of the community.
And such has it been with Sunday keeping. That is, they have been enforced by civil law, with pains
in varying degrees upon the transgressors thereof. Thus, in light of the long past and more recent
history of such manmade laws, and the current attempts being made to reestablish the dominion of
those authorities which espouse the civil enforcement of Sunday laws, and in light of the revelation
and fulfillment of certain Bible prophecies (Revelation 13:11-18), Adventists have been led to
understand and teach that the enforcement of Sunday laws will be
THE MARK OF THE BEAST
In order to understand what is meant by the phrase "mark of the beast," we
need to know what is meant by the terms "mark" and "beast." A mark is something which is used
for identification purposes. To understand why the enforcement of Sunday laws (and the principles
underlying them) is to be the mark of the beast (something which identifies one with the beast) we
need only be aware of some elementary truths.
The first is the fact that the mark (the sign) of God is in His law, and
particularly in the Sabbath commandment (Exodus 31:16, 17; 13:8, 9: Deuteronomy 6:4-8; 11:18;
Ezekiel 20:12, 20).
The second is that man without the Spirit of God is but a beast (2 Peter 2:9-12;
Jude 1:4-10; Titus 1:12). This is also borne out by the symbolical use of beasts in prophecy to
represent nations which arose from the mere will of men (through strife and turmoil), rather than by
the anointing of the Holy Spirit (see Daniel chapters 7 & 8). Thus the mark of the beast is the mark
of man acting without the Spirit of God – man acting as a beast.
Next we need to learn the identity of this beast, and what it means for man to
act as a beast. This we may do by looking into the prophecy which reveals this matter, and the
symbols employed therein.
"And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and
he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the
power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell
therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
"And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come
down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, And deceiveth them that dwell
on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of
the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to
the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. And he had power to give
life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and
cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And
he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark
in their right hand, or in their foreheads:" Revelation 13:11-16.
As revealed in chapters 7 & 8 of the book of Daniel, beasts represent nations
and governments, and horns represent their distinctive political powers, be they individuals or
groups. That horns represent political powers, and how a beast uses its horns is also seen in a
prophecy recorded in the book of Zechariah:
"Then lifted I up mine eyes, and saw, and behold four horns.
And I said unto the angel that talked with me, What be these? And he answered me,
These are the horns which have scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem.
"And the LORD shewed me four carpenters. Then said I, What
come these to do? And he spake, saying, These are the horns which have scattered
Judah, so that no man did lift up his head: but these are come to fray them, to cast out
the horns of the Gentiles, which lifted up their horn over the land of Judah to scatter
it." Zechariah 1:18-21
The way a beast (a government) with horns (political powers) enforces its will
is by the use of its horns to dominate (to push and scatter), rather than by using only the power of
persuasion in speech and reason, as a man is capable of doing.
Therefore, this beast with two horns which makes an image of the beast which
was before it, and forces his mark upon all, represents a nation with two dominant political powers.
Those two horns are described as being lamb-like. As in Bible symbolism a lamb represents Christ,
then those two horns represent two political powers which have the appearance of being Christian.
There is but one nation so represented in the history of the world – the United States of America. To
further understand this heaven-inspired interpretation, and the chronological proof of said position,
please read our publications The World, Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow & War News
Forecast. The Great Controversy, p. 439-450
The notable part of the prophecy is the hypocrisy revealed by the fact that the
nation appears lamb-like (Christian), but speaks "as a dragon" (the devil – Revelation 12:9). As the
devil is a liar (John 8:44), then for this nation to speak as a dragon would be for it to lie. For
example, for the government created by the Constitution, and bound by the prescriptions thereof, to
repudiate the principles of the 1st Amendment thereto which prohibits the Congress from making
any law which favors an established religion and enforce Sunday, the first day of the week, as a day
of rest, such would be a lie in the character of the dragon (the devil) – hypocrisy. The same would
be true if Congress were to make a law enforcing rest on the seventh day, Saturday, the Sabbath.
