Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 2 of 4)

8 Sep

Related image

Baylor University Institute for Oral History

We continue our series on this historical interview.

McGEE: Tell me, when you were making these visits, did the occasion ever
come for you to identify yourselves as Davidians from Mt. Carmel in
Waco, Texas, and if so, were you recognized? Were the members of the
Seventh Day Adventist churches across the nation familiar with Mt. Carmel
and what was going on there?

SAETHER: I would say that very few churches were unfamiliar with it
because we were sending this literature out to everybody. (Interview no. 7, p.301)

SAETHER: I went to Illinois at the time of my father’s death and funeral.
They asked me, “What kind of a man is Brother Houteff?” Well, I’d say,
“One thing for certain, he was not sanctimonious, not arrogant.” He
could be courteous and polite, but he was not affectations at all. He
didn’t go on ceremony too much although in the meeting he believed in
a certain amount of protocol and order. Very strict on that.

SAETHER: We’d have meetings—Sabbath afternoon and sundown worship
right after that they’d distribute the mail. That was an interesting
time for us. Every Saturday afternoon.

SAETHER: Mrs. Houteff cornered me and said, “You know.
Brother Houteff is not so well now. I think that has affected him.”
That was in 1954. I’m pretty sure it was. In 1955 he died. Less
than a year after this. So you know that affected him.
He was not up to par and he didn’t hold any meetings any more, either.
Others held the meetings.

He didn’t speak, just once in a while he’d
have something to say. The doctrines had been drawn up and published.
His work was finished and as far as the work on the outside, he still
kept his eye on that, but he was in quite bad shape, I’d say.

McGEE: Was this period of his failing health about a year long? 

SAETHER: It was more than a year because—I’ve forgotten what year… here’s the point I want to make. The next year after he died, one of the first things she told the council was that—“I want to study the Bible now, I have some things on my mind.” What she did was go back to this Timely Greetings, Volume II, number fifteen and decipher that.

Even when he died that was on his mind. Revelations 10 and 11, especially 11. That’s the thing that stopped it—published that chapter. Correction of the manuscripts,
and the revision of the printing and all that stopped. We just went up to Volume II, number fourteen and stopped revising. Because he stopped.

But, you know, just before he died he was in worse condition than he was a year before this, but she talked with him and he was still thinking of this and talking about it. Then to take this as a groundwork for a new doctrine, it was really stupid, I think. 

McGEE: She took it as a basis for a new doctrine after his death?

SAETHER: Yeah, that’s where this whole idea of that meeting in 1959 came
from, what she said.

McGEE: Did most of the people at the center here during that last year of
his life recognize that his health was failing? I guess it was pretty obvious to everyone because he wasn’t leading the worship anymore. Did he make any signs, do anything, say anything to indicate that he knew that he would be gone soon and v/ho he wanted to be leader after his death?

SAETHER: Mrs. Houteff said that he told her that he wanted her to be the
leader. Well, that was all right. But now, take a man that’s ready to die, and is not really clear, I thought at the time it was the best way out for us. But I’ve thought since it was a big mistake.

McGEE: To have Mrs. Houteff as leader?

SAETHER: Mrs. Houteff and her brother and her mother, all in one family, all in the council. Just unthinkable. Unthinkable.

McGEE: How did Brother Houteff’s death affect the community? How did the
people respond?

SAETHER: They were just—most of them, I think, were—what would you call
it? Dumbfounded.

McGEE: Something hard to believe.

SAETHER: Unbelievable, yeah. He was gone and who was to take his place? That was the next question. Well, M.J. Bingham had been Brother Houteff’s right-hand man years before, years before. He got into the trouble here and he was out of here for years. He came back in again and this time, while this was going on, he was sent as a missionary
down into the Caribbean. I think at the time he was in one of those islands down there.

McGEE: Who were the other candidates? You mentioned Bingham and Wolfe.

SAETHER: That’s the only ones that were really—the only ones, at the time, that we knew of. There was another man that I think was grooming himself to be the leader. He’d been here for a short while, several months. He had a garden down next to the lake. I don’t know whether it ever amounted to anything. I wasn’t here at the time.
This was in 1953. His name was Roden—Benjamin Roden.

McGEE: Benjamin Roden.

SAETHER: Yeah. He wasn’t here, but in 1955 is when he started his demands to take over Mt. Carmel. I think he was possessed by the devil because he used the devil’s tactics in— (Interview no. 7. p.320-332)

****************************************

McGEE: What were the issues that the council began to deal with as they looked to the future after the death of Brother Houteff? What were the first big issues that the council began to struggle with? Was it the question of who would be the leader? 

SAETHER: I think it was but I think the Hermanson family really— we say, we have that saying, “put one over on the rest of us.” What is the word they—we want? (pause) Pulled a coup d’etat.

McGEE: How did the council go about and when did they begin going about dealing with the question of the leadership? Who would be the leader? Did they do it a month after Brother Houteff’s death or was it a year later or just when?   
SAETHER: It was immediate. The day of the funeral. Maybe even before the funeral. It might have been even before the funeral, Oliver came to me and he said this: “Before Brother Houteff died he told Florence that she should be the vice president and be the manager and that I should be elected to the council, as a council member, to assist her”…but right away we heard from Bingham. Brother Bingham thought he should be the leader. Wolfe had resigned from the council. He was a councilman. He was the acting chairman. He was the chairman of the council for years.  (Interview no. 8, p.335-337)

(Underlines for emphasis for final summary)

Advertisements

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 1 of 4)

2 Sep

Related image

Baylor University Institute for Oral History

In our ongoing series of the new code controversy, we came across a treasure trove of jewels. Brother George Saether was one of the old time members of the Mt. Carmel “camp”, as brother Houteff would call it. He was there from 1937 to 1961 at the dissolution of the Waco grounds. He played a very influential part in the Davidian movement.

After listening and reading the 10 interviews, we believe that unbeknownst to Daniel McGee, the Baylor interviewer, the Lord was indeed guiding him because Mr. McGee, time and again, zeroed in on the subjects that would later prove noteworthy due to today’s controversies specifically Florence Houteff and the new codes and Ben Roden and the Branch DSDA.

Thus, we’d like to report on what we found noteworthy in this invaluable series of interviews, not only for some clarifications but for the general history of the movement.

Before we begin we’d like to thank brother Jim Mentore for bringing these interviews to our attention. We were not aware of these rich and timely memoirs and have found then, as we said–invaluable for  some clarifications and points.

