Looking at Bro. Stanford’s New Codes Report (Part 2 of 5)

In our last post,  we ended with the issue of witnesses and bro. Stanford’s summation that their were supportive witnesses. And yes there were, however there were a sizable non-supportive group of DSDA who did not go along with them.

Next we see BS (bro. Stanford) make the point–

“Shall we now more than 50 years later allow a non-witness to rob us of these priceless treasures because he cannot harmonize them to his satisfaction, or be one who may actually have another agenda?”

He suggests that because those who disagree with the often confusing, contradictory and false private predictions of the New Codes may have an “agenda”, we sure would like to know what that agenda is? Is it to disrupt Davidia? Is it to mount the judgment seat with this issue to exalt self and our causes?

We do not believe those who stand against them have a desire to anything but “get it straight” and stand upon the more sure word, the Rock of Jesus.

Personally speaking, we do not have an “agenda”, rather we WANT THE TRUTH and only want It proclaimed among us.  So rather than claim those who dis-agree with the New Codes may have an agenda, how about trying to see it through the fact that many DSDA are “studying for themselves” in order to be approved and discovering way too many areas of compromise within them?

“Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” ( 2 Tim. 2:15)

What the enemy did to Seventh Day Adventist through infiltrators, as reflected in this scripture, (see 1 Answerer p. 70), don’t you think that he will try to do to Davidians (rob and spoil us of our precious truth through sophistry or other means)? Shall we not be on guard? The prophet warns us: “Teach the message as it is—add nothing to it, neither take anything from it. …”

Please let us be aware that there are several ways of taking away from God’s word. One of the most subtle and hence, more dangerous, is to take away the effect of his Word by casting doubt on its authenticity. Let us be wise like the Bereans and know that some of the most dangerous enemies of the Message are it’s pretended friends.

Did you know that according to brother Stanford, you are considered a “most dangerous enemy of the Message” and linked with the likes of Florence Houteff, Ben Roden, etc, because you don’t believe in the New Codes? Did you known that once we start an honest discussion about the truthfulness of these Codes, and share and express our doubts and concerns, we are “casting doubt on its authenticity.”?

Right here we can see that BS truly needs to humble himself in prayer and cease from the exalted judgment seat. Thankfully we know God is raising up people right now within Mt. Dale who are challenging this long-held and neglected area of the compromised New Codes.

Let us remember this goes both ways. Those who are at the diametrically opposite position of Stanford, those who condemn those who believe in them, likewise are mounters of the judgment seat. We’ll discuss this more at the end of our series, in our summary. Let us continue.

Apparent Contradictions in Old and New Codes

In this next section of BS’s report he starts by showing how even the Bible, Rod and SOP can be made to contradict itself. Of this we agree and among his quotes he uses is —

“Those who have not been in the habit of searching the Bible for themselves, or weighing evidence, have confidence in the leading men, and accept the decisions they make; and thus many will reject the very messages God sends to His people, if these leading brethren do not accept them.” — Gospel Workers, p. 303; Testimony to Ministers, pp. 106, 107.

One thing we note here is that the very quote BS uses should be carefully studied and applied unto himself. By that we mean that as one of the main leaders of Mt. Dale, he has a responsibility to “get it straight” on this subject because he is one of the more vocal leaders and often leads out in some of their projects as evidenced by being the pro-Code spokesman for the Mt. Dale’s last session.

After several examples of Scriptural, SOP, and Rod “apparent” contradictions, BS then goes on to explain  how harmony is found within with the New Codes and original Codes.

Now let us seek for “the underlying harmony” in the apparent contradictions.

TIME OF JACOB’S TROUBLE.
There are references showing that Jacob’s time of trouble is after Ezekiel 9,the
purification of the church. There are also evidences and types to show that there will be a time of trouble for Jacob with his brother Esau before the purification.

So is there really a problem? In reality no. Jacob will have trouble “before and behind”, before the purification and after the purification. Now let us examine these harmonious positions.

Here we agree. This is plain to those who study the Rod. In other words, there appears a double application, although not named as such in the Rod. Although we as DSDA must go by the “pillars” of our faith the –-Fundamental Beliefs. Our primary application here (after Ezek. 9). We would never think to insert a stick for a pillar, trying to use some supposed references from the Rod as paramount to the FB’s timeline.  

The following references establish that on his way home to Palestine, Jacob will have trouble: 2TG #10, 29-31; FB 12,13; 2SC #9:6; 2SC #1:9-10;10SC#8:4;11SC #1:13; 13SC #1,2:10.” Since no one questions these–(trouble for Jacob after Ezekiel 9), we need not elaborate on this. 

But here are other points to consider, which though on the surface contradictory, are in reality evidence of good underlying accord. Let us look at 1Tr. p. 38,39; and 11 SC 7:8-9.

We will also compare the two statements one from the Old Code or literature and the other from the so-called “New Codes”.

“After the sighing and crying ones were marked (which is not to be understood as
being consummated in its entirety worldwide before the slaying follows anywhere), the slaughter completed, and the matter reported, the Lord “spake unto the man clothed with linen, and said, Go in between the wheels even under  the cherub, and fill thine hand with coals of fire from between the cherubims, and scatter them over the city.” Ezek. 10:2.