It is also said of this two horned beast that "he exerciseth all the power of the
first beast before him." (verse 12). The "first beast before him" represents the world under the time
when men used political powers to compel the consciences of men in matters of religion (whether
those political powers were those of the Papacy, or those of the Protestant nations). For the two
horned beast to exercise "all the power" of that beast, it would also have to exercise the same power
of compelling consciences in matters of religion. As true religion touches on every facet of life, then
the compelling of the consciences in matters of religion can also reach to most any aspect of daily
life.
This compelling of the conscience by the first beast was accomplished by the
punishing of what was determined to be heresy with pains of civil and criminal penalties. Not
infrequently this was instigated through the will of only one person, the pope, or one of his
representatives. So it is, and will be, with the two horned beast as he exercises all of the power of
the first beast before him. Whether it be by pope, monarch, president, or judge, the exercising of the
principle and power is the same – assumed authority vested in one person to punish dissenters. The
exercise of this power in America is evident in the exercise of a president sending troops to wars
which Congress has not declared to be wars, and in judges declaring their opinions to be overriding
the plain declarations of the Constitution.
It is not alone in the enforcement of Sunday as a day of rest that the hypocrisy
(speaking as a dragon) will exist, but in the prohibition of the free exercise of the true religion of
Sabbath keepers. That is, concerning the keeping of the Sabbath the Biblical law reads,
"Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt
thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy
God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy
manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy
gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them
is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and
hallowed it." Exodus 20:8-11.
Thus with a law prohibiting work on Sundays, Sabbath-keepers would be
deprived of one of the biblically commanded six days in which to work, and would be prohibited
from the free exercise of the religion of the Bible. There are many other aspects of the religion of the
Bible which men have been, and will be, compelled to disregard. At the same time, they will be
compelled to accept ways and means which are contrary to the true religion of the Bible. More on
this later.
While some may be so naive as to say such things are not possible here in
America, just such a movement to accomplish said agenda has been under way for well over a
century, yea, much longer than that. Though the means which are used to accomplish the purpose
may not appear to be religious in the beginning, such is the ultimate goal of many involved with it.
For example, in 1960 the Supreme Court declared Sunday laws constitutional for purposes of energy
conservation. For a fuller explanation of the ramifications of that court decision, and how some are
trying to use it to sustain their errors in the realm of religion, see our publication The Energy
Crisis and Sunday Sacredness.
The difference between receiving the mark in one's hand compared to one's
forehead is that the hand represents one's work, while the forehead represents one's thinking. So to
receive the mark in one's hand means that the person accepts the beast-enforced Sunday laws in order
to work, to earn a living, but they don't believe the religious or other reasonings behind the mark.
That is, they receive it out of convenience. While those who receive the mark in their forehead do
so because they believe in the ideological (religious and/or philosophical) principles of the
beast-enforced law. As God requires His people to "bind them [His commandments] for a sign upon
thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes" (Deuteronomy 6:8), so the beast will
be attempting to put himself in the place of God, and require like reverence.
While Adventists have been teaching for well over a century that the mark of
the beast will be the enforcement of Sunday laws, Ellen White also stated that, "Not all in regards
to this matter is yet understood, and will not be understood until the unrolling of the scroll."
Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 8, p. 159. So, what more of the matter of the mark of the beast is
to be understood, how it relates to these issues, and how such also directly relates to the matter
of Koresh will be discussed further on, for the scroll has unrolled further.
DEAD OR ALIVE?
There is another Biblical doctrine held by Adventists, in general, which is also
a part of the controversy, and is a factor in why the things involving Koresh transpired the way they
did – that of the state of the dead. That is, we accept the Bible revelations that the dead are not
conscious of anything, for they do not exist at all; that the soul which a man is is mortal, not
immortal. If such was not the case from the beginning then there would have been no need for there
to be a "tree of life" in the garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9, 3:22 & 24), for man would have had eternal
life without it. We believe in the resurrection of the soul which is made up of the dust of the earth
with the Spirit of God within (Genesis 2:7). [For an in depth study on this matter please see our
study, Where the Devil is Hell?]. The relevance of this particular doctrine to the matter of
Koresh (and those who wanted to destroy the true Branch Church) is rather broad.
In one position there are the Catholics who teach that the soul is immortal.