As we have shown before, the Word says the following —

“There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.” (CWE, p. 35)

Indeed! Close investigation will not hurt the Truth at all. Thus we shall closely look at what a key member of the movement had to say about Florence Houteff, M.J. Bingham and Ben Roden. We know that two living members of the original camp, sister Bonnie and brother Don, were very young when the camp was in full swing, not so with brother Saether. He was in the prime of his life and thus could relate in more clearer detail what he learned and experienced on the camp.

The first of the series of  ten interviews took place on July 12, 1973. They went on over the next two years with the last one on June 30, 1975.

Ok, let us begin with our analysis of bro. Saether’s  interview. We shall break it up into four parts, relating to Florence Houteff , M.J. Bingham, Ben Roden and a summary. All three of these people, we as present truth believers know, had extremely influential roles in the movement after the passing of brother Houteff.

FLORENCE HOUTEFF/M.J. BINGHAM INFORMATION

SAETHER: Well, the leader of course, was Brother Houteff and his right hand
man was a man by the name of Bingham. M. J. Bingham, He was almost a cripple. Tall, about six foot three or four and just like a bean pole. He had some trouble with his legs. But, could he talk! He could out-talk about anybody you ever heard.
He was a student of words. He doted on that. When he’d talk, he’d get new words and see how many times he could use that new word in his sermon or talk. He could follow that.” (Interview no. 3, p.139)

..when he was here he was the spokesman for Brother Houteff, largely, you know, deal with the people. (Ibid, p.140)

McGEE: Do you think there was any kind of attempt on the part of
Elder Wilson to kind of control Bingham or keep him from getting too
much influence?

SAETHER: Oh, I think there was some. Of course, Bingham resented
somebody else being placed over him. Elder Wilson wasn’t here when
Brother Houteff was here. He was out in the field. He was the only
fieldworker we had. He traveled all over the United States and Canada. Then Brother Houteff left he put him in charge. 

No telling what would have happened if Bingham had been here
just by himself. But he did have a following. He was bright and
some of them followed him. I’ve forgotten all that happened, but
anyway, some of them just rebelled against Elder Wilson and they
went off in the woods here—there was a lot of woods here and you
couldn’t find anybody.

McGEE: Who were these rebels? Who was their leader? Were they rebelling
against Wilson’s leadership?

SAETHER: That’s right.

McGEE: I see. Who was their leader?

SAETHER: Bingham was the leader.  (Ibid, p.161-162)

McGEE: When the group originally came here in 1935, Brother Houteff
was not married? Did Mrs. Hermanson and her children come during
that first year?

SAETHER: They came in that same group, the original twelve.

McGEE: I see. I see. So they were members of that twelve. After
about two years Brother Houteff married—

SAETHER: Florence.  (Ibid, p.169)

McGEE: There really was no question in the minds of anyone at the
Mt. Carmel Center as to who was the leader?

SAETHER: Absolutely not. He was the leader. Bingham was the assistant
leader most of the time. But it was what Brother Houteff said that
they swore by. (Ibid, p.172)

*********************


McGEE: We might, while we’re just thinking about these people,
ask the question about those that are still living. Of course Florence
Hermanson is—she’s now remarried, Mrs. Carl Eaken, E-a-k-e-n.

SAETHER: You talked with her over the phone, did you?

McGEE: No, I got to talk with Mrs. Sophia Hermanson. I never got—

SAETHER: Sophia?

McGEE: Yes.  

SAETHER: You never got to talk to—

McGEE: No, I did not. But Florence Hermanson is living. (Interview no. 4, p.191)

****************************

SAETHER:  When we were here at Mt. Carmel, beginning in ’37 when we came,
there was a meeting every Sabbath, Friday night at sundown there was
a meeting and then usually in the afternoon the next day we had a meeting
and Brother Houteff spoke almost entirely.

Beginning in about ’47, I think, let’s see—’46, he began to
take these all down and well, I guess they had before but now it was
designed to meet the needs of the people and get it in such a shape that it could be published.

His wife was a typist and she took all these notes but wrote them
out so that—so they were publishing a book then. That’s what I was
doing in the print shop. At first I was cutting the paper and then I had charge of the
print shop for a number of years.

Here you see the first one is Timely Greetings, Texts and Addresses by V.T. Houteff, Minister of the Davidian, Seventh Day Adventists, Sabbath, August 3, 1946, Mt.
Carmel Chapel, Waco, Texas. And went on like that. (Interview no. 7, p.305 )

SAETHER: Distinctive. It was his handwriting. Of course, he wrote
a lot. Most of these things that he formulated for printing, he wrote
it first and then his wife typed it. Then she’d say she’d “tackle” it. (Ibid, p.311)

This concludes part one. We are posting relevant information in order to make a good summary for our three subjects, Florence Houteff, Ben Roden and M.J. Bingham. As mentioned we can gather good solid eye witness information on the mindset and agendas of these controversial parties.

Mountain Dale Letter

18 Aug

 

Image result for prophet deep in thought picture

Open Letter to Mt. Dale Leadership

Greetings in our King’s name and may we continue to strive to be among that number to stand with Him in that glorious kingdom so very near!

Intent —

“God does not propose to remove all occasion for unbelief. He gives evidence, which must be carefully investigated with a humble mind and a teachable spirit; and all should decide from the weight of evidence.”– Testimonies for the Church , Volume 3, p. 255

In this report we’d like to highlight what we saw in the session and also we’ve seen and heard over the last few years working in His vineyard concerning the controversial new codes. We hope that this will help our brethren “weigh the evidence” and then make that decision in the closet of prayer.

Session —-

May we suggest more preparation and planning for session next year. This year it was not well prepared and as the people proclaiming the Lord’s Elijah message we should valve this time we get together and make it a special media event like in times past when it was published on Live Stream.

New code discussion —-

Many of us were disappointed in the fairness of the discussion. It was very one sided. Because of this we felt it important to let the brethren know that instead of a few quotes and a couple paragraphs from HEARYETHEROD blog post, we should present more concrete evidence and to weigh the situation properly.

Controversy —

For many decades Davidians have simply taken the new codes as a part of the Golden Bowl. This began to change in late 1990’s as brother Lennox Sam and Michael Graham undertook a thorough study of the new codes, it’s history, the so-called errors, the hiding of many new codes, etc.