Notice the point of focus in this paragraph: “which is not to be understood as being consummated in its entirety worldwide before the slaying follows anywhere”. This is in perfect harmony with the statement expressed in 11SC 7: 8-9. (Blue Book 591). “You notice here that the angels are not told to hold the winds until Ezekiel 9 has all been fulfilled, but until the servants of God are sealed.”

The one statement is saying that the hurting by the angels could start before sealing is fully completed, and the other statement is saying there could be some trouble by the winds before Ezekiel 9. Now the problem only comes if we mark out an EXACT time line for each event as though there could be no blending or overlapping.

Important Counter point -BS’s mis-read of the text.

Stanford explains the first of his underlying harmonious discrepancies. Let’s review and re-read an important part of 1 Tract, p.38-39 reference.

“After the sighing and crying ones were marked(which is not to be understood as
being consummated in its entirety worldwide before the slaying follows anywhere)…”

Note: The marking is not to be understood as being completed (consummated) in entirety BEFORE the slaying (of Ezek. 9) starts (anywhere). What BS has done is mis-read the text! He has taken liberty to say “the slaying” as being a different slaying apart from Ezek. 9.

How do we notice this? Because the CONTEXT shows us only ONE slaying it speaks about –Ezek. 9. Further we see that the marking (sealing) is the main point here and shows us that  the marking will be consummated ONLY AT THE EZEK. 9 EVENT.  Not before this.

This one reference actually proves BS’s whole idea–wrong. Because he and those in agreement with the New Codes all teach that there will be an “intervening time”. In other words, the sealing is completed before Ezek. 9 , which Inspiration just said won’t happen(“not to be understood as being consummated”).

Read the whole context–

“And it came to pass, while they were slaying them, and I was left, that I fell upon my face, and cried, and said, Ah Lord God! wilt Thou destroy all the residue of Israel in Thy pouring out of Thy fury upon Jerusalem?  Then said He unto me, The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great,…and as for Me also, Mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity.” Ezek. 9:8-10.

   After the sighing and crying ones were marked (which is not to be understood as being consummated in its entirety worldwide before the slaying follows anywhere), the slaughter completed, and the matter

Tract 1                            38

reported, the Lord “spake unto the man clothed with linen, and said, Go in between the wheels even under the cherub, and fill thine hand with coals of fire from between the cherubims, and scatter them over the city.” Ezek. 10:2.

When we take the reference in context we obviously see that the slaying mentioned is the slaughter of Ezek. 9, not some  different slaying added by private interpretation. BS’s idea is certainly showing a mis-read of the text.

The following shows where the New Code believers get this idea of hurting or slaying by the angels prior to Ezek. 9 —

“You notice here that the angels are not told to hold the winds until Ezekiel 9 has all been fulfilled, but until the servants of God are sealed.  Therefore, if there is any intervening time between the close of the sealing and the slaughter of Ezekiel 9, there is a possibility that the winds could start blowing during that time.  If the nations had everything ready, it would not necessarily take long to bring the trouble that is represented by the four winds.

We do know from this scripture that God will restrain the winds until the sealing is finished, for according to verse 3 of this chapter a message was sent to the four angels instructing them to hold the winds until the sealing of the 144,000 is finished.  It shows that the Devil is doing all he can to loose the winds as soon as possible, perhaps even in a day.” (11 SC, no. 7, p.8)

Do we see why there is real discrepancies in the New Codes versus the original?  This is but one example of the contradictions that yours truly, along with many others, believe Florence Houteff/and or her hand-picked council attempted to put into the Golden Bowl!

Here is another point to consider. The fear factor

Why would Jacob be exceedingly afraid as projected in Jeremiah 30:5-8 “every man with his hands on his loins as a woman in travail”, if Ezekiel 9 has already passed and he consequently knows that he is alive and therefore sealed and cannot die?

Why would he be afraid if he is already sealed to be part of the 144,000 who cannot die, for nothing can take his life? In short, why would the sealed and protected (144,000) be terribly afraid? It would only make sense if this takes place BEFORE Ezekiel 9, when they are not sure who is sealed. Why should they be frightened, knowing that they are sealed and cannot die?

This is nothing more than doubting in the Rod because as we will see it is the ROD who places Jer. 30:5-8 in the time of “returning to the homeland”. Let us carefully read the reference —

We QUOTE from 1 TG 47:14-15

Jer. 30:7 — “Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the
time of Jacob’s trouble, but he shall be saved out of it.”

“The people that have come to this antitypical time of trouble are returning to
the homeland, are comforted. Apparently it is bad enough to frighten all, but
God’s encouraging counsel is, “Fear not.” Plainly, the burden of this chapter is concerning the antitypical returning to the homeland. Though terrible the trouble may seem, yet the outcome of it is to be the same as in the type.

Right now we may not appreciate this study as we ought to, but the time is soon coming in which we will dig as fast and as hard for it as we would to get out from under an avalanche. Those who have but little faith in the Word of God though, the study will not do them much good. Now is the time to start cultivating the faith we need to have then.”

Some questions on this same point:

“Would there be any persons of the 144,000 (the escaped ones), with “little faith in the Word of God”after the sealing and Ezekiel 9? Would not this have to be before?

Once again these questions cast doubt upon the clear word of God. Re-read the text again.“Plainly, the burden of this chapter is concerning the antitypical returning to the homeland.”

Is pre-Ezekiel 9 “returning to the homeland” timeline?