They profit from this belief by taking money for Masses said for the dead who are purported to be
in Purgatory. But the belief in the immortality of the soul is not restricted to the Catholic Church.
It has pervaded much of the Protestant world also. The notion crept into the Christian Church in
general when partially converted pagans who came into the Church in the early centuries of its
history brought with them the influence of the Greek philosophers (Neo-Platoists) who taught that
the soul was immortal and that when a man dies his soul first goes to the sun to be purified, and then
on to its final abode. That same general influence had crept into the Jewish community in the times
immediately preceding the advent of Christ and may be see in some of their writings of the time.
Thus even some Jews who accepted Christ also brought this error into the Church.
In another position is Spiritualism. Those who believe that we can
communicate with the dead because they believe that they are still alive in some form or another are
becoming more numerous, and their influence has reached into nearly every facet of society. Whether
it be spiritualism, witchcraft, satanism, or any other form of occultic or pagan/heathen philosophy,
the preaching of the Biblical doctrine which declares that when one dies "His breath goeth forth, he
returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." (see Psalms 146: 2-4), and that "the living
know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for
the memory of them is forgotten. Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished;
neither have they any more a portion for ever in any thing that is done under the sun. ... for there is
no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." (Ecclesiastes
9: 3-6, 10), does not sit well with those who profit by the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and
especially so with those who say that they can communicate with the dead. Neither does the teaching
of the binding obligation of the commandments of God and the judgments which attend their
continued violation as they are summated in the saying, "The soul that sinneth, it shall die." (Ezekiel
18:20).
So, in the light of this point of Biblical doctrine which Adventists accept and
teach, it may be readily understood why many who are aware of our position would be desirous to
see the Branch Church defamed through the association with one such as Koresh. As the doctrine
can not be properly rebutted, the thing which remains for its opponents to attack is the character of
the Church through a disparaging portrayal of the true facts relative to Koresh and his followers.
Parallel with the rise of Adventism was the rise of Spiritualism in its modern
manifestation. It is well known among many Christian ministers that those who embrace witchcraft
and Satanism actually train people to infiltrate churches in order to disrupt the work of, and to bring
disrepute upon, those who are most active in preaching against the prevailing evils. The best
evidence of this fact comes from the testimonies of those who have been involved in such things,
and have been saved by the Gospel of Christ. This fact has particular significance as it relates to
Koresh's coming to the Branch Church when he did. More on this later. The point here is that there
has been a cleverly disguised warfare by those involved in the various forms of Spiritualism against
the work of Adventists, in general, due to our stand on Bible truths.
While this doctrine of the nonexistent state of the dead is not unique to us, and
there are other equally, or more important doctrines which we proclaim that have also brought the
enmity of the devil and his agents against us, this one in particular does expose one of his very first
lies to mankind – that is, "Ye shall not surely die." Genesis 3:4. But, as will be seen, there are other
doctrines which expose in even greater depths the nature of his sin, and those opposed to the law of
God.
Along with the rise of modern spiritualism in the world is that of the same
among those who profess Christianity. This has been brought in by means of the widespread practice
of the so-called speaking in tongues – otherwise known as glossilia. Adventists, in general, teach that
the true Biblical manifestation of the so-named gift is that of a person given the ability to speak in
a known language which is unknown him or her in order to preach the Gospel to the diverse people
of the earth. Such was the case on the day of Pentecost when the gift was first seen. It is written,
"And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other
tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men,
out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together,
and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were
all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and
Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome,
Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful
works of God." Acts 2:4-11.
Yet those today who profess to exercise this gift engage in what may be simply
described as speaking baby-like gibberish. Though many among them say that they are speaking in
some heavenly language, the sounds they make are those with which they are already familiar. The
English-speaking person makes sounds native to him, while the Russian-speaking one makes
sounds familiar to him. Very rarely does one of a language foreign to the speaker of tongues hear in
his own language. Often when one of them does speak in what they call tongues there is an
interpretation given by another, which professes the speech to be a message from God. Thus the
simple gift of languages becomes, as it were, the gift of prophecy, further confusing the true gifts of
the Holy Spirit.
