PDF Taking Up A Reproach, An Act of Spiritual Suicide

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Taking Up A Reproach, An Act of Spiritual Suicide file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Taking Up A Reproach, An Act of Spiritual Suicide book. Happy reading Taking Up A Reproach, An Act of Spiritual Suicide Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Taking Up A Reproach, An Act of Spiritual Suicide at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Taking Up A Reproach, An Act of Spiritual Suicide Pocket Guide.

The Editors continue their unwarranted boasting thus:.

Compare Translations for Isaiah 4:1

These people must have been asleep and dreaming for the past nearly fifty years. The only thing which The Educator managed to hold "together" was a bundle of like-minded individuals who were opposed to the unrolling of the scroll, and the exposure of their presumptions. In order to bolster their own image, the Editors first malign the work of Ben Roden by saying,. The very fact that the Editors chose to portray the teachings of Ben Roden as "Rodenism," thereby creating an "ism" in place of a brother Davidian, shows their readiness to strengthen their position by dehumanizing and depersonalizing those whom they consider their enemies.

They certainly would never find it likeable to hear some refer to the teachings of Victor Houteff as "Houteffism," or of Ellen White as "Whiteism," or their own work as "Binghamism," yet they have failed to "do unto others, as you would have them do unto you. Of course, they did not provide any examples of any in-context quotations from Ben Roden which could rightly be termed "literalistic, often fanatic, misinterpretations.

They follow their denigration of the Rodens with a glowing portrayal of their own "voice," to wit,. This statement calls for some candid evaluation. Aside from the obvious prideful depiction of their work as "masterpieces," they say that their publication " While there are many merit-laden defenses for the Davidian movement before Victor Houteff died, there is no defense for the apostasies which have occurred since then, nor for the divided state of the "far-flung flock. Though the Editors say that their "voice" served to "encourage a far-flung flock," time has shown precisely what they have been encouraging others to do — that is, they have encouraged others to set their stakes and not move them.

It certainly cannot be honestly said that they have encouraged any to seek present truth from the Lord who has promised to "continue to speak" to His people until their righteousness shall go forth as a burning lamp Isaiah ; Symbolic Code , Vol. The odd thing about this is that they admit that the "Davidians" after Victor Houteff died are a "far-flung flock," but they fail to present to the reader that which the Rod teaches is the cause of such divisions — that being the people's failure to allow "this man" Christ in His living servant, prophet — Luke ; Mt.

Sion at the 11th Hour , p. If there is one point which is most prominent in the Rod message it is,. In this light, what can be said of the Editors nearly fifty years "without the living Spirit of Prophecy in [their] midst? So, after patting themselves on the back for being such a comfort to their brethren in a time of crisis that is, after they display their pride that have they stood in the place of the Holy Ghost to their brethren , they then relate some of the content of The Educators , which reveals its true character.

They write,. And they twice stated As usual, they did not supply the reader with a reference to the document they are quoting so that they might evaluate the statement in its context. Reading Ben's statement in context one may see that he was speaking of a specific aspect of Ezekiel 9 , of which there are many. One of the aspects of Ezekiel 9 which many of the Davidians were in confusion about after Victor Houteff died was the difference between putting the sickle to the grain and destroying the tares — both of which take place during the "harvest.

Therefore, what Ben was referring to was the separation , not the destruction , aspect of Ezekiel 9. And just such a separation did occur at the time indicated.

Judgment began with the elders of the house of God 1 Peter It was at that time that many of the tares in the Davidian leadership sealed their separation from the true movement, and shortly thereafter manifested that separation by denouncing Victor Houteff and disbanding their shadow association that is, they had no lawful standing to represent the true Association. What is as important to a correct understanding of what Ben Roden meant in saying that " Ezekiel 9 " must occur on Passover, or it would prove the Rod wrong, is understanding why he came to the conclusion that such was the correct date.

In searching out this matter one will find that Ben Roden proves that the Rod is absolutely correct in its presentation of the time element of Ezekiel 9 , and that his application of such also stands on a firm foundation. More on this aspect later. The article now under discussion, Division , ends with quotes from The Educator , in which the Editors again pat themselves on the back for having done some sort of an investigation of the Branch teachings, and with them quoting some quite verbose language from another one of those publications which denigrates the Branch message and messenger.

It is as though they are relying on the weight of those unsupported statements from The Educator to convince the readers of their Division article of the validity of their position without having to prove it by concrete facts. From this it is also obvious that one of the primary target audiences of that publication are those who were already brought to a position that The Educators positions were unchallengeable and, therefore, authoritative.

Ben has described such "Davidians" as "super Laodiceans" — in need of nothing but their own words and thoughts, which manifests itself in the type of circular thinking we see in the Editors' articles. This brings us to another of the articles under discussion, History: Roden to Koresh, From Rodenville to the Conflagration. While this article starts out relating truthful facts about the history of the Roden family, it is not long before the Editors start introducing errors and bigoted statements.

Their first obvious error is in regard to what they say occurred in the Association immediately after the death of Victor Houteff. That is,. Over 30 years ago it came to light that Florence Houteff and those who claimed to be members of the Church's Executive Council were not so.