While many of us believe that today, unfortunately bro. Sam has departed from the original message to a large degree, nevertheless, his report was in-depth and today stands out as one of the most thorough historical accounts of the new codes.

Personally, I believe there is some good evidence for both sides. When one looks at Vol. 13, no.5-6, there appears great and deep answers to Sabbath observance. It all appears very deep and true, such as our prophet would write.

However, take Vol. 11, no.1 for example. This new code was published by Florence Houteff, as all the new codes were, and it actually declared what the 42 months anti-type prophecy was concerning Rev. 11! Soon this code disappeared from distribution. Why? Because it was flat out error.

This is what makes these new codes controversial –error mixed with truth. Some Florence Houteff codes truth and some error. That is the history of these new codes.

Extremists —-

Because there is good points on both sides, those who take the position that one is lost for taking this side or that side, we feel is– an extremist. The Lord ,we all know took the reins into His own hands after the knockout blow and preserved the Rod movement and kept it from disintegrating, yet nearly all those old timers believed in the new codes. Historical writings from the sessions and meetings confirm this.

Are we going to say all those faithful pioneers, like brother Warden, brother Green, brother Sidney Smith, sister Bonnie Smith, etc.–are lost? Likewise because the new codes have been compromised as a thorough study proves are we going to say that those who don’t believe in them are lost as well? Either way both are extreme positions.

It was mentioned after this session’s code discussion by one of Mt. Dale leaders that “Satan” is trying to take us off the message, implying that those who don’t believe in the new codes ,don’t’ believe in Inspiration and are thus working for Satan—this is extreme and uncalled for brethren.

Questions and comments —-

1) Why are the “missing” new codes not distributed yet were published by Florence Houteff?

10 Symbolic Code No. 8
10 Symbolic Code No. 9
10 Symbolic Code No. 11
10 Symbolic Code No. 12
11 Symbolic Code No. 1
11 Symbolic Code No. 5
11 Symbolic Code No. 9
11 Symbolic Code No. 10
11 Symbolic Code No. 11
12 Symbolic Code No. 10
14 Symbolic Code No. 1
14 Symbolic Code No. 6

NOTE: According to SAM/GRAHAM REPORT they were found. They exist at the Carroll Collections Library at Baylor University in Waco, Texas. They can be viewed in person (not online).

2) Has Sam/Graham’s request to make these missing new codes known to the brethren ever been considered by Mt. Dale?

3) Why do we allow Florence Houteff/her council’s false prophecy private words to be part of the Golden Bowl? “a fact and approaching reality” says Florence Houteff?

“On September 21, 1936 Brother Houteff made the remarks concerning the possibility of trouble coming to the church after the sealing of the saints and before the slaughter of Ezekiel 9, and if so what the results would be and why. Since Revelation 11 has more recently been unfolded before us we should be able to see that it is not just a possibility, but rather both a fact and approaching reality that trouble is coming to the church before the slaughter of Ezekiel 9. None therefore need be ignorant concerning what we must now be doing about it.)” {11 SC no.7 p.3)

4) The SAM/GRAHAM REPORT made the startling discovery.

“Brethren, we would like to draw your attention to some more startling facts. The symbolic codes in the 5 volumes now being distributed are not complete Codes there are many missing pages, which are shown in Exhibit “I”. Was this an oversight or were these pages lost, as some brethren were told? The answer is a big loud No! Why are we distributing portions of these New Codes? Is it because there are some errors found in them? Or did we simply had no access to them, if so, we now do, the complete Symbolic Codes can be found at the Carroll Library at Baylor University, Waco Texas.”(SAM/GRAHAM REPORT)

“11 SC. No. 2 actually contains in excess of twenty-six pages. Why are we only distributing the first fourteen pages? In addition, we are not even distributing page fourteen in its entirety. Why! Why! Why see Exhibit “I” No. 3. We are splitting Symbolic Codes and even splitting pages so as to avoid the errors found therein.”(SAM/GRAHAM REPORT)

NOTE: These questions was asked of the Waco brethren and as far as we know never answered from Waco and now we ask this question anew to Mt. Dale. Very Important questions that should be answered if we are to get to the bottom of this controversy!

Main Differences —

There appears two main differences (generally speaking) with the new code teachings and the original codes published by VTH.

1) Jacobs time of trouble occurs before Ezek. 9 per the new codes
2) Jacobs time of trouble occurs after Ezek. 9 per original codes

1) The new codes shows the “Confederacy” making severe trouble to Davidians (possible death decrees, going before Gov. councils to answer for our faith, etc.) before Ezek. 9.
2) The original codes do not show this

Summary —-

As this issue has come before us, let us take it seriously and look at all the information to properly decide. We are counseled to “weigh the evidence”. This short report is general in nature and certainly some other brethren may have additional information to show opposition to believing the new codes as inspired.

One important point I would like to make is that we are NOT advocating that Mt. Dale is a false organization. We believe that it and Waco are two organizations that God is using to bring the Truth to Mother and spread His Elijah message. We remain committed to supporting Mt. Dale

Let’s ask the Lord to “guide us into all Truth (John 16:13) He will not fail us. Thank you for your consideration to this important matter.

Three reports to help weigh the subject–

1) Sam/Graham Report http://www.davidiansda.org/NewCodes-BRC.pdf

2) Stanford Report https://drive.google.com/…/1Zhnz7K_Uqbtjf6RTB-lkI_GHfA…/view

2) HEARYETHEROD Report https://hearyetherod.wordpress.com/…/…/14/authorized-by-who/

Applicable Quotes —-

“Hear and Count the Evidences on Both Sides Before Firing For or Against “ (GCS cover page)

“WARNING.
Do Not Deeper Fall Into the Pit But Get Out.—Teachers of Present Truth, having before them the example of the tragic results caused by conflicting teachings by the S.D.A. ministry and, in addition to this, having been repeatedly warned to teach only that which has been revealed, and published, stand in great condemnation before God when they set forth conflicting or unauthorized views on any subject. Be absolutely certain that you are teaching according to that which is written, and not according to that which you may think should be or will some day be written. Failure to comply with this requirement will disqualify anyone as a worker in this cause.” (SC, vol. 3, no. 5-6, p.14)

“There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.” (CWE, p. 35)

NOTE: the above was submitted to Mt. Dale FB website “Golden Bowl Ministries” , we await their reply.