What is even more revealing of the unsanctified nature of these manifestations
is the way it is practiced among those who give themselves up to its influence. The apostle Paul
wrote, "How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a
doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course;
and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him
speak to himself, and to God." 1 Corinthians 14:26-28.
Any one who has seen the common practice of this in the Pentecostal and
similar congregations has witnessed that sometimes everyone on stage is speaking in some strange
tongue, and oft times many in the audience are doing so simultaneously. Thus there would be dozens,
if not hundreds or thousands all doing it at the same time. Paul's reason for admonishing Christ's
disciples to only speak in a foreign language "by two, or at the most by three, and that by course [one
after another]; and let one interpret," is "If therefore the whole church be come together into one
place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will
they not say that ye are mad?" 1 Corinthians 14:23. Evidently those who disregard this counsel by
their group participation in speaking gibberish do not give much weight to Paul's counsel, or are
unable to do so.
As we, as Adventists, are outspoken against the abuse of the true gift of
tongues, and the counterfeiting of it, we again see another significant group of people who would
prefer to see our influence and testimony silenced and our reputation sullied.
-----o-----
When near her death in 1915, Ellen White was asked if she thought God
would give the gift of prophecy to another after her. Her reported answer was "I don't know."
According to the historic Church teachings on this gift that question should not have even been
asked, for Christ had not yet come, and the Church was not then, nor is she now, in the unity which
God desires for her. Though the S.D.A. Church has not, as a body, accepted anyone claiming to have
the gift since then, they do claim that God is still giving an occasional dream here and there, mostly
for counsel on minor matters. Even then, these manifestations are frowned upon by many in the
denomination, as it has been drilled into their minds, by some, that there is no more need for the gift.
They say that the writings of Ellen White, and those of their Bible scholars and pastors are all that
they need to guide them through the pearly gates. Yet at the same time, they pretty much disregard
the counsels of Ellen White, especially those which state that there is to be more light to come to the
church through God's appointed means – the gift of prophecy.
Anyone who is familiar with the Bible should be aware that one of the
continuing conflicts revealed therein is God's attempt to reach the people by means of his prophets,
and the people's almost wholesale rejection of them. It is written, "Surely the Lord GOD will do
nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." (Amos 3:7). Sacred history is
replete with fallen man's inability to receive instruction from those inspired by God to bring them
redeeming truth.
The need for the prophetic gift was demonstrated by the Israelites in their
experience at Mt. Sinai. After God had personally spoken the Ten Commandments to the people,
they responded by saying to Moses, "Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak
with us, lest we die." The inability of fallen man to bear hearing God's personal voice is not restricted
to the people in the Old Testament times. Were the gift of prophecy not needed in the Church today,
Christ would not have warned of false prophets and false christs (Matthew 7:15; 24:11, 24), and of
the need for His followers to avoid rejecting truth as it was to be revealed to them by the Holy Spirit
(1 John 4:1) who has been sent to lead us into all truth (John 16:13).
Even those Adventists who have acknowledged God's working through Ellen
White were and are slow to respond to the counsels given, and at times have even been openly
rebellious thereto. Her writings to the Church contain warning after warning of the negative effects
of them failing to come up to the standard to which God was calling them. Her writings are also
replete with testimonies of the blessedness that comes to those who overcome. Along with the
weaknesses of those who were truly seeking for a higher walk with God, there were (and are) the
enemies of righteousness and God's law who have infiltrated the Church in order to disrupt its
progress and unity. This was nothing new. Such is the express case with regard to Koresh.
In one of His parables (Matthew 13), Christ had pointed out that the enemy
had sown tares among the wheat. And such has been the history since His time. Even from the time
of the beginning of what became known as the Protestant Reformation (the early 1500s), a
counter-reformation was launched to undermine the work of the reformers. Among the primary
agents in the counter-reformation are the Roman Catholic priests known as Jesuits. Foremost in their
work has been the establishment of institutes of learning, the purposes of which are to counter the
work of the Reformation and propagate the false doctrines of their organization. They also infiltrate
any group necessary to further their aims. They don't even have to do this directly, as all they need
to do is influence those already part of a group. Of course, the Jesuits (and the Roman Catholic
leadership in general) were not the only ones who wished to disrupt the true work of the S.D.A.s
during Ellen White's time, and in the present day.