It was revealed during the court proceedings involving the supposed dissolution of the Association that documents which could have given those persons including Florence who were formerly members of the Executive Council positions on such for the one-year term which would have included the time of Victor Houteff's death were not signed by him, as the previous appointment documents had been year by year.

Thus it was clearly shown that neither Florence nor her collaborators were lawfully members of the Executive Council at the time of Victor Houteff's death, nor afterwards, and that she was thus not able to be the "Vice President. So why would the Editors choose to portray her as such? Could it be because their claim of succession to the Davidian leadership is of the same character as was Florence's Executive Counsel after Victor Houteff's death?

That is, do the Editors actually have any lawful standing to their claim of being the leaders of the true "Davidian" Association? Are they acknowledging Florence's presumptive and erroneous claims of succession because they want their similar claims which rest on similar presumption and errors to be likewise acknowledged to their benefit?

This whole issue of lawful membership in the Davidian association is one which the Editors have been avoiding since the truth of the matter was revealed in the s. The facts are simple. The documents which would have acted to appoint the members of the Executive Council , and also one which would have appointed the Trustees of the Association's property for the period which included the time of Victor Houteff's death were not signed by him, as was necessary for them to be effective.

Along with this was the fact that most all of the Davidians held membership cards which also had to be renewed each year and signed by Victor Houteff. So those Davidians who professed to be the leadership, and most others such as the Editors ' original core group actually ceased to be members of the true Association within a year after Victor Houteff's death for they had acknowledged no one as President after Victor's death, and up to that time only the President could issue membership cards. That is, except Ben and Lois Roden who held membership cards signed by Victor Houteff, and without any expiration date on them.

Though according to the Church's Constitution and By-Laws , the Executive Council is to have the ability to grant "credentials and licenses" p. The then current practice of having Victor Houteff personally sign each membership card shows that this particular provision was not in operation prior to Victor Houteff's death. Therefore, neither the Editors who were Davidians at the time of Victor Houteff's death, nor any others whose membership cards were expiring were authorized to renew or grant membership cards, let alone appoint someone as vice-president.

Only a president could authorize the change in policy regarding who issues membership cards, implementing either all or a part of the non-fully "operative" governing Constitution and By-Laws. Yet we see today that most of the various so-called "Davidian" groups, such as the Editors , do not have a President of their group who they say has received said appointment in accordance with the prescriptions for the office of President as delineated in the Church's Constitution and By-Laws.

Yet this has not stopped the leaders of the various "Davidian" groups from assuming offices of leadership, selecting others for similar offices, granting memberships, and collecting tithes and offerings in the name of an Association whose core teachings they reject — that is, they deny that anyone after Brother Houteff will be given the true gift of the living Spirit of Prophecy, and thus no one will be thus qualified to fill the office of President — that is, until the "special resurrection.

So the issues of membership, leadership, and the Editors' complaints against the Branch and its messengers all stem from the same controversy — the work of the living Spirit of Prophecy in a living person, i. In order to continue their unwarranted antagonism, the Editors proceed to present some factual evidence, yet put a spin on it, or strip it of its context, and even go so far as to contradict themselves as they go forward in their quest, as we shall see.

They certainly did not get that notion from Ben's own testimony on the matter which was widely published. As the Editors later admit, Ben stated that he had to be compelled by God to write the things which he eventually presented to the Davidian leadership after Victor Houteff died. They do not provide any evidence that Ben had any illusions of being the "new prophet" of the Church previous to the time of the experience he had after Houteff's death, and which he related to all who would hear, as insinuated by the language of their above quoted statement.

The Editors then somewhat truthfully relate that,. Houteff's regime by his claims to be the new voice of Inspiration, the legitimate leader. One small error therein: The seven letters which were presented to Florence Houteff and the Executive Council were sent sequentially during that time period, and were only later bound into one publication and given the name which the Editors have noted. While the Editors' description of Ben's "challenge to Mrs. Houteff's regime" is quite benign in itself and both factual and to be expected if God was to control the Church by the gift of prophecy as the message teaches , but when it is coupled with their following false statements, their attack on the "unrolling of the scroll" becomes obvious.

They continue,. Of course they have not produced any evidence that Ben Roden ever attacked "the past movement and late leader" — no quotations nor references. They freely admit that his "challenge" was directed to "Mrs. Houteff's regime. Such would be ludicrous because the Branch message is based on the integrity of the Rod message under Victor Houteff. So rather than presenting any statement from Ben which clearly sustains their representation they have to create one by presenting a statement out of its context, which they later do.

But first they backhandedly take a swipe at the phenomena of Inspiration in the unrolling of the scroll. To wit,. Considering the history of the Advent Movement, and the timely work of the living Spirit of Prophecy therein, what else would the Editors expect to appear on the scene except just such a manifestation of God's presence within His Church in a present truth message at a time of crisis. After all, that is exactly what happened in after the disappointment, and in after the Seventh Day Adventist leadership rejected the message in their own Sabbath School Quarterly.

It is not a matter of whether or not one claims "new light," but whether or not the message is true and in harmony with the testimony thus far revealed. For new light to be "new" it, of course, would contain some amount of things which were previously not known, or were misunderstood. Yet the Editors condemn this principle in saying,. Again, how can the Editors profess to be "Davidians" while condemning the very principle which is the strength and foundation of the Davidian movement?