Mt. Dale Reviews the New Codes

11 Aug

Image result for Mountain Dale organization Davidian picture

This week a very big event occurred within the Davidian world. Mountain Dale decided to at long last bring the long simmering issue of the new codes to the fore front. They made it a top priority of discussion items for this year’s session in New York. God’s Spirit is moving brethren, rest assured.

SOP counsels us —

“There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.” (CWE, p. 35)

We often quote that to Mother, yet it might as well be very applicable to us about the new code issue! Our long-held “doctrine” among many DSDA that the new codes are part of the Golden Bowl will not lose anything upon close investigation–if it is truth.

Ok a little back drop before we begin. This author came into the message in May of 2011. Soon after, we were made aware of the controversy about the new codes. Unfortunately some “militant” brethren tried to tell us that the new codes are “evil” or “the work of Satan” etc. Those who believe in them and proclaim them are lost.

Not knowing the “whole picture” and being relatively new to the Rod message we tended to side with this idea. But over the years we discovered that there truly is “two sides” to the issue. Thus we came to the conclusion that instead of being dogmatic like some brethren, we prefer to see this issue as a “how readest thou” issue instead of a  “condemn them at all costs” issue. But this is a whole separate report in itself.

But nevertheless we were persuaded that the new codes really should not be a part of the Golden Bowl. There is just too much problems with them (authorization, errors, historical blunders, etc.).  So we began to reach out to other brethren with our understanding of the issue.

One brother, we’ll call brother H, is one of the leaders at Mt. Dale. We were able to present to him over a period of a couple of years, certain reports and analysis of the new code situation. Soon this brother began to tell us that he was of similar belief in these codes after thorough study. This was truly a break through we thought!

Apparently this brother is enough of a leader that he began to work with some brethren at Mt. Dale, to open up to their understanding the many issues that were conveniently hidden from view for agenda reasons. Well God’s Truth does not stay down for long, it has now surfaced at Mt. Dale–praise the Lord!

SOP counsels us again–

“The Lord often works where we least expect Him; He surprises us by revealing His power through instruments of His own choice, while He passes by the men to whom we have looked as those through whom light should come. God desires us to receive the truth upon its own merits–because it is truth.” (TM. p 105 -106)

This new code issue is surely being revealed by “instruments of His own choice” and not necessarily through the leaders of the DSDA “men to whom we have looked as those through whom light should come”. This session is an example case.

Ok fast forward to a couple of days ago at session.

This year’s session unfortunately has experienced a lack of proper planning. The management decided to livestream it through Facebook instead of years past when they did it though Live stream.com, a regular online live streaming media site that enables you to store and file the videos away for future viewing. This we feel was a big mistake. It makes the presentation look much more amateurish . We ARE the highest light bearers of the world brethren we need to keep this in mind!

So the discussion day came and they announced that “Rob Peralta’s” website would be quoted as “opposition” to the new codes evidence. Instead of going into some close examination of the following report they decide to quote just a couple of paragraphs. But they did quote some of the Rod references we used to counter the idea of publishing hearsay and rumors.

https://hearyetherod.wordpress.com/2013/01/13/the-codes-whats-the-facts/

To begin with, unfortunately the two higher-ups with Mt. Dale who do not support the new codes had to leave back home shortly before this discussion began. So we became the defacto response. Briefly  speaking, our post was not helpful as they did not go much into it. But they did make sure to present brother Errol Stanford.

As many of us know ES is similar to brother Norman Archer at Waco, both are really the “leaders” of the organizations, even though there may be a figure-head (VP).

ES presented the pro-code position. Mainly the idea that because some of the old-timer witnesses remember the sermon addresses (ie. sister Bonnie Smith) they must be true codes and worthy of putting into the Bowl. Their idea is that the word “publish” can also mean verbal things remembered. Now this brethren is what is called — mental gymnastics or a big stretch.

But that really is not the main issue. As we posted already the main issue is authorization, who did it and why? If it was not done by the prophet then this issue should really be a mute point. Can anyone add writings to the Golden Bowl?? This is basic fundamental DSDA teaching (Zech. 4) ONLY the prophets can do that!

See this post —

https://hearyetherod.wordpress.com/2018/07/14/authorized-by-who/

As mentioned the Lord is working on this issue. The discussion left a sour taste in some brethren as it truly was a “one sided” discussion. Imagine if you will a presidential debate where one side gets 90% allotted time to present and the other gets 10% –???

This author in the comment section has announced that he will post a “formal and open” post to Mt. Dale via the FB website addressing this issue and asking some serious questions that the leadership of Mt. Dale should address. Other wise this issue will fester and not really heal as it should.

We will update you soon as to ongoing events. In the meantime brethren we really do need your prayers to help us present something that will hopefully provoke inquiring minds to investigate this issue further and come to the preponderance of evidence which will show this issue as compromised and thus should be no part of the Golden Bowl.

Another Look at the Timing of the Pre-Millennial Kingdom

28 Jul

A while back we did a post entitled “7 Years in the Pre-millennial Kingdom?”

https://hearyetherod.wordpress.com/2018/02/10/7-years-in-the-pre-millennial-kingdom/

In it we pointed out that there is some debate as to the length of time this kingdom will exist. We also said this was not a “dogmatic” issue, meaning that we should not declare it will be “for sure” this many years or that many years. We would like to revisit this issue due to a recent blog post covering this issue.

The comment that caught our eye was —

“..unfortunately there are some amongst present truth believers who are not content to accept a “thus sayeth the Lord” and want to insist their own private opinions by suggesting that seven years is to long because Ellen White says the last day events will be in rapid succession so seven years must really be something like two or three years at most. This is a very dangerous and presumptuous position to take which demonstrates unbelief in God’s Word and ignorance about how we should rightly divide the Word of Truth.”

An obvious rebuttal to our post no doubt. Here we see that this poster takes a dogmatic position that the pre-mil kingdom will be –seven years. He bases on the following Scripture in regard to length of time of the pre-mil kingdom–

“And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the hand staves, and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years.“(Ezekiel 39:9)

Then he use the following Rod reference as support of literal seven years —

“I do not know of any chapters in the Bible that are more explicit than these chapters of Ezekiel.  They need no interpretation whatsoever.  But in spite of it the Denomination ignores them as though they were not in the Bible.  And even now, rather than teaching the soon fulfillment of these chapters, the setting up of the Kingdom, the ministers are doing all they can to confuse the laity and to enshroud the Scriptures in mystery!  So there is evidence upon evidence that the angel of the church of the Laodiceans is blind, and yet knows it not.” — Timely Greetings, Vol. 2, No. 4, p. 21

However this above reference is speaking of ALL of Ezekiel chapters 37, 38, and 39. And not solely of Ezek. 39:9.  What the Rod says directly after quoting Ezek. 39:9 is —

“As these verses need no comment, we pass on to Ezek. 39:22-29…” (TG, vol. 2, no. 4, p.20)

Then the poster comments —

“So why do some not accept that “they that dwell in the cities of Israel” shall go forth and burn their weapons of destruction for seven years? …Think about the problems if one does not believe that the seven years in Eze. 39:7 are seven literal years. Does that also mean the the seven months in verse 12 that the house of Israel shall be buying Gog and all his multitude is not seven literal months, but something else?”