Such was the case within the S.D.A. Church at the time of Ellen White's death
in 1915 – the tares sown within the Church had managed to bring the people to what could be aptly
described as a deathlike sleep. The reformers, themselves, needed to be revived and reformed. Thus
again, God, by his grace, had to intercede to reclaim His people from the grasp of the enemy.
Another step in the restoration of "all things" was to be taken. This work could only be accomplished
by God inspiring another person to call His people to repentance and to a higher walk. Thus began
the work of those who later became known as
DAVIDIAN SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS
In 1929-1930, a Seventh Day Adventist Sabbath School teacher named Victor
T. Houteff claimed to have received a message for the Church by the Spirit of prophecy, and
presented to a small number of Church leaders a manuscript entitled The Shepherd's Rod. He said
that the heart of the message did not originate with him, but rather from a study which appeared in
the 1928-9 Seventh Day Adventist Sabbath School Quarterly, entitled Isaiah, the Gospel Prophet.
The heart of the message in that Sabbath School Quarterly was not accepted by the Church
leadership, even though it originated from one of the highest and most well respected men in the
Church.
Victor Houteff said God had given to him (was unfolding to him) the fullness
of that message, and was being led to call the Church to reform because the ministry of the Church
were rejecting their very own teachings. He pointed out to them that they were rejecting not only the
interpretations of previously unrevealed and unfulfilled prophecies, but also the calls for moral
reform and a return to basic Church practices and standards, and were teaching others to do likewise.
The heart of the message involved the purification of the Church as portrayed
in Ezekiel chapter 9, Isaiah chapters 62 & 65; Matthew 13:24-30, and elsewhere; the sealing and the
work of the 144,000 (Revelation chapter 7); the identity of the great multitude of Revelation 7:9; and
the pre-millennial kingdom on earth with its capital in Israel. The first point, the purification of the
Church, was the idea which the majority of the leadership of the S.D.A.s stumbled over. They believed
that the "harvest," the final separation of the "wheat" from the "tares" in the Church would not
happen until the very end of probationary time for the world. Victor showed them that the Bible
clearly taught that the "harvest," the separation, was to occur before the Church made the last call
of mercy to the whole world, and that she would do such in a pure state, without sin or sinner among
them. He pointed out the fact that as the Bible shows the Church making a call for God's people to
come out of "Babylon" that they "not partake of her sins," or "receive not of her plagues" (Revelation
18:4), that they must be called into a pure place – a pure Church.
He pointed out many Scriptures which referred to the latter-day evangelistic
work of the pure Church which would encompass all of the peoples and nations of the earth (Isaiah 2:2-4; 60:1-22, Micah 4:1-4, etc.). He furthermore pointed out that the prophecy which the S.D.A.
church has accepted as their commission since 1844 (i.e., Revelation 10:11), reveals that they were
only to go to "many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings," not all of them. That is because,
as he showed them, they would have to go through a change in their theories, practices and habits
which were not in harmony with the Bible before they were ready to go into all of the world with the
last message of mercy. These changes were those which had been pointed out to them through the
work of Ellen White, and those which may be pointed out to them through any others God should
send in the spirit and power of Elijah the prophet to restore all things (Malachi 4:4-6). It was also
presented to them that because of their refusal to amend their ways, God would intervene in a
supernatural way to cleanse the Church (Ezekiel 9:1-10; Isaiah 65:11-16; 66:15-19).
Victor also showed from the Bible that the 144,000 Israelites who are depicted
as being from the twelve tribes of Israel (except the tribe of Dan – see Revelation 7:4-8) could be
from almost any nation. This is because the vast majority of the Israelites lost their distinctive racial
identity when they at various times were assimilated into the nations which conquered them, and
were thus scattered throughout much of the world (Ezekiel 21:27). The first scattering happened
around 721 B.C., when the ten tribes, where overturned by Assyria; the second time was when the
two tribe kingdom of Judah (along with many Levites) was subdued by Babylon around 538 B.C.;
and the third time was when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 A.D. by the Romans. This
third overturning was concurrent with the Jews who had become Christians going into all of the
world to spread the Gospel, and who also eventually lost much of their racial distinction.