The Rod offers its readers the very thing which they denounce in the Branch — "certainty instead of confusion, new 'light' instead of familiar, oft-repeated teachings. So why do they condemn on one hand what they approve on the other? Because the testimony Ben eventually bore was not only directed to Florence Houteff and those of her "regime," but also to the Davidians in general, and even specifically against the Editors' group, who were in no better of a position in regards to new light than were the Seventh Day Adventists.

Then, after giving a biased, incomplete rehearsal of Ben Roden's testimony concerning his calling, the Editors proceed to contradict themselves. Earlier they had stated that,. So which is it? Did Ben start off by " attacking the past movement and late leader," and then later abandon that strategy as the Editors first state , or "[a]t first, rather than attacking the Davidians, Roden warmly referred to the movement and its founder.

That statement also contains another glaring contradiction. It their previous article, Division , they had said,. Yet in this article they say that Ben,. Again, which is it? The fact is that Ben's writings are full of references from the Rod message which are presented to sustain the "new light" which he was bringing.

It is the same as when Victor Houteff "heavily laced his writings with references from the writings of" Ellen White. In order to further cast the illusion that Ben was unrighteously attacking the Davidians, and even the very name of the message, itself, they continue by saying,. First off, their quotation is not accurate. They write, "If the Scripture here quoted But regardless of how much of a Scriptural foundation Ben had lain for his statement, it is not of the character which the Editors are trying to assign it.

That is, he is not saying that Victor Houteff misnamed the literature as the Editors are attempting to make it appear , but rather that if the texts which he was quoting had found their perfect fulfillment in when the message came, it should have been named differently. But Ben proceeded to prove that as said Scriptures did not meet their fulfillment in the message of , and that the name given the literature then The Shepherd's Rod was the absolutely correct name, and that that situation also left the door open for the future fulfillment of those Scriptures and the new name which expresses their fulfillment.

It is this point which they are trying to becloud by their misrepresentation. Simply stated, Ben was saying that if the work of revival and reformation which the Rod message was to bring had already been accomplished in , then the name of the message would have reflected that situation by being named "The Branch," "The Lord our Righteousness," which would have indicated the end of the reformation, rather than "The Shepherd's Rod," the instrument which was to bring the beginning of the reformation. But this simple fact seems to overwhelm the Editors.

Though what the Editors mean by "identifying with the movement" is quite vague, it is clear that they feel that they have been exalted to a seat of judgment which allows them to censure others with words which can be rightfully used against themselves. Their antagonism with the Branch message lies in the fact that it points out that the greater body of Davidians after Victor Houteff's death were doing the very thing that the Editors have been accusing Ben Roden of doing — accepting only a portion of the message.

But that which sadly portrays the Editors ' love of sleep is that in the beginning of this article they state facts which relate that Ben had been a Davidian for nine years at the time of Victor Houteff's death, and had been so zealous for the work that he had even moved his family to Mt. Carmel to participate in the work there.

Others might consider that that action was taken by someone who was in the process of "completely identifying with the movement. He was so "brimming with enthusiasm for his newfound beliefs" to use the Editors ' words regarding his accepting the Rod that he, his wife, Lois, and another, set forth to raise up a congregation and build a meeting house for the Seventh Day Adventist church. At the time he accepted the Rod he was an elder in that church. He was no less zealous in his reaction when he accepted the new light of the Rod.

The Editors round off their current attempts to discredit the Branch message by saying.

  1. God Has Daughters Too: Women of the Old Testament in Their Own Voices.
  2. Taking up a Reproach?
  3. Foot and Ankle Motion Analysis: Clinical Treatment and Technology (Biomedical Engineering);

As usual, no reference, context, nor explanation of why Ben said those titles applied as the Editors indicated. They do not present those things to the reader so that he or she may evaluate the matter for themselves and see if those prophetical names Ezekiel are correctly applied, but rather are attempting to cause the reader to rely on their the Editors ' ability to decide things for other people. Moreover, had they supplied some of that information, the reader would be aware that the title "Sodom" was applied only to the Davidians who after Victor Houteff's death refused to progress with the unrolling of the scroll, and not to the "Davidian movement" as a whole, as the Editors make it appear.

But as they, themselves, fall within the category depicted by the prophecies which reveals the identity of those so named, we should not expect anything different than what we have been seeing.

Another manifestation of the Editors ' inclination to contradict themselves follows. Great emphasis was placed upon the change of names, the 'Branch' being advocated as Christ's and His people's new name. Again confusion and misrepresentation. The references in his works to this point are so numerous that anyone who has approached the matter candidly could not stumble over the two aspects of the new name.

What the Editors appear to be doing here is attempting to askew an application made by Ben to certain prophecies which depict the Rod and the Branch such as Isaiah , and others which have similar symbolical imagery regarding "the Branch. The matter is not so complicated that the average person would not be able to understand it simply for what it is. Victor Houteff had been teaching that the Church was to have the experience of Christ coming invisibly i. Ben Roden was simply showing that there were different prophecies that depicted "the Branch," some of which refer to Him, Christ, personally, and others of which refer to the message and movement which would be present truth at the time He was under His new name — that being the time of His invisible coming during the Judgment of the Living.