In  regards to Ezek. 39:12 we should note that the Rod does not expound upon it. The only mention of it is —

“As these verses need no comment, we pass on to Ezek. 39:22-29…” (TG, vol. 2, no. 4, p.20)

When we look at the context of verse 12 for “seven months”, we see in both the prior verse 11 and the later verse 13, there are no “symbols” to cause us to consider the meaning as symbolic. In other words, the seven months should be considered literal.

Let’s say that the seven years is a literal seven years. Ok, now when we take these words literally, are there also to be literal shields and bucklers, bows, arrows and spears burned as well? Then we must take the seven years as literal but make the weapons symbolical (?). Let us read what the Rod says concerning a similar case involving symbolism integrity.

“And the same hour was there a great earthquake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in the earthquake were slain of men seven thousand: and the remnant were affrighted,  and gave glory to the God of heaven.”(Rev. 11:13)

“The “hour,” “the earthquake,” the “tenth part,” “the city,” the “seven thousand” slain, and “the remnant” must, to maintain the integrity of the entire trumpet symbolism, themselves be symbolical.”(Tract 5, p.112)

We also have specific counsel from SOP —

“The language of the Bible should be explained according to its obvious meaning, unless a symbol or figure is employed.“(GC, p.599)

So are we maintaining “the integrity” of Ezek. 39:9 when we mix and match  what is literal and what is not? In other words , if the weapons are symbolical, and they of course must be, then should we not take the seven years symbolical as well?

As we presented in our prior post, brother Houteff never confirms any time length of the pre-mil kingdom in all the Rod writings. His only comment is he has “no comment”.

To be sure, not once have we ever said that there is no possibility that the kingdom will be seven years. We only say that due to the balancing of the other Inspired references we are not sure that this many years will indeed constitute the duration of the kingdom.

We bring up this post because often we see declarations from some present truth believers that the kingdom will be at least seven years. This we feel should not be a dogmatic teaching. The view presented here should be considered as well.

To judge another’s viewpoint on this issue and make comments like —

“This is a very dangerous and presumptuous position to take which demonstrates unbelief in God’s Word and ignorance about how we should rightly divide the Word of Truth.”

Is to be shortsighted, dogmatic and judgmental on something that surely is not expounded upon from the restoring Rod.

In closing we found the following reference from the Rod. In speaking of the time when “Mt. Zion” rejoices, in the Kingdom set up, the Rod says this–

“Because time and the gospel are at their climatic hour, and the work is consequently of transcendent scope, expansion, and importance, yet of exceeding  short duration, God has inspired man to invent and build time and labor-saving, wonder-working, earth mastering tools and machinery of all kinds…” (WHR, p.36)

“He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?(Luke 10:26)

This issue will soon be disclosed to us, Lord willing. May we be ready to witness it, that is our focus and goal right now THEN we’ll know.

 

Authorized by Who?

14 Jul

Image result for Florence Houteff picture

Recently on our sister FB group “Golden Bowl Ministries” the subject of the “new codes” came up again. This subject rises up every so often among us as there really is a mixed and divided view on them. Let us look at an important aspect of these codes.

We have dealt with this subject before and we mostly focused on why they are not to be relied upon, but this post we’ll look at it from another angle.

See this link for our other report  —
https://hearyetherod.wordpress.com/2013/01/13/the-codes-whats-the-facts/

When we start to understand the new code situation we MUST look at it first and foremost from the point of authorization. After all the divine injunction to publish inspiration is a directive by our Lord, it is not happenstance or man’s private doing.

The Rod in fact declares —

“..this prophetic organ “The Symbolic Code,” proves to be the mouth piece of the Elijah message, leading hundreds of S.D.A.’s in the work of helping this message to restore the defunct and decadent institutes of the Christian religion.”(SC, vol. 2, no.9, p.2)

“This Association shall hold regular sessions at such time and place as the Executive Council shall designate by a notice published in The Symbolic Code, the official organ of the organization..” (Leviticus Tract, p.7)

We all know that brother Houteff was, according to all accounts, a meticulous and orderly man of God.  He ran the camp with order and a system. But even more so was he extremely conscientious of the Inspired works which God had laid upon him  to write and publish. This we all can agree to.

In the Rod brother Houteff was asked about the subject of what to believe and teach.

WHAT IS MEANT BY “THAT WHICH IS PUBLISHED”?

Question No. 133:

   “The Symbolic Code” says: “Teach only that which is published.” Will you please explain whether this restriction is Intended to include Bible, Spirit of Prophecy, and “The Shepherd’s Rod” literature, all together, or just the  writings of the “Rod”?

Answer:

   The Bible and the books of the Spirit of Prophecy being the sole source of The Shepherd’s Rod message, therefore when the Rod is taught, the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy are taught. And since none but the Spirit of Truth who transmitted  the mysteries of Inspiration can interpret them, then those who attempt to teach them without  this Inspired interpretational authority inevitably fall into the forbidden practice of private interpretation (2 Pet. 1 :20)–the great evil which has brought Christendom into its present almost-boundless state of schism and consequent confusion, strife, and impotency.

   As we dare not follow in such a path, we must therefore, as teachers of The Shepherd’s Rod (the official publications of the Davidian Seventh-day Association), teach only in the light of the Rod those passages which in one way or another need to be interpreted. Thus only will all Present-truth believers ever become of the same mind, seeing eye to eye and speaking the same things (1 Cor. 1:10; 1 Pet. 3:8; Isa. 52:8).

   And such as do choose to engage in private  interpretation are respectfully asked to desist from teaching in the name of the Rod and at its expense. Let them like honest men, teach in their own names and at their own expense. (Answerer, vol. 5, p.55-56)
 

Question: “It is claimed by some that Sr. White made the statement that the Loud Cry message would come through the Review & Herald. Is there such a statement?”