At the time that Victor began teaching what was revealed to him concerning
the 144,000, the S.D.A.s were teaching that the 144,000 would be the only living saints when Christ
personally returned; that they were not necessarily literal bloodline descendants of Israel (Jacob); and
that there was not to be any restoration of anyone to the land of Israel, nor the establishment of the
promised kingdom on earth until after the millennium (Revelation 20:4). He pointed out that the very
fact that the 144,000 are called "firstfruits" (Revelation 14:4), implies that there are also second fruits
(the fullness of the harvest). He also pointed out the covenant promises which related that after the
remnant of Israel are restored to the Abrahamic covenant in Christ, they will bring in the great
multitude of Revelation 7:9 from "all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues." (Isaiah 66:20;
Micah 4:2; Zechariah 2:11, 8:22). This call will bring forth a great multitude of saints from all
peoples, and will prepare them for Christ's return (Ezekiel 36:22-38). This pre-millennial kingdom
on earth will exist for a relatively short period preceding Christ's visible return and the millennium
spent in heaven thereafter.
Then, after the people of the world witness the glory of the kingdom, and
make their individual choices of whether or not to be a part of the kingdom where God's laws are
supreme, Christ will personally return to take the saints to heaven with Him for 1000 years (the
millennium), after which time they, with Christ, will return to earth in fulfillment of the remaining
prophecies (Revelation 20:1-10; Isaiah 65:20; etc.) which precede the time of the earth being made
new (Isaiah 65:17; Revelation 21:1; etc.), and the saints inheriting the earth with Christ in His
everlasting kingdom (Isaiah 65:21-25). This one point concerning the pre-millennial kingdom in
Israel has as its opponents not only the Catholics who teach that the establishment of the Papacy was
the setting up of the promised kingdom, but also those non-Catholics who preach of a secret rapture,
and many of those who embrace Zionism.
Those who believe in the secret rapture take texts like Revelation 3:10,
"Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation,
which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth," to mean that God will
suddenly take them from the earth before the "hour of temptation" (a time of tribulation). But in
order to make such an assumption they have to ignore many other Biblical statements regarding
tribulation, such as, "In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome
the world." John 16:33; and "Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue
in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God."Acts 14:22.
What is even more telling in regards to the tendency of those who preach of the secret rapture
to disregard the plain Biblical teaching on this matter, is Christ's own testimony on the matter of
tribulation and His second coming as recorded in Matthew 24:21-44. In those verses, He states that
"except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those
days shall be shortened." (verse 22). Following that He warns against false Christs and false prophets
(verses 23-26), and states that "For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the
west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. ... Immediately after the tribulation of those days
shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven,
and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in
heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming
in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." (verse 27, 29-30). There does not appear to be
anything secret in that coming. And as He says that at that coming He will "send his angels with a
great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end
of heaven to the other," (verse 31) there must be some saints ("his elect") on earth to be gathered
together."
Moreover when John, in vision, asked his guide the identity of the great
multitude who were seen after the 144,000, he was told that, "These are they which came out of great
tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." Revelation 7:14. Those who preach the secret rapture take the texts which read "Then shall two be in the field;
the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be
taken, and the other left" (Matthew 24:40, 41), to mean that the saints are the ones who are "taken"
to heaven, while the wicked are left in the world to suffer through the tribulation.
Yet to come to that conclusion they have to wrest those statements out of their
context. The preceding verses read, "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the
Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying
and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood
came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." (verses 37-39)
Thus in view of their context, it is clear that those verses regarding those who
are "taken" refer to the wicked who are typified by the indifferent in Noah's day, and those who are
"left" are the great multitude of saints who are typified by Noah and his family and the great host of
animals who entered into the ark and whose lives were preserved. The "taken" ones were taken in
destruction, while those who were "left" were spared. Were this not true, then Christ's comments
which follow those admonitions would not make sense, to wit, "Watch therefore: for ye know not
what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what
watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be
broken up. Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh."