Also, after Ezekiel 9, why would the 144,000 who are sealed, safe, delivered from the slaughter and protected, need to be fearfully digging “as fast and as hard for it [this study] as we would to get out from under an avalanche.” This would only make sense in their trouble BEFORE Ezekiel 9, does it not? Consider also in the following quote, the emphasis and significance of the word “before”.

Private doubts are cast again upon the Rod. Let us stand  firm on the Rod and not be taken and snared  by presumptuous and salacious questions such as these. If God said it, it will come to pass, that is all we need to know. Are we to know all details and purposes? No, that is why our “faith” in the word “as it reads” is paramount.

….To be continued in Part three.

Looking at Bro. Stanford’s New Codes Report (Part 1 of 5)

As we continue our series of the New Code debate, due to the fact that we were thrust into it by Mt. Dale using our blog here as a counterpoint to their official stance on these Codes, we decided to look closely at brother Errol Stanford’s report in support of these Codes. This report seems to be the official or at least the latest one on the  New Codes.

It is quite a lengthy report but we shall address the major points he makes. Following the heels of our last report showing that Florence Houteff had the motive and means (New Codes) to complete her scheme to clean out the store, so to speak, we can segue into Stanford’s report and by God’s grace see if it stands upon the “more sure word” and is solid. In other words is it “Logical” and compiled by a “Close Reasoner” as the Rod would say?

To be sure, after reviewing this report, Stanford appears quite dogmatic in his stance. This makes Mt. Dale certainly more uneasy as they have several (and some high ranking) members who do not share this report’s viewpoint. The sources we speak to share many of other brethren’s viewpoint that this Code issue cannot be used as a “Thus sayeth the Lord” due to the many compromises proven.

We do not want to say a mutiny is coming but we see that this issue MUST come  to some solidified official stance and it cannot be the same old same old. Times have changed with more brethren all across Davidia coming into more facts and historical understanding of this issue. As we mentioned before, the first and one of the best, in our opinion, report exposing this issue was from Lennox Sam and Michael Graham’s report. Other brethren have posted helpful reports as well since then exposing the situation. This has now finally come into Mt. Dale’s lap, and by God’s providence it will be set  straight.

Our prayer is that the Spirit of Truth will have His way with us —

“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; He will speak only what He hears, and He will tell you what is yet to come.” (John 16:13)

Let us begin.  (His words will be in green)

CAN THE NEW CODES (PUBLISHED AFTER 1955) BE VALIDATED?

“There are a few persons today who are questioning the authenticity of the sermon Codes published after bro. Houteff’s death in 1955. (From 10 Symbolic Code # 7 to 13 Symbolic Codes, #’s 11, 12). They claim that they may not be genuine because they were published after his death and there are apparent contradictions between the earlier published works by the prophet himself and those of his sermons/writings published afterwards. Can the New Codes be substantiated? It is the purpose of this article to address these important questions and issues.”

Stanford begins by trying to minimize this issue “a few persons”. No, it is not a “few persons” brother Stanford–it is ALOT of persons. Here we can gain his mindset showing that the issue according to him is simply a greater belief in Davidia vs. the tiny few. While it may be that more believe in the authenticity, that number is shrinking and the opposing view is gaining as more facts come to the surface via electronic media today.

Now what does the word “publish” mean? For maximum objectivity we shall consult an official English dictionary. Let us take the Miriam Webster dictionary, for example. Here the word is defined.

a) To make generally known
b) To disseminate to the public
c) To make public announcement
d) To produce or release for distribution, print
e) To issue the work of an author.

From the above official dictionary definition we see that the word “publish” is NOT limited to the printing press. Consequently, when the prophet preaches a sermon before a congregation or group of persons, it harmonizes perfectly with the dictionary mean of “publish” –making known/ announcing, etc.

The first official  point Stanford tries to make is that the “world’s” interpretation of the word “publish” should be used to clarify God’s word and It’s meaning, yes unbelievable as it sounds. Then by the same token why don’t we look up “Woman” in the dictionary for the word “Woman” in Revelation, doesn’t that make common sense? Now brethren this is truly an illogical stretch here. His first point seriously misses the mark.

The ONLY way we can get the correct interpretation of the word “publish” is by review  of how the Rod makes use of that word! Stanford or anyone else can never show one reference from the Rod showing anything other than the meaning “published” meaning the Rod writings. For solid proof  see 1 SC- no. 8, p.8, 1 SC- no.7, p.5,6, 3 SC- no.5-6, p.14 and 2 SC -no.12, p.11. This is the Rod’s viewpoint and interpretation of “published” and not a private man’s view using a “foreign standpoint”.

“The most common cause of doctrinal confusion among Bible students lies in their so very frequently failing to view a subject in full perspective from the writer’s point of view, — a failing which results in their seeing it from some foreign standpoint so narrowing their view that instead of gaining the writer’s idea on the subject, they gain a false idea on it.” (Tract 3, p.91)

At this point we’d like to show a very interesting dialogue from brother Houteff and long time S.D.A pioneer M.L. Andreasen.

“The most satisfactory part of the interview concerned the matter for which the interview had been sought: that of confirmation on his part the public statements published in the two volumes of the “Shepherd’s Rod” were still his belief and teaching.