   Answer: As to the claim that Sr. White said the “Loud Cry message” would come through the Review & Herald, we cannot answer authoritatively from a personal knowledge, for our acquaintance with her unpublished works is more limited than extensive, but from those unpublished writings (and they are not less than a 100) which we have had the privilege of reading, we would be led to scout the possibility of her ever having written or made such a statement. We quote what she counsels in regard to accepting just such reports:

   “And now to all who have a desire for truth I would say, Do not give credence to unauthenticated reports as to what Sr. White has done or said or written. If you desire to know what the Lord has revealed through her, read her published works. Are there any points of interest concerning which she has not written, do not eagerly catch up and report rumors as to what she has said.” — 5 T 696.

   Moreover, if the SRod is present truth, and Sr. White a true prophet, she could never have made such a statement except it had reference to the messages at that time and not now. (Vol. 1 Symbolic Code No. 8  pg. 9)

“Be absolutely certain that you are teaching according to that which is written, and not according to that which you may think should be or will some day be written. Failure to comply with this requirement will disqualify anyone as a worker in this cause.” (SC, vol. 3, no.5,6  p.14)

Notice in the top reference that only the “official publications of the Davidian Seventh-day Association” constitutes the –Shepherd’s Rod. We can thus see that nothing published without the “official” sanction of the DSDA can be part of the Rod led by the prophet only. This is plain and clear.

In the second reference we see that the Rod gives another important counsel. we are not to go by hearsay. Nothing is to be believed except it be from her “published works.” Same goes for the Rod principal no doubt.

Here we have to point out that it is well known that Ellen White gave instructions that upon her death they were free to publish her works in the files that had not yet been published. The Rod definitely did not have those instructions given by brother Houteff concerning publishing any of the file reports upon his death! This is an important point to remember.

So in order to get to the bottom of this authorization question we must look at Florence Houteff.

All who have studied the historical accounts , know that Florence decided on the very next day after VTH’s death to call a council meeting! This alone should raise all kinds of red flags. Can we even think about a non-Christian spouse doing something like this?? Let alone a supposed member of the group known as the highest light bearers in the world, a very inner circle member of the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists??

No brethren we cannot truly fathom such a thing. This should let us know that some spirit other than God’s was leading! To lose your spouse unexpectedly of almost 20 years and then the very next day call a business meeting, to discuss among other things your future compensation is truly disturbing on all accounts. Yet  this is what the Davidian  Association found itself in upon the prophet’s death.

Instead of the man who was to lead the association, E.T. Wilson, being at the helm, we had a power driven, controlling woman take the helm. Thus from that point on the “official” title and purpose  of the association was called into question. The only existing DSDA group was now led by an truly unofficial leader, who took the leadership by hook and crook.

“God’s people should ever be on the alert for the voice of the Spirit of Christ, as well as be on guard to discern the spirit of Satan.” (Tract 15, p.84)

With this historical back drop, we can then look at her moves that led to the publication of the new codes. Among her first public declarations came in the new codes.

Vol. 10 The Symbolic Code No. 7

Vol. 10 No. 7

MAY, 1955

AN UNPUBLISHED LETTER OF INTEREST

Printed May, 1955

[USA MAP PICTURE]

 

INTRODUCTION

  The following excerpts from a letter written in 1932 by Brother V.T. Houteff to a Seventh-day Adventist Elder is being published at this time not only because of some early historic facts it contains, but also because of its other statements of interest. (By way of explanation, we point out that the letter was written after The Shepherd’s Rod, Vol. 1 was printed but before Vol. 2 came.) 

We highlighted in red an important part of her new code writings. An admission that what she was about to publish was “unpublished” by the prophet while he was alive. So this fact is established that she, Florence Houteff (along with her handpicked council) now decided to make known and publish all that “she” wanted published. In other words authorization of publishing the new codes laid with Florence Houteff and her council.

Established also is the numerous new codes where she and/or council members added to the new codes with their own words, supposed facts and truths as they saw it!  Now brethren how can we truly accept this mix and match? Part Inspired and part not? No wonder Mother can have a field day when they decide to check out these new codes,  fodder indeed! Truth and error declared as–Truth!

For one of the clearest and most blatant of these additions is the following —

“Brother Houteff made the remarks concerning the possibility of trouble coming to the church after the sealing of the saints and before the slaughter of Ezekiel 9. And if so what the results would be and why. Since Revelation 11 has more recently been unfolded before us, we should be able to see that it is not just a possibility, but rather a fact and an approaching reality that trouble is coming to the church before the slaughter of Ezekiel 9. None therefore need to be ignorant concerning what we must now be doing about it.” (SC, vol. 11, no.7, introduction)

As many have noticed, who says it’s a “fact and approaching reality that trouble is coming to the church before the slaughter of Ezekiel 9….Since Revelation 11 has more recently been unfolded before us”?

What? “a fact and approaching reality”?  Meaning that Revelation 11, specifically the 42 months had “more recently been unfolded before us” ?? Clearly an agenda was set in motion brethren and it came to a head with the knock out blow (April 22, 1959) Florence and her council mixing error with Inspired Truth.

Let us look at another startling example. In 11 SC, vol. 8 , it begins with —

“God has revealed the forty-two-month prophecy to us for no other purpose than that we be made to realize that we individually have no time in cleaning ourselves up with the provisions He has given us, no time to lose in getting our divinely-appointed work done in the church…”

The above was added to the Golden Bowl! Yes, Florence Houteff’s words
“God has revealed the forty-two-month prophecy to us”  is an outright lie brethren yet some accept it as part of the Bowl! The Blue Book has it right there for Mother to read!

Why do we accept Florence Houteff’s words in the Bowl when she was not a prophetess of God? Please explain that to us. Why should we not start adding , for example, Waco or Mt. Dale’s recent Code articles as well? We all know that would be ridiculous, why is it any different with Florence Houteff?

The Lord, remember through brother Houteff said ,”“The Symbolic Code,” proves to be the mouth piece of the Elijah message”. Anything written in this “INSPIRED” mouth piece of the message –MUST BE INSPIRED! Thus the new codes have Florence Houteff and/or her council writing in It!  Can we accept that and not say they are tainted?? Cmon brethren let’s be real about this.