(verses 42-44).
Why would we be counseled to "watch" in order to know when the One
coming as a "thief" will be coming so that we may not suffer our house to be broken up? It is
significant that the vast majority of those who preach the secret rapture also teach a lawless, grace
only Gospel which disregards the binding obligations of the Sabbath commandment and its
sanctifying blessings in Christ, the Creator.
Yet a blessing is placed upon those who keep "the commandments of God,
and the faith of Jesus," "and have the testimony of Jesus Christ," which "is the spirit of prophecy."
(Revelation 14:12; 12:17; 19:10) – even in a time of great tribulation. That is, "No weapon that is
formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt
condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness is of me, saith
the LORD." Isaiah 54:17. And also that, "the spirit [shall] be poured upon us from on high, and the
wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruitful field be counted for a forest. Then judgment shall dwell
in the wilderness, and righteousness remain in the fruitful field. And the work of righteousness shall
be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance for ever. And my people shall
dwell in a peaceable habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting places; When it shall hail,
coming down on the forest; and the city shall be low in a low place. Blessed are ye that sow beside
all waters, that send forth thither the feet of the ox and the ass" Isaiah 32:15-19 (See also Psalms 91).
It is no wonder, therefore, that those who preach the secret rapture, and a
lawless grace Gospel would not only sit idly by while the true Branch church was being defamed
by a disparaging association with Koresh, but would also, in effect, be saying "Aha" (Psalms 35:21, 40:15, 70:3; Ezekiel 26:2; 36:2), by using the opportunity to misrepresent us in their pulpits and in
the media.
The message Victor Houteff bore also brought to light that the current return
of the Jews to Israel by means of the efforts of the Zionists and the United Nations, though in the fulfillment of certain Biblical prophecies (Zephaniah 2:1, 2), was not the ultimate setting up of the
promised latter-day kingdom. He showed that the land of Israel was promised to the Jews (Israelites)
who accept Christ, not to those who reject His teachings. Among these revelations was the place
which the United States, England, and allies would have in opposing God's work of restoring His
true people to the land of promise, and of His humbling them for their own good. For further light
on this matter see The World, Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow & War News Forecast.
As the Church leadership had rejected their own message as it was presented
by one of their own leadership, they were not about to accept it from a Sabbath School teacher,
inspired or not. Thus, when one or two leaders (who were, themselves, not in harmony with the
Church's doctrines and practices) superficially studied what Victor had presented them, and did not
accept the message (nor did they go to the source for explanations of what they did not understand),
they made an open warfare against anyone who accepted the message, or anyone who would even
want to investigate the matter for themselves. As a result, thousands of people were unjustly
disfellowshipped, and continue to be to this day, for investigating and sharing the message. Thus was
formed, of necessity, a second Seventh Day Adventist Church, at first called Shepherd's Rod S.D.A.'s.
In 1942 the name Davidian Seventh Day Adventists was officially adopted. The additional name
"Davidian" was expressive of the teaching regarding the latter-day theocratic kingdom of Christ
(Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15; Ezekiel 34:23, 24; 37:24, 25; Hosea 3:5; Amos 9:11-15).
In 1942, twelve years after Volume 1 of the "Shepherd's Rod" message was
first published, and the issues of the S.D.A. ministry's gross departures from their foundational
principles were raised, a meeting took place between a prominent representative of the S.D.A.s (M.
L. Andreason, Secretary of the General Conference of S.D.A.s) and Victor Houteff. The written report
of that meeting by this high official of the Church clearly showed that the ministry of the S.D.A.s was
willing to, and actually did, confederate and conspire among themselves to push aside the Davidians
and their call for reforms within their own Church (the S.D.A.) rather than openly address the grave
issues of the departure from some of the most fundamental S.D.A. doctrines and practices. He stated
that though he believed many of the issues of reform raised by Victor Houteff were either
insignificant or untrue, there were other serious issues raised which should not be addressed as such
would not look good for the S.D.A. ministry. Therefore, he recommended not addressing any of the
issue