I mentioned that it was often the case that a man in his early published views, made statements that he would later gladly retract, and that this might be the case with him. If this were so, I would like to know, for I did not wish to use anything that he later repudiated.

On this matter he was certain. He turned to me and said: “We do not work that way. We do not claim that the words are inspired but the idea is. We do not change our teaching, and have not done so. What is published we still stand by and always will.” (Letter by Gen. conf.field secretary from M.L. Andreasen, Dec. 25, 1942)

Here we see that VTH and Andreasen showed the mutual understanding of “published” and that is the –writings. What VTH stands by is the written published word.

It is clear Stanford needs to make this leap of mental gymnastics to lay one of his foundational pillars for believing in the New Codes. But we can see this first point is not well grounded.

At the point we want to present several solid reasons/evidences why the sermon Codes are trustworthy, scriptural and genuine sermons of Bro. Houteff and then we will address the apparent contradictions and show the underlying harmony. Here are solid facts to consider:

1. The sermons constituting the so called “New Codes” were presented (published) by Bro. Houteff on the specific dates given before many believers as witnesses. And now we have seen the English dictionary has validated sermons as being included in the word “published”.

2.         Bro. Houteff’s sermons were usually reproduced verbatim (word for word) by
designated persons, or written by himself for presentation, and found in his card files.

3. Thus to question the reliability of memories to reproduce the sermons is not valid; there was no question of depending on persons’ memories. You only had to consult the card files.

4. These sermons were published shortly after Bro. Houteff’s death while many of the members and witnesses who heard the sermons were alive and could readily identify with what was preached by the prophet.

5. There is not a single record of any of the numerous brethren on Mt. Carmel and elsewhere, making the slightest protest concerning the genuineness of these sermons or even insinuating that they were changed, when they were published.

6. They were not printed 10, 20, 30 or 40 years after his death. Praise God! They were published very shortly after his death, some even the very next year. To repeat, most of those who heard these specific sermons were alive and able to verify. But best of all the sermons had been written, and not just presented orally.

7. Some of the sermons like “The latter-day confederacy” were presented more than once by bro. Houteff. See 13 SC # 2,3. Thus there were double records in his card files.

The bible says:
“…. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.(2 Cor. 13:1-3)

Now since the Bible tells us, “in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established.” Shall we not follow this biblical principle? Yes, the Bible is always right. Some of these witnesses like Bro. Don Adair, are still alive. Besides we have had several older Caucasian brethren who were part of Waco and heard Bro. Houteff’s sermons, etc, brethren who have been in Mt. Carmel New York, HQ for many years, and there never was the slightest doubt about the genuineness of these sermons. Shall we now more than 50 years later allow a non-witness to rob us of these priceless treasures because he cannot harmonize them to his satisfaction, or be one who may actually have another agenda?

Here we see that Stanford attempts to make his second point or pillar of truth, that because there are witnesses that heard the sermons, they were/are legitimate for written publication. But let’s carefully dissect this view-point.

“The sermons constituting the so called “New Codes” were presented (published) by Bro. Houteff on the specific dates given before many believers as witnesses.”

In our report on a recent three-part blog post called “Let’s have thousands of home storehouses” we show that the “old timers” made use of and supported the New Codes in their reports and sessions. This is why we believe that we cannot summarily sweep aside this issue dogmatically , as some present truth believers do, and say those who do believe in them are lost. Our history proves we must each individually search this issue out and be convinced in our own mind after due diligence study.

The only TWO who we as DSDA know who are still alive and proclaiming the message are brother Don Adair and sister Bonnie Smith. However they were but children during all the sermons posted under the New Codes and can’t be relied upon for solid substantial witnesses other than describing some of the old timers views on them.

But we want to highlight something here that needs to be addressed. Yes, the early (post VTH) Davidian groups showed an acceptance of the codes back in the days after the death of VTH, but there were objectors to these codes . This part though, Stanford ignores and doesn’t address in his report. Once the evidence was clear that the New Codes were being manipulated by Florence Houteff and her hand-picked council,  to have an agenda (42 months doctrine by Florence Houteff) some of the more observant DSDA voiced their objections to them.

The objecting DSDA made it clear to FH and her council through their “protest letter” dated April 9, 1959, just days prior to the knockout blow, the following —

“..We may pardonably emphasize the fact that when the Council’s predictions and program as set forth in Codes, Vol. 14, Nos.6,8, and 9, come to naught (30th day of this April [1959] is the absolute limit of the 3 1/2 years embraced in their own pronouncement: “..we have already [November 1955] entered the period of forty-two months…” — 11 Code 1:13:3, it will be the private predictions and the private program of the new- Code and new-Carmel, not the inspired program of the ROD which will thus be denuded of integrity, discredited, and humiliated. The ROD and genuine ROD Davidians will endure to the end to finish their Heaven-ordained mission to the Church and to the world.” (Our bold highlight added)

These pioneers knew very well the manipulation of the New Codes was their vehicle, their “private program”, thus compromise and a cloud of suspicion rested clearly with FH and her council by the observant old timers in regards to their published New Code program.

….To be continued in Part two.

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 6 of 6) / Final Summary

Our last post for this series. Let us now conclude with the jewels of this important eye witness and then a final summary.