“Since we are in constant contact with the Lord’s headquarters, we are able to give you firsthand information, not hearsay, concerning the things on which you need truthful and concrete intelligence… I am sure you believe the Bible prophets not because of what they personally were, but because of what they wrote through inspiration.  Why not do the same with the “Rod”?  Why do you try to judge it by gossip and hearsay?” (Jezreel Letter, no. 7, p.1-2)

Was that communication line cut upon the death of brother Houteff? It was not because the “original writings” through the authorized publications by VTH still speak to us but certain individuals such as Florence Houteff did indeed attempt to cut it for the sake of their private agenda. History clearly bears this out.

Can we think that anyone can put “oil” –truth into the Golden Bowl at their discretion, especially  without any documentation showing the prophet authorizing such addition after his death? At least our S.D.A brethren have such authorization IN WRITING from our prophetess. We as Davidian SDA have nothing except to trust in Florence Houteff.

It would be one thing if we had manuscripts, notes , or card files of ALL disputed codes for PROOF and to allay the doubts but we do not. All we have is implicit trust of someone who proved herself untrustworthy from the very first day of brother Houteff’s death. Think this through brethren. What leap of illogical faith this takes!

In closing, we cannot accept the private authorization by Florence Houteff/her council of these new codes because the Lord works with Truth and not deception, falsehood and private agendas. Let all those who want the Truth stay clear of these new codes and stand on the original published writings of the prophet–published by the prophet. Then we know we stand firm upon the Rock of Truth.

Trent Wilde a “Prophet”?

30 Jun

Recently we came across a very sincere and frankly well presented video concerning the Sabbath School lessons. The husband and wife were clear and understandable. They went over the quarterly and pointed out certain aspects and compared them to SOP and the Rod. So far so good, right? Not quite.

You see they are Branch Davidians. We all know the difference of the BDSDA and the DSDA–BIG difference! Yet, despite this I was impressed with the presentation, so the Spirit moved me to reach out to them in the hopes of bringing to their attention something they may not be fully aware of. At least we should try. Please pray for brother Ed and sister Mary.

Their YouTube video —

 

So we watched the video and noticed that they kept saying “we must have a living prophet in our midst.” This obviously threw up alarm bells and hence we reached out to them in a form of question. We asked them to address the following —

“Behold, I will send My messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Me: and the Lord, Whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.” Mal. 3:1.

The promise here is that the Lord will send a messenger, and as the fourth chapter of Malachi is but a continuation of the story in the third, we are there told that the messenger is antitypical Elijah (Mal. 4:5), the one who is “to restore all things” (Matt. 17:11) and Inspiration of a later addition, and in a special message to the Seventh-day Adventist ministry warns: “Prophecy must be fulfilled. The Lord says: ‘Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.’ Somebody is to come in the spirit and power of Elijah, and when he appears, men may say: ‘You are too earnest, you do not interpret the Scriptures in the proper way. Let me tell you how to teach your message.'” — “Testimonies to Ministers,” pp. 475, 476.

There are two main points to note in these quotations: (1) that the message and messenger here mentioned are the very last; (2) that they are to restore all things, (3) that there is danger for some to make fools of themselves by daring to tell him how to teach his message — assuming to take God’s place!” (JL, vol. 9, p,.1-2)

We haven’t as yet received a response. But we did get some information prior when we asked if they had a specific name of a “prophet” in our midst. They responded “Trent Wilde”.

Trent has been around for a while, starting out as accepting the Rod, then not satisfied he became enamored with Ben Roden and the Branch teachings. He later followed Doug Mitchell, including calling him also a prophet.The following shows Trent’s idea of the progression of “prophets” after brother Houteff.

1) Victor Houteff

2) Ben Roden

3) Lois Roden

4) Doug Mitchell

5) Trent Wilde

http://www.bdsda.com/authors/

Notice that Trent is not shy in showing himself in his coveted list. This obviously implies that “he” is the current living prophet in our midst. This bold statement is a departure from our well known prophet and prophetess, as they NEVER declared themselves a prophet. It was left for the people to make that decision. Not so with Trent, he wants you to see his name and place among the prophets.

This is Trent’s idea of the “progression of truth”, the Lord’s mouthpieces down to today.  When we say “prophet” we of course mean it in the truest sense of the word — those called of God to give a specific message to His people, the church.

We as present truth believers know that the Bible is our first bedrock of Truth, our first “go to” book from the Lord. Thus, let us now look at the folly of declaring Trent Wilde a prophet.

First, the Lord does not do anything unless He reveals it to His prophets —

“Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” (Amos 3:7)

So in order to know that the Lord will show us the way to the kingdom we must know who is “to come” as said in the Bible, our solid bedrock of Truth. Ok fair enough. Where are we to find the one and only promise to send someone in the last days? Exactly–Malachi 4:5.

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD.”

It is a fact as can be seen, that the Lord promises ONE man, a prophet, to come in the end times. This should be obvious to all yet Satan does what he does. We remember in the very beginning when God told Adam and Eve they would die if they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Satan then came along and said something opposite — you shall NOT die.

In other words the clear simple straight words of God were made of no effect and told that they don’t mean what they say –twisting!

SOP and the Rod gives us great counsel on reading specific words and taking them for what they say.

“The language of the Bible should be explained according to it’s obvious meaning, unless a symbol or figure is employed.” (Great Controversy, p.598).

“..as there are no useless words in either of the writings, those who desire to know the truth must carefully mark every word, otherwise they will never comprehend the truth and, as a consequence, they will be driven by the winds as the waves of the sea until the winds cease blowing (probation closes), and they be left to sink down in their sins as do the waves in the sea.” (SC, vol. 2, no.7-8, p.10)

“Hold not to what fabricated ideas seem to make the Scriptures say, but grip tenaciously to what the Word, in simplicity, plainly says.”(Tract 10, p.13)

So when the Lord said He’d send one Elijah, should we rise up and tell the Lord He meant  two, three, four or eight?? People like Trent do. Of course Trent does not say he is another Elijah, but he says he’s another prophet coming in the last days. Ok, show in the Scriptures another after Elijah. Does not exist.

To further solidify this “one” aspect of the Elijah to come we again review Testimonies to Ministers, page 475 —

“Prophecy must be fulfilled. The Lord says: ‘Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.’ Somebody is to come in the spirit and power of Elijah, and when he appears, men may say: ‘You are too earnest, you do not interpret the Scriptures in the proper way. Let me tell you how to teach your message.'”