To reenforce their allegation they quote one Ernest Farrell, who is reported to have "studied the 'Branch' from ," and who said,. That opened my eyes. The Branch is Christ, not a movement. Whatever reason he has for saying that does not make his statement true. It is hardly necessary to repeat the fact that the Editors are not really addressing any of the true issues the Branch message has brought forth, but are attempting only to discredit the message and the messengers through bald, untenable assertions.

With all due respect to Ernest Farrell, it is most embarrassing to see purported "Davidians" attempting to assign to his opinion some sort of authority and weight in order to discredit those they cannot disprove in a candid manner. It is as though they do not even know what they are really doing here — they are walking and talking in their sleep. The Editors then proceed to complain about the variety of names under which Ben and Lois published, as though Victor Houteff did not use any alternative pen names, nor publishing names.

After this they speak out against the Branch's teaching regarding the Biblical feast days. In this regard they say,. Though the Editors clearly intend to degrade the Branch teaching on the feasts by quoting this statement, its effect is null in that regard, for those who are aware of the contents of that publication know that what he said therein was only an accurate paraphrase of what Ellen White said on the matter.

Those who have read the publication they quote from know that prior to making that statement Ben had quoted Ellen White in that very regard. White says: 'Memory will be awakened as Christ is seen portrayed in the pages of the Old Testament. Souls will be saved, from the Jewish nation, as the doors of the New Testament are unlocked with the key of the Old Testament. So what do they mean by quoting that statement as they do? If it is true that Ben Roden's "insistence on ceremonialism was so strong" that he made the preceding comment, then the same can be said of Ellen White, for she said the exact same thing.

As it adds nothing to their argument that Ben was teaching error, is it anything more than an example of their loud snoring in their death-like sleep? God help them all! As the subject of this section is the Biblical feast days, the Editors have not been as careful as they might have been because they should know that the Rod teaches that the Biblical feasts which were kept in antitype after the cross, and which were taken away by the "man of sin," will be restored in the time of the Judgment for the Living.

For example,. The Roden's emphasis upon Catholicism caused them to conclude that since the Pope had historically changed the day of Christian worship from Saturday to Sunday, he had also replaced sacred feast days with paganized holidays. Thus, the Rodens saw their zealous advocacy of the Hebrew feasts and ceremonies as the restoration of the true religion that the Pope had destroyed.

One might ask, Where did Ben Roden get such an idea? Here is what a good Davidian, like Ben, would have learned about the matter from the Rod. And now will I discover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and none shall deliver her out of Mine hand. I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.

Then was His word fulfilled: 'I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts. Daniel, also, was shown that this was to be accomplished through Rome, the 'exceeding great' horn, which 'cast down We may note from this that Victor Houteff taught the same thing regarding the Old Testament types and symbols that were contained in the law being "a compacted prophecy of the gospel, a presentation in which were bound up the promises of redemption" which Ellen White and Ben Roden did.

That is, that not only does the Sabbath both prefigure the complete work of Christ and is a part of the outworking of the salvation of the Gospel, but that all of the law, and especially the feast days and the rites they contained, also hold a similar place in the plan of redemption. Elsewhere he speaks further of the taking away of the "feasts," to wit,. The Pagans in whose clutches the church fell were no more to blame for the church's going into darkness than were the Chaldeans of destroying Judah and her temple. The real blame falls on the church herself.

And this should be a lasting lesson to each of us, that we should never again have illicit connection with the world, should never depart from the Lord. Regarding Hosea , he also said,. While Victor Houteff spoke more of the prophetical typical and antitypical aspects of the "feasts" and the fact that they were taken away from ancient Israel, and also from the early Church, because of sin, he also spoke of the restoration of the keeping of the feasts in their antitypical manner.

O Judah, keep thy solemn feasts, perform thy vows: for the wicked shall no more pass through thee; he is utterly cut off. After she awakes she is to behold something and she is to do something. What is she to do?

Episode transcript

She is to perform her vows. From this we understand that at the close of the Assyrian period and in the time when the wicked no longer will be in the church, God's people in it are to keep their solemn feasts and perform their vows. The Lord's Supper being one of the solemn feasts, it will be celebrated next in the time when the wicked are no more to pass through the church.

Do you not see that we are now closer to it than when we first believed? Symbolic Code, Vol.

taking up a reproach an act of spiritual suicide Manual

From what we have just seen, the Editors should be well aware that the Rod teaches that the feasts which were taken away from the Church are to be restored to her. They should also be aware that the Rod teaches that along with " a pagan priesthood and a pagan sabbath " The Latest News for "Mother" , p. We read,. The answer is easy, and the worship of the dragon can be clearly seen. The present system of worship by so-called Christian institutions is unquestionably pagan.

Sunday, Christmas, and Easter keeping, etc. Christians, in modern times, assume to honor the most High God with pagan customs calling them "Christian Doctrines. As the sluggard sucks the blood unaware that his satisfaction brings him to destruction, just so with protestants and their pagan commemoratives, even daring to call them by the name of Christ. Blasphemy indeed! Every student of ancient history knows this to be true; likewise every Bible student knows these so-called Christian festivals are unbiblical as well as unchristian.