SAETHER: Right then and there what I should have said and insisted
on, was that this thing should be brought before the council and if
it could be proven we’d accept it. But, if it can’t, we’ll tell the
people there’s a mistake made. How easy that would have been compared
to what happened. Well, I didn’t know what to do about it.

McGEE: How did the other members of the council react? How did the other people here in the camp react to that? I guess they were as surprised as you were?

SAETHER: I don’t know whether they were or not because she’d
talked to me all that Friday afternoon trying to persuade me.
I couldn’t see it. What I had decided to do was go along with her.
I said to myself, “We selected this person to be the leader, the
damage has been done. The people have all received this literature.”
There was one time I was going along when it was against my nature
to do it, rather than cause a fuss. Well, I should have done it….

McGEE: All right. Then along comes this message that we’re in
the last days—”We’re in these days.” How did the people respond
to that over the next year or two?

SAETHER: I think there was division came in then, more than before.
This came out November 9, [1955].

McGEE: … Well, that happened on this Day of Days, October 25,
1955? The Rodens, you say, were back here on October 25.

SAETHER: Yes, and it was the same thing, trying to get a foothold
some way or other.

McGEE: Were they able to get a foothold?

SAETHER: Not with anybody here, I don’t think. As I recall, there
wasn’t anybody that went with them ….  those people are deceitful, those Rodens. Deceitful. They’re treacherous. Because they’re possessed of the devil.
They must be. They’ve resorted to various forms of incantation. 

Let us remember these comments were made by Saether eye witnessing evidence to make these claims. The thievery and the incantations showed a spirit not of Christ, but of the adversary. Also we are reminded of the following Scripture —

“A lone witness is not sufficient to establish any wrongdoing or sin against a man, regardless of what offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.” (Deut. 19:15)

Sister Bonnie Smith as mentioned also testified that Roden was a thief. The thing established.

McGEE: Let’s follow up on this—

SAETHER: Oh, I ought to tell you this, though, to show you the
way that they worked…We figured this way, they’re gonna come and have a sit-down
strike….We were outside and I noticed Nelda and another woman who came from California. She’s the mother-in-law of Perry Jones. She used to be one of our nice neighbors. When she came on a visit we thought a lot of her. But in that meeting
there in October—the tenth—my, she was changed altogether. You
wouldn’t think it was the same person…

I saw these two women come down this way from the south and I thought, I’ll just go over there and see what they’re up to. So they came here to this door right here, this is where my wife and I lived. We had these rooms right here. One was the spokesman and she knocked on the door, “Behold I stand at the door and knock. So you open the door.” No answer. My wife was working in the office and I was outside. “Behold your house is left unto you desolate.” You see, there was incantation. It’s from the devil. It is!

I went back to the office later on and the wind was out of their sails. They were allowed to come in the office. That is, two or three at a time. Roden was in there. He wanted to buy some charts and Hermanson asked him, “Are you prepared to pay your bill here?” When he came here as a gardener he ran quite a bill. He just ignored what he said. He didn’t pay any attention to it. I’m pretty sure that he still owes that bill. He didn’t pay it.

He volunteered to come and have an organic garden. It takes something to put a large family—to come and stay for months at a time and no income. That was his agreement but he owed this seven hundred dollars anyway, for rent and food and one thing and another. That indicates the kind of a leader they had behind them.
It’s of the devil. ..I understood that afterwards Roden claimed to be a prophet and
the leader.

 They made close to 700,000 for the selling of the land in about 1957. They kept only about 10 acres. Let us keenly focus on the following —

Saether: When we were selling this property here in Waco she sold— I’ve forgotten how many acres, herself, without any okay from the council at all. And to this day I don’t know what the price she got for it. I don’t remember and I think it wasn’t clear how much she got but I think she made a big mistake doing that. And, not only that, it was illegal. 

She didn’t have the backing of the council. That was the agreement; all the sales had to be okayed first by the council. And then the board of trustees— signed the deeds to the properties that we sold. We sold lot by lot. 

SUMMARY —

There is ample evidence to show from brother Saether’s report that two individuals stand out as the ringleaders of the apostasy that tried to infiltrate our movement that the Lord made through  brother Houteff –Florence Houteff and Ben Roden.

To a lesser degree, but no less important, was M.J. Bingham’s more cunning deceptions that would surface later on and hold a greater trouble for the Truth seekers than the prior two, because of the plausibility of Bingham’s additions to the Golden Bowl.

But Florence was shown to ultimately not be truly “converted” but rather “went along” with the movement, because when the Lord tested her (by the death of VTH), she failed miserably. Brother Houteff, under Inspiration clearly pointed this out —

“Everything that can be done against God’s message of today will be done with even a greater vengeance than was manifest against Heaven’s message in the days of Christ’s first advent, for the Devil knows that if he loses now, he loses forever — that he is to have no other chance. Unparalleled, therefore, is the urgency that every eleventh-hour church member now quickly and solidly brace himself against the Enemy’s effort to deliver a knockout blow.  We must be alert, too, to realize that the blow is to come from surprisingly unsuspected foes — from professed friends of the gospel, who are no less pious than were priests in Christ’s day.” (WHR, p.33)

As we saw , she right away began her move to undermine the movement, and also as we saw, most likely for the financial wealth she stood to gain, and ultimately did. Evidently she used the ploy to call the Lord’s hand and force the prophecy of the 42 months to happen. Knowing full well her rouse would lead to her ultimate goal of dismemberment  of the movement and gain for her and her family.