The word “he” is not to be made as “they”. Otherwise our all knowing Lord would have spoken through sister White telling her to place the they instead of the he. Simple and God’s solid Word! Trent strikes out a second time.

The Lord’s Rod “restores” this idea of “one” and goes further with the words “very last”, showing that all who understand basic English have no excuse. The words very last cannot be misconstrued.

There are two main points to note in these quotations: (1) that the message and messenger here mentioned are the very last; (2) that they are to restore all things, (3) that there is danger for some to make fools of themselves by daring to tell him how to teach his message — assuming to take God’s place!” (JL, vol. 9, p,.1-2)

Ah, so here we have DEEP and powerful straight truths. “the message and the messenger here mentioned are the very last”. 

You see brethren there is common false teaching methods called “slice and dice”, “mix and match”, and “pick and choose”. What Trent and all the other false usurpers do is slice and dice the words “very last”. They turn it into “not very last” just as Satan turned “die” into “will not die”. Satan still has his same method of twisting!

So this brings Trent’s ideas to strike three. He cannot play the card that says he is another prophet with a message from God because God has already said the Rod from brother Houteff is the “very last”.

But Wilde has a wild imagination. He cunningly teaches that the Rod Itself has more light (ie. from another prophet- himself) to tell people. No matter what references he tries to mix and match he will still come head on with the following —

“To re-emphasize the fact, let it be said again that BEING THE LAST OF THE PROPHETS ELIJAH IS, therefore, the only one who can open to our understanding all the prophecies of the Scriptures pertaining to the great and dreadful day of the Lord — prophecies which heretofore have been only mysteries to all.  Thus he is, as the Scriptures say, to blow the trumpet in Zion, and to sound an alarm in God’s holy mountain, in the church.”(GCS, P.19)

Here the Lord makes a pivotal connection —  Elijah = last prophet. So Wilde is struck down in his idea that another prophet is to come showing more light from the Rod.

“However, I would remind you, Brethren, that no prophet of God has ever been welcomed by the church.  On the contrary, each in his time was rejected, abused, and most of them were martyred by the ones to whom they were sent — the very ones who were supposed to be serving God!  Indeed, the Lord Himself paid the same price.  For this very reason we must remember that when the last prophet comes he will have the greatest opposition to meet, for Satan well knows that if he loses now, he loses forever.  What makes Elijah’s work especially hard is that Christendom has long been drilled in the idea that no prophet is to come, that there is no necessity for one, that it has enough revealed Truth to carry it inside the Pearly Gates.” (GCS, p.6)

Once again we see that Elijah is “last prophet” that comes.

Thus the last prophet is shown to be Elijah thus cancelling any idea that another is to come after Elijah. Either we believe God’s word or we don’t. Sadly Trent’s followers are all snared inside his twisted web of deceit, slicing and dicing, mixing and matching, picking and choosing.

We are aware of his attempt to explain the words “last” as spoken in the Rod. We saw his two videos on this subject. Predictably,  he does not address the above clear text (JL, no. 9, p.1). Most likely because the words “very last” doesn’t fit into his agenda. However it doesn’t matter this would surely be diced up as well anyway. Water off a duck’s back to be sure!

One of Trent’s main points in the video is that SOP called the third angel’s message  “last”  and according to Wilde it’s not, and as such we are guilty of doing the same thing  in calling the Rod message last, hence why not believe that God has another message after the Rod just as SOP had another message of the Rod after It? The precedent is set, right? The following reference is used —

The third angel of Revelation 14 is represented as flying swiftly through the midst of heaven crying:”Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Here is shown the nature of the work of the people of God. They have a message of so great importance that they are represented as flying in the presentation of it to the world. They are holding in their hands the bread of life for a famishing world. The love of Christ constraineth them.

This is the last message. There are no more to follow, no more invitations of mercy to be given after this message shall have done its work. What a trust! What a responsibility is resting upon all to carry the words of gracious invitation: “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” (Testimonies, vol. 5, p.206-207)

When is the third angel’s message over and the word “last” apply? When it — “shall have done it’s work”! Trent once again mis-interprets God’s word. So as the Rod teaches, it’s the 4th angel combined with the third angel and that message is not yet over but will be the — last. The contextual understanding is clearly showed by the fact that SOP already showed that  the Elijah would have a message that he would bring! SOP was also one step ahead of Trent Wilde.

The Lord was aware of these impostors, we know from the Zech. 4 symbolism that TWO pipes come to produce oil (interpret prophecies) to fill the Golden Bowl, and the seven tubes (ministry) gives us the candlesticks (members of His remnant church) our God inspired interpretations. There is not three or four or eight pipes drawing oil out like Trent wants us to believe.

We could go on and on showing how God’s Word destroys his house of sand but brethren you see that unless we are child like and take God’s word for what it simply and clearly says–we shall be snared as well!

Trent has dug down deep in his own understanding of being an exalted prophet of God. He has already made public the understanding of the Seven Thunders as mentioned in Rev. 10:4. Yet the Rod declares —

“..since the Seven Thunders are not recorded, the truth of them cannot be revealed by interpretation, for there is nothing written of them, and therefore nothing to interpret from.  If, then, we are ever to know the truth of the Seven Thunders, it is to be shown to us perhaps by the same means as The Revelation was shown to John.” (TG, vol. 2, no.15, p.4)

Did we catch that? “ cannot be revealed by interpretation, for there is nothing written of them, therefore nothing to interpret from”. So who’s lying here? The Rod says we cannot know the Seven Thunders by interpretation, and Trent Wilde says we can know them. If you want to see it for yourselves click here —

Trent Wilde is well read in the message yet woefully short sighted on the Truth and simplicity of God’s word, which makes him a perfect tool for that other voice we are warned about —

“..one’s only safety will be in the teaching of Elijah, for there will be no other voice of timely Truth and authority to whom one may turn.  Any others will lead their victims blind-folded into perdition.” (GCS, p.8)

In closing let us humble ourselves and , like children, know that the Lord’s Word is not hard to discern and can be understood easily and plainly. His Word says ONE PROPHET to come and that is Elijah, who rests in his grave awaiting that final call, amen.

“The language is plain, and the thoughts and sentiments are marked with the greatest simplicity. The poor, the unlearned, the most simple-minded, can understand them…” (Testimonies, vol. 5, p.254)

Study with desire to know everything but never allow the hidden things to cause doubts about the things that are made plain.”  (Symbolic Code, Vol. 2, no. 5-6)