If these institutions were Christian, or Biblical, they would certainly have been spoken of in the Bible. But since they are not found in the Word of God, Christians had better leave them alone lest they be found worshiping the dragon. The substance of the message we bear may be classified into five subjects: 1 the time of the end; 2 the judgment day of atonement, since ; 3 the second coming of Christ in this generation; 4 the restoration of the true Sabbath; 5 calling God's people out from Babylon idolatry which we define to be Sunday, Easter, and Christmas keeping, etc.

Clearly, when the saints are called out of something polluted they will be called into something clean. How can the Davidians be ready to call the people "out from Babylon idolatry which we define to be Sunday, Easter, and Christmas keeping, etc. The question is, When will the knowledge of how to keep the feasts come, and how?

Victor Houteff never reinstituted any of them, nor does the Rod message give any specifics as to how they are to be kept in antitype. But he does say some very relevant things concerning what may be understood to be the most significant "feasts" of them all — the Lord's Supper. Says the Rod ,. He is to lead us. We of ourselves never know what is right and what is wrong unless we are told.

Easy enough, if we do whatever we are told to do, no more and no less, we shall be accounted worthy. So far, our God-sent message has not brought to our attention the ordination of the Lord's Supper Some observe it every Sunday or every Sabbath, some occasionally, some every quarter and so on. It seems logical to say that when God commands us to ordain it anew He will tell us also how and when to observe it properly.

Therefore, the Editors have themselves in a bit of a pickle, so to speak. The Rod teaches that it is "God" who is to "command Moreover, he publishes peace and thus announces the restoration of the Kingdom. This is the only peace that the world can have. There is to be no other. Those who keep God's solemn "feasts" and perform their vows shall have this peace. None others shall. From Symbolic Code, Vol. But, as the special resurrection in which Ellen White and Victor Houteff come forth from the grave to take up again their work in the kingdom of God does not take place until after the fall of "Assyria" and the liberation of the saints the ,00, and those with them , and as the Editors and most of the rest of the so-called "Davidians" today do not believe that there are to be any more prophets before that time, they are in quite a predicament when trying to explain how they will awake and learn to keep the feasts in antitype and the Lord's Supper properly before that time.

This is especially troublesome for them due to the fact that the special resurrection does not take place until the first deliverance of the saints the first fruits which occurs at the time when "the voice of God" announces the day and hour of Christ's literal coming Early Writings , pgs. What is most interesting about the "Davidians" being temporarily prohibited from having the Lord's Supper among themselves is that they also abstain from having the accompanying footwashing service, of which Ellen White says,.

  1. The Color of Lies.
  2. Prayers for healing, deliverance, protection, exorcisms.
  3. Launch Out Into The Deep!
  4. The strong cords of spiritual death can only be broken in Christ..
  5. The Different Types of Spiritual Narcissists?

The , were all sealed and perfectly united. On their foreheads was written, God, New Jerusalem, and a glorious star containing Jesus' new name Then it was that the synagogue of satan knew that God had loved us who could wash one another's feet It is evident that the saints will be keeping the footwashing before the time they are "all sealed and perfectly united" the condition they are in when they are delivered at the voice of God , for it is the benefits received from correctly observing the ordinance which bring them into that condition Early Writings , p.

But if the "Davidians" do not receive true new light on the keeping of the feasts and especially the Lord's Supper , and also receive a direct command from the Lord to now disregard the Rod prohibition against having the ordinance among themselves, before the time of the special resurrection i. In other words, in order to have the effects of the remedy — perfect unity and the complete seal of God — said remedy must be available before it is can produce its effect.

As said remedy is urged upon the church through the entreaty, "O Judah, keep thy solemn feasts, perform thy vows," it would be remiss of God to fail to provide the Church with the knowledge of how to properly keep the "feasts" including, most importantly, the Lord's Supper. Yet such is exactly what the so-called Davidians have charged God with whether they realize it or not when they say that the Rod is all the light that God intends on giving His people on the keeping of the feasts.

This is especially true considering that Victor Houteff was called to issue a temporary restriction against keeping the Lord's Supper one of the "feasts" , and the so-called Davidians have closed their doors to any new messenger the Lord may, in His great mercies, send to instruct us in the proper way of keeping said feast, and to lift that temporary restriction. Moreover, if the "Davidians" are not to learn how to keep the feasts and especially the Lord's Supper correctly before the deliverance which happens after the fall of Assyria , then how are they ever to appropriate the benefits of the feasts and especially the Lord's Supper which they need to be sanctified, sealed, and marked for deliverance before Assyria falls?

Assyria falls only when the saints have cast away all of their idols, and because they have done so Timely Greetings , Vol. Furthermore, if the saints are not to be required to keep the feasts including the Lord's Supper before the special resurrection, then that would also mean that they would not be required to "perform their vows" before that resurrection either, for the two are inseparable as to the time of their fulfillment — that being when they give heed to the call, "Awake, Awake.

Thus, the Editors and those like-minded have a real dilemma before them. To take the stand that the message, "Awake. Awake" has already come, yet has not brought with it the knowledge of the keeping of the feasts and the call to keep them which occurs after the saints are awaken by the two-fold call, "Awake. Awake ," and before the fall of Assyria [which only occurs because the saints have cast away their own idols] is to admit that they must be in a deep sleep as we have been saying because the Rod message, in and of itself, does not contain the light sufficient to awaken the saints and declare unto them that the time has come to keep the feasts, or else they would be keeping them now.