Her cunning vehicle to use to spread her ploy was –the NEW CODES! Yes, in the sacred writings of the Lord’s Rod, the Symbolic Codes, she found a way to add and subtract key areas of the message to point to her 42 month prophecy. After all, nearly all was unsuspecting that she was not a solid believer in the message (being the secretary and wife of the prophet). Thus, she had the perfect con job in place for her schemes.

For an excellent report on ONE powerful Example of the obvious additions made by Florence Houteff to the New Codes (Sixth Trumpet understanding), see the following report by Lennox Sam. As we posted before we DO NOT advocate Sam’s GADSDA organization, due to their own ideas and additions to the Golden Bowl, but we do agree with this older report on the Codes —

https://www.gadsda.com/new-codes-abomination/

(Maybe brother Errol Stanford can address this at a later date, being one of the most vocal advocates of the New Codes being Holy Spirit Inspired and promoting it as “truth”)

In regards to Ben Roden, there is no doubt that eye witnesses (at least three, bro. Don Adair, bro. Saether, and sis Bonnie Smith) saw the “real” Ben Roden and who/what he was about. And it wasn’t a Holy Spirit filled “prophet” but rather a usurper who fleeced the flock and snared many down through the years. Their current leader (Branch DSDA) being Trent Wilde , who now holds the unholy mantle and continues to spread Satan’s imitation prophetic ideas and truth.

His fruit exposed him clearly and only those who desire “truth” will know for a certain that Roden and the “Branch” teachings are Satan’s handy work.

In closing, we thank the Lord for preserving brother Saether’s report and also for inspiring Mr. McGee to investigate and get out some real Davidian history.

Here is link to read the full transcripts and audio —

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/ref/collection/buioh/id/1214

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 5 of 6) /Summary

Well brethren, what we’ve learned is truly remarkable. The prior 4 posts have shown us many , many jewels of first hand accounts regarding our main subject –Florence Houteff and Ben Roden, and their works of deception and subversion.

Both of these people are directly responsible for two of some of the biggest snares right now in our Davidian people. FH  with her “new codes”,and Ben Roden with his “feast keeping” and Branch doctrine.

As our readers know we’ve had an ongoing series regarding the new codes and their myriad of problems they possess. But if we truly follow Inspiration and “study” this issue , all should have no problem seeing the “Truth” of the matter.

“Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Tim. 2:15)

Let’s review some specific jewels that are noteworthy.

“The doctrines had been drawn up and published. His work was finished”. (Saether)
This was describing what Saether summed up on VTH’s work in 1954, while VTH ‘s health was deteriorating.

“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.”

Florence Houteff had an agenda and that was Rev.11, the anti-typical 1260 days. Convinced that VTH’s death meant something in this regard she started deciphering the literal application to apply somehow someway to their time. Unlike VTH who did not explain it, it appears Florence felt her job was to do that for her own ulterior motives.

“Mrs. Houteff said that he told her that he wanted her to be the leader… But I’ve thought since it was a big mistake. Mrs. Houteff and her brother and her mother, all in one family, all in the council. Just unthinkable. Unthinkable.”

As we know Saether and us today knew that FH pushed her way in as leader, relying on her story that brother Houteff “told her” she was to be the leader. Thus the motive and authorization rested solely with her own story. And to ensure her agenda she placed on the council her family members. Thus the coup was ready to move forward. Hijack the work done and the Lord’s Rod message.

At this point it’s noteworthy to make mention of another important issue. Some present truth believers have made a big deal that those on the council today should not be voted in, thereby making it foolish to have a legal Rod council. But VTH’s history shows us the practice they used as spoken by Saether.

” ..it was the duty of the council to fill any vacancies among the officers. The council members were to be chosen by the council. At first they were appointed by Brother Houteff. He made this suit himself. I mean—he wasn’t about to relinquish any hold on it…Then as time went on he could see that it was—didn’t take him very long then, to consider that it was necessary to have this thing on some kind of a legal basis…The way he had it, all the officers and all the council members were  to be selected by a vote of the council in session.  Except the president.”

Let’s move on to brother Bingham. This summary report is just briefly going to highlight him, as the other two were more involved in our two subjects of the New codes by FH and Branch leader apostasy of -Ben Roden. But Bingham played an important role during the knock-out period in steadying the ship, along with brother Warden.

“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… I knew he wanted to be the leader and I, for one, was determined that he wouldn’t be…

Wolfe was another candidate and I was just as opposed to him, maybe even more so. More so because, primarily, Bingham and I always got along all right. He left me alone
and I left him alone. He was always courteous to me, never discourteous…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…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—.”

This is one of the most startlingly discoveries we made. Ben Roden was, according to first hand witness brother Saether, really a foul fruit bearer. It is noteworthy to say that two other firsthand witnesses, and still living members of the old camp, Sister Bonnie Smith and Brother Don Adair back these sediments up completely. Adair’s book “A Davidian Testimony” goes much deeper into the history of Roden and his behavior and troubles in the vineyard. Sister Smith tells us of the personal story how Roden stole her parents money, with a personal promise to take them to Israel. It never came to be and the money was used elsewhere! No repentance or asking for forgiveness ever made!

“Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.” (Matt. 7:16-17)

Yes, we know the excuse that “Well Moses and even David were sinners” .True BUT they repented and went on to do powerful work for the Lord. Roden NEVER repented and yet claimed to be God’s prophet–blasphemy! Sorry God does not work that way.

” if a wicked man restores a pledge, pays back what he has taken by robbery, walks by the statutes which ensure life without committing iniquity, he shall surely live; he shall not die.” (Ezekiel 33: 15)

Back to more of FH–

McGee –“Immediately after his death was there any indication that Mrs. Houteff wanted to become the leader?”

Saether — “Well, only that she came to the council room and said that Brother Houteff had indicated that she should be the leader…I don’t think it was his idea. She might have questioned him, see… 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.

… Well—but right away we heard from Bingham. Brother Bingham thought he should be the leader. Wolfe had resigned from the council. 

Again, we see that because brother Houteff was in failing health, the vultures were circling. Ready to pounce once the prey was dead. As we’ve reviewed in entirely this interview there is no doubt that FH and her family had plans to take over and not surprisingly a big part of the those plans was– the vast property holdings Mt. Carmel had. Hundred’s of thousands of dollars maybe even a million. Now the answer to the question of motive as to why the knock out blow was formulated seems very plausible –money.

For concrete evidence of this planning Saether says–

Saether: ..If the modus operandi had changed in 1954, and maybe that’s where they got the idea that the council—the officers should meet with the council. When we came to the council meeting I was presented with a sheet of paper—and Mrs. Houteff told the very same thing that Oliver told me. Only she thought it was better to make it official so she put it in black and white that Brother Houteff had given her the idea that she should lead out in the organization—and Wolfe spoke up…I think the Hermansons were ambitious..

Brother Wolfe and others such as bro. Bingham, Warden, etc. definitely smelled a rat here and was against this coup d’etat, as brother Saether put it.

Speaking of vultures gathering, the most forceful vulture was Roden, who appeared right after VTH’s death.

SAETHER: Of 1955—that Roden came to the fore.

Moving right now to the subject of brother E.T Wilson we see from bro. Saether that probably many of us didn’t know that elder Wilson was sick and therefore not up to the job, let us read —

McGEE: Brother Wilson did not resist the idea of Mrs. Houteff being named vice president in his place?

SAETHER: He was sick at the time and I don’t know how it was that his name was by-passed. As I see it now, he was considered incompetent. I think maybe he was. There was something eating on him. He was here—right here in this building in one of these
rooms, in what we called the dispensary. We had a duplex here…He was in here as I understand it. He was not out in field work. He was here as a patient.

McGEE: Anyway, he was in no position I suppose to object to this
and as far as you know he did not object to being replaced?

SAETHER: No.

Now we move on once more to FH, showing the beginning seeds of her “prophesying” —

Saether:  ..in 1955 and Mrs. Houteff cornered me one day in the office. We closed at noon on Friday so everybody could go home and get ready for Sabbath. She cornered  me there and she talked all afternoon to me, trying to persuade me
to her idea in Revelation 11…I was courteous with her, I wasn’t rough. I should have
even made fun of it but I didn’t. She was in earnest, I thought she’d lost her mind…I thought that Mrs. Houteff was wrong but she talked all afternoon. Hour after hour. Pleading with me. Just pleading. What she should have done was taken it to the council. What she did was go to each individual in the council and talk with them about it.

That’s what she must have done because in the fall of the year we sent out a code—every month a code came out. In this code, on November 9, we opened them—we got them over at the office—they were sent out to the—that’s what was printed I think, as I recall. Fifteen hundred had been sent out to the people and there it says, “We’ve now entered these days.” When I opened it up I was dumbfounded. I knew she talked to me about it but that’s the last I heard of it. Not another word was said.

In March—it was in March that she told me this or April, March, we’ll say. April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, eight months—not a word. Not a word was said. In the council or anywhere else. It was just kept on the q,t. Then, she come out and said we’d entered these days. Hermanson was getting his mail—they were distributing the mail over in the office, to the office workers. He got his code, too, with the mail and he gave us each our code. The codes had been sent out. Taken down to the post office.

So they’d gone out to all the people. I said, “Did you see this?” “Yes.” “We’ve now entered these days, ” I said. “If we’ve entered those days they’re gonna end some day and then what?” “Well,” he says, “she wrote it. It’s her responsibility.”

Ok with undeniable proof FH is shown the sole proprietor of the infamous knockout blow prophesy. Even her own brother Oliver acknowledged it. Obviously her long study  period of about 7 or 8 months  produced her false ideas of the anti-typical 1260 day period. Her new code program was then set to facilitate her plans. Keep in mind what we have learned. This may have all have been a smoke screen to dissolve the whole thing on Mt. Carmel so she could reap the vast holdings there and get on down the road of life. Time would prove this is exactly what was done!

NOTE: Due to the continuing discovery of more information, we’ve had to add one more post to this series and we’ll post that part 6 soon.

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 4 of 6)

 

SAETHER: In the spring now, April 22, the time was supposed to end, It’d
be better to tell ’em now than to wait. While I was thinking
that, word came that I should go out, that we’d have a council
meeting. When I got there they’d already had the council meeting and
they were discussing the question—about those plagues. I could
see that it might happen. I told them when I came in, I said, 

“I just was impressed that we ought to write and tell the people
that we’re mistaken. That we made a blunder here and we want to
rectify it before that time comes. There’s still time,”
Anyway, they didn’t see it that way and they had something
else showing that these plagues would—we were causing these
plagues to the church, you see, by all this.