That is, since the message declares that when they are awake the saints will keep their solemn feasts, and the "Davidians" do not now keep the feasts including the Lord's Supper among themselves , then that must mean that they are not awake yet. Which means that they are asleep still.

One and one still equals two. Regarding the possible time for the institution of the Lord's Supper, Victor Houteff says that that time may be. The Editors , being students of the Rod , and the Bible should know that the parables and types show that the wheat and tares are marked and separated before the wheat is put into the barn, and before the tares are burned destroyed. Accordingly, the tares must be first marked and separated from the wheat at harvest time when the sickle is thrust in so that they can be bound into bundles to be later burned. This separation must occur even before the wheat is threshed and winnowed to separate it from the chaff, and before the chaff is blown away.

That is, the tares are not threshed with the wheat, but have been separated from the wheat and bound into bundles at the time the wheat is receiving its final cleansing before it is put into the barn. What is significant here is that in order for that separation to take place, a sickle has to be put to the dried grain, and an investigative judgment regarding the nature of that which is being harvested must take place — that is, a determination must be made as to whether it is wheat, or whether it is a tare.

This investigative judgment is actually made during the time when the sickle is being put to the field. Note also that neither the wheat nor the tares are destroyed burned by the harvest action of the sickle. One more point regarding the Harvest. It is well established that the Rod purports to be the "Latter Rain. Verse 15 reads " They also reminded the brethren that the Rod teaches that the grain would spoil in the field if it stood in the field too long after the latter rain had ceased and before being harvested.

Thus the need for a timely harvest after the "latter rain" ceases. Earlier we mentioned certain aspects of the year prophecy and types as they relate to Ezekiel 9. One question is, How does that time prophecy relate to the "latter rain? Those who have a basic knowledge of the Rod know that Victor Houteff showed that the year prophecy applied to the revival and reformation — to the time when the Lord comes suddenly to his temple. From the fact that the "harvest" is to take place at the end of the years, it is obvious that that time period applies in its fullness to a time after the "latter rain" has ceased, and the grain had "dried.

Therefore, the year time prophecy which applies to the harvest must apply to a time shortly after the latter rain has ceased, for only then would the grain be "ripe" "dried" , and not yet rotten. Thus, though Victor Houteff made what he termed a "not exact" application of the years which ended in , the events which he said were to transpire at the perfect fulfillment of the prophecy the opening of the Judgment of the Living , did not transpire in , nor before he died in Therefore, the truth of the matter is that Victor declared that the year prophecy applied to the time of Ezekiel 9 the Harvest which was to come after the end of the falling of the "latter rain" not at the beginning of it , and after the wheat was mature and dried ripe — which perfectly fulfills the description of the Rod 's message as revealed in Revelation , which chapter is a delineation of the messages angels which are to come before Christ's second coming in the clouds, and thus must include the Rod.

This is the only other "angel" in this chapter whose message contains a "time" element — the other being verse 7,. The Editors' real dilemma arises from the fact that they do not believe that a living voice will come forth actually awakening the saints and simultaneously bringing them the ability and knowledge to keep their solemn feasts and perform their vows. Moreover, some may even believe that they are now wide awake, and that the Rod message, alone, has accomplished that.

Yet that they have no need to keep the feasts, nor a need for a true voice to call for and define their proper keeping. So here is another pivotal issue the Editors have with the Branch message — Has that call come, or is it yet future? If the call, "Awake, Awake," has come, then why is it not time also to keep the feasts and perform our vows?

The Branch says, Yes, the call had to come and has come in order for Revelation to reach its fulfillment and announce that the first fruit harvest is "ripe" and that the "time" to harvest thrust in the sickle — judge the living had arrived. The Branch further says that the Scriptures declare that the call to "Awake" is two-fold "Awake. Awake" and that the Rod correctly applies the time of this call to the time of the Judgment of the Living, not to the time of the Judgment of the Dead the time of Ellen White and Victor Houteff.

Spiritual Death and Life in the Bible

The Editors , evidently, do not believe that the call "Awake, Awake" has come, or maybe that it just has not yet borne its fruit in producing a vow-performing, feast-keeping group of "Davidians. The seven women in the spiritual realm are symbolical of the seven churches -- all the churches -- just as the seven heads on the leopard-like beast are symbolical of all the churches.

And what does this say they want? They want just His name. Then in the time when the purification is due there is to be a complete apostasy among all the churches. And that is the very condition that now exists. The very fact, moreover, that we are not yet observing the Lord's ordinance [the Lord's Supper] privately among ourselves shows that some of us as individuals may yet be in the very apostasy described in these verses, and perhaps even asleep.

It is possible that some of us as individuals may want to be associated with the Davidian organization but refuse to fully imbibe its Truth or live its principles. Victor Houteff made this observation over 60 years ago! He never said anything to the contrary, nor that conditions had changed for the better before he died as time has well proven.

Note that he says that it is possible that some of those who wished to be called Davidians in his day, because of their "apostasy" and being "asleep," were only embracing a general form of the message, and "refuse to fully imbibe its Truth or live its principles. Which part of the Rod message is it that is being refused, and which rejection is preventing the so-called "Davidians" from coming to such a standing in Christ where they could partake of the Lord's Supper among themselves in truth and righteousness, and thus, in safety?

That part of the message may be described by the phrase, "Let Heaven Guide. Victor Houteff expressed this fundamental truth and principle in many similar ways, all of which describe the message of "Elijah" as. This is the life of the Church, and is the most prominent point of the Rod message. It is very well expressed in the following. On this matter he also says,.

It is because God's people need a work to be done for them that will cause Him to continue speaking and working until righteousness and salvation are accomplished. We may be certain also that in this process we as a body will win; but some as individuals will lose out because they, like rebellious Israel of old, will not submit themselves to the necessary requirements that God lays before them. They refuse to exchange their ways for His ways and their thoughts for His thoughts. Therein is given the reason why the Church needs the work of the living Spirit of Prophecy in her midst — "It is because God's people need a work to be done for them.

Yet that is the very thing the Rod prescribes:. God will not let you be deceived if you really hunger and thirst after righteousness, if you really want to know the Truth, for He is anxious that you keep up with His progressively revealed Truth. There is therefore no danger for one to be deceived by coming in contact with error, but there is a great danger for staying in darkness by not coming in contact with fresh Truth.

Inspiration's counsel is thus:. To keep this commandment is just as important as to keep any other. In light of the fact that the message to "Awake, Awake" is a part of the "Truth Yet for the Editors to accept any true new light on these would be, in effect, admitting that their teaching that Victor Houteff is the last prophet to the church before the deliverance is in error. This because, according to the Rod , it is God who is going to "continue to speak" to His people until they are purified and made white, and, therefore, whoever brings the true new light must be one of His appointed agents, a messenger of the Covenant — a prophet.

The Rod makes it clear that "Elijah" is the last messenger to church, but also that the title "Elijah" is not restricted to one person , but rather to the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Prophecy in a living, human agent Answerer Book 1, pp. In considering this matter we must ask a couple of questions regarding the work of "Elijah," the "Messenger of the Covenant" — which work is to prepare for the coming of the Lord to His temple. The questions are, In what manner is the "coming" to be?

Consequently, there are two such comings of the Lord "to His temple" and two purifications , -- first, the cleansing of the temple sanctuary from the wicked dead the investigative judgment , and second, the purification of the church temple from the living wicked, at which time Malachi will meet its perfect fulfillment. The parable of the ten virgins is applicable to the latter. In the first fulfillment of Malachi's prophecy for the judgment of the dead a forerunner William Miller came announcing the imminent coming future of the Lord to His temple, and was followed shortly thereafter by another instrument of the Spirit of Prophecy Ellen White announcing that the Lord had now come present tense to His temple for the cleansing of the sanctuary — first to judge investigate the dead.

Such is an illustration of what is to be expected with its fulfillment for the judgment of the living. There is nothing which indicates that the process will be different. Thus in the "future" from , "perfect fulfillment of Malachi Three" for the judgment of the living, we should expect to see one inspired messenger announcing the coming of the Lord to His temple, and then that one being followed by another in the mantle of Elijah , a messenger of the Covenant, announcing that the Lord has come to His temple for the judgment and cleansing of the living.

None can dispute the fact that the whole of Victor Houteff's message is an announcement of something to come "yet future" — that being the coming of the Lord to His temple for the judgment of the living. As we have seen, the announcement of the coming of the Lord to His temple by one prophet is to be followed by an announcement by another prophet that the Lord is come to His temple, and is currently sitting as a refiner and purifier.

This is so simple that. Given the actions of the Editors and most others who wished to be called Davidians since Victor Houteff died, and giving them every benefit of the doubt, it cannot be honestly said that they really believe this part of the Rod message and teach it as it simply reads. So then the question naturally arises, How can they be called "Davidians" if they don't " fully imbibe its Truth or live its principles. The very fact that there are numerous groups claiming to be the true representatives of the "Davidian" association, and, more importantly, the Rod message, while disavowing the others' similar claims is proof, in and of itself, that they have not really accepted the Rod message, for it is a message which is to unite those who abide by its teachings, not divide them.

Their situation is more deplorable due to the fact that none of them have a President which they say is endowed with the Spirit of Prophecy. They are in effect saying that God no longer needs to send any true prophets because there is nothing more which needs to be revealed since the Rod has come, and they no longer need to have the important cleansing work done for them by the Holy Spirit — especially that which attends the true keeping of the footwashing and Lord's Supper.

The real controversy people have with the living testimony in the Church is not the unrolling of the scroll which reveals new light on the prophecies or other hidden mysteries, but rather that at the same time the Spirit reproves and rebukes the sins of the people. Ellen White's experience in this regards is the perfect example. If her testimonies consisted only of visions and dreams of hidden truths and of events in heaven and of the unfolding of future events, then she would not have received such opposition as she did at times.

But because much of what she was called to speak and write about were the sins of individuals and groups of people, the Spirit of Prophecy was not appreciated by the majority. The early Adventists were graced with many manifestations of the Spirit of Prophecy without, at first, really expecting such a work of intercession on God's behalf towards His people. That is, but few of the early Adventists were open to the idea of there being any true manifestations of the Spirit of Prophecy, or were expecting that such a direct work as that manifest in the Testimonies was going to be done within the church to purify her for the second coming of Christ.

But after a while the Lord cleared up the matter and declared through the Spirit of Prophecy that the testimonies which Ellen White was bearing were the "voice of God" to the people. She also said that God wanted to continue to work with His people in such a manner.

Yet in spite of all this, the testimonies were generally ignored or rejected. The situation is a bit different with the Davidians, though. The Rod decries the abuse of the Testimonies, and clearly sets forth the true position of the living Spirit of Prophecy in the church — that it is her very life. Therefore, they, of all people on earth, should be found looking for the Lord in new light through the living Spirit of Prophecy.

Yet there is practically no one harder to reach with anything beyond that part of the Rod they choose to accept. Victor Houteff said that there will be only one church which will be distinguished by the present truth-unfolding message during the Judgment of the Living Shepherd's Rod , Vol. So what is one to think when the professed reformers have become deformers? The way that they teach the message has served more to divide them than to unite them, as seen by their fruits.

The Rod has described those who cause these problems as "position seekers" and "usurpers. Heaven says that God is going to "continue to speak" to His people through the Spirit of Prophecy in a living person to cleanse and sanctify them because they need it. The "Davidians" say that He has spoken enough up to to sustain them for quite a while — though they don't say how long said condition will last, nor provide a type where such condition ever proved a blessing to those who lived without God's living voice among them.

How would these "Davidians" react to such a manifestation which specifically points out their individual sins? Would they attribute such a manifestation to the Devil? Another point of contention in the Editors ' conflict with the Branch and Ben's claim that his work was part of the continuing "unrolling of the scroll" is that he said that he was shown that the Judgment for the Living had begun on October 20, with an investigation of the Davidian's reaction to the present truth message he was bearing — that that message was the harvesting sickle.

If Victor Houteff had announced that the Judgment for the Living was open, and that feasts were to now be kept, the Davidians after he died would have had no test to see if they as individuals were willing to get their marching orders from heaven or from uninspired men. The question was, Were they really believing the Rod message which proclaimed that God was going to "continue to speak" unto His people until they are a pure body, or were they not? In the type, Christ's message came and judged proved — investigated those who professed to believe John the Baptist's preparatory message.

Many had been baptized by John, but not all brought forth fruits meet for repentance. Even during Christ's ministry many who had been following Him left Him when He said some hard things — either hard in the sense of being a sharp rebuke, or hard in the sense that it portrays deep truths, not easy for a proud heart or mind dulled by sins and trespasses to readily grasp.

No longer will his people be insulted everywhere. He will wipe away the tears from everyone's eyes and take away the disgrace his people have suffered throughout the world. The LORD himself has spoken. Holman Christian Standard Bible He will destroy death forever. International Standard Version he has swallowed up death forever! Then the Lord GOD will wipe away the tears from all faces, and he will take away the disgrace of his people from the entire earth. NET Bible he will swallow up death permanently. The sovereign LORD will wipe away the tears from every face, and remove his people's disgrace from all the earth.

Indeed, the LORD has announced it! New Heart English Bible He has swallowed up death in victory. The Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces. He will take the reproach of his people away from off all the earth, for the LORD has spoken it. The Almighty LORD will wipe away tears from every face, and he will remove the disgrace of his people from the whole earth.

Jubilee Bible He will destroy death forever; and the Lord GOD shall wipe away every tear from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people he shall take away from off all the earth: for the LORD has determined it. King James Bible He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD has spoken it.

American King James Version He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD has spoken it. American Standard Version He hath swallowed up death for ever; and the Lord Jehovah will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of his people will he take away from off all the earth: for Jehovah hath spoken it.

Brenton Septuagint Translation Death has prevailed and swallowed men up; but again the Lord God has taken away every tear from every face. He has taken away the reproach of his people from all the earth: for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it. Douay-Rheims Bible He shall cast death down headlong forever: and the Lord God shall wipe away tears from every face, and the reproach of his people he shall take away from off the whole earth: for the Lord hath spoken it.

Darby Bible Translation He will swallow up death in victory. And the Lord Jehovah will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of his people will he take away from off all the earth: for Jehovah hath spoken. English Revised Version He hath swallowed up death for ever; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the reproach of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it. Webster's Bible Translation He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people will he remove from all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.

World English Bible He has swallowed up death forever! The Lord Yahweh will wipe away tears from off all faces. He will take the reproach of his people away from off all the earth, for Yahweh has spoken it. Young's Literal Translation He hath swallowed up death in victory, And wiped hath the Lord Jehovah, The tear from off all faces, And the reproach of His people He turneth aside from off all the earth, For Jehovah hath spoken.

Matthew Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Luke "The Lord has done this for me. In these days He has shown me favor and taken away my disgrace among the people. Revelation For the Lamb in the center of the throne will be their shepherd. He will lead them to springs of living water, and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes. Isaiah Your dead will live; their bodies will rise.

Awake and sing, you who dwell in the dust! For your dew is like the dew of the morning, and the earth will bring forth her dead. Isaiah O people in Zion, who dwell in Jerusalem, you will weep no more. He will surely be gracious at the sound of your cry; when He hears, He will answer you.