McGEE: When was that date established and who established it?

SAETHER: Well, we met in council meeting sometime after this.
When this was I don’t recollect.

McGEE: This would be sometime after the fall of 1955?

SAETHER: Right. After—well, “What time’s this going to end now?”
That’s what interested me. That would be the debacle, I figured.
(laughing) To go along with something like that, that was something.
Anyway, I tried to be as agreeable as possible. We decided this: that when that information went out in that code, that must have marked the day when those twenty-three hundred days— I wondered what it would be. Maybe Brother Houteff’s
death. We discussed those things. Decided that it was the day
the code went out. We weren’t all agreed on that, but I think
pretty much agreed. 

When did it happen? On the twenty-second. It was just a
happenstance. That was the Jewish Passover, came that year—
You know, that changes from year to year. The twenty-second was
the day of the Jewish Passover. Some felt that was quite significant.
Well, maybe it was.

McGEE: The tithe had gone down because I guess after 1959 there
was a good deal of disillusionment.

SAETHER: Especially after 1955. 1955 and then 1959, that was when
all the agitation by—you know, all those Branch members, they
weren’t paying tithe anymore. They paid it to Roden.  (Interview no. 8, p.383-394)

McGEE: I see. Well, let me ask you this. The date was April—

SAETHER: —22 .

McGEE: —22 . Can you describe what happened on that day?
(pause) Nothing, huh?

SAETHER: Nothing.

McGEE: Zero. (chuckling)

McGEE: You mentioned Mrs. Houteff’s apparent effort to erase this
or help people forget it. During this time—in 1959—was she
really in charge of things or was there a lack of leadership or
was someone else in charge?

SAETHER: She was in charge. Of course, she had the council and
then these young ministers, one of which was Dudley Goff. Afterwards,
subsequently, he spoke over the radio. We had several radio stations scattered all over the country. How many, I’ve forgotten. 

McGEE: As you look back on what was going on in 1959 during that period,
do you see any signs of the conflict that was later to come out
in the open and break the movement apart?

SAETHER: Well, there were upshoots or offshoots, I’ll say, of our
movement. Bingham was one of them. And Roden was another and Bashan was there from Washington, D.C, and who else? There were several there and the most aggravating was this man Roden. 

You see, he got these people out around Odessa to follow
him and I think most of them liked Brother Roden. He was a
pleasant sort of fellow. A big man. His wife was right with
him in everything he did and I thought many times that she was
the power behind the throne. What she decided, that’s the way
it went.

They came there to the meetings and I think this: that if
you were a member of the organization once and you disagree, I
think a person ought to be heard. I believe, let them voice their
opinion, not squelch it. Because that’s the treatment we received
from the mother church ourselves. But I don’t think a person
ought to come in and disrupt a meeting. I don’t think that’s
fair, either. That’s what they tried to do.

SAETHER: When the meeting was over in 1959, I had my
own opinion of the whole transaction. In fact, I was not in favor
of this meeting. And, it was really, you might say, put over, by
the vice president.
She wanted to talk to me about this doctrine that she had.
This was along in the spring of 1955. She talked all afternoon
trying to persuade me to her viewpoint and I didn’t—I wanted
to be polite;

I didn’t want to be rude and so I told her, “I can see you have a point there in regard to this not occurring in the Dark Ages but the rest of it, I don’t see it.” And she
just begged me to see it. But, I said, “No, I don’t see it.”
I thought she was losing her mind, just the way she looked
and everything. Several months later in November—we had a monthly
magazine then. The monthly magazine came out and they were passing them out with our mail and I stood and opened that up and it
says there, “We now know that we have entered these days,”
it’s Revelations 11. And my—

SAETHER: As I said, I was not in favor of it and I went along
with it. I mean, I didn’t just oppose it and I should have.
I should have put my foot right down on it because it was done
illegally. She should have brought this before the council and had it all decided. This isn’t the first time that she did something like this.

When we were selling this property here in Waco she sold—
I’ve forgotten how many acres, herself, without any okay from
the council at all. And to this day I don’t know what the price
she got for it. I don’t remember and I think it wasn’t clear
how much she got but I think she made a big mistake doing that.
And, not only that, it was illegal. She didn’t have the backing
of the council. That was the agreement;

all the sales had to be okayed first by the council. And then the board of trustees—
signed the deeds to the properties that we sold. We sold lot by lot. (Interview  no. 10, p.421-423)

In our next post we will particularly concentrate on revealing what brother Saether spoke about Florence and Roden. These two notorious historical figures that prominently made serious diversions to the Rod message, yet nevertheless It will triumph!

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 3 of 6)

Baylor University Institute for Oral History

 

Continuing with part three —

SAETHER: The thought came to me like this: if in 1954 when I
asked Brother Houteff two questions about Revelations, a book
that he had written quite a little on and talked a lot on—if
he wasn’t able to answer two simple questions about this because
he wasn’t up to par, then what dependence could you put
on his statement when he was just ready to die?

Would his word and his opinions and his judgment be better or worse  than it was say, six months before that? In 1954?

No, I tell you, I think the Hermansons were ambitious and
the first thing that was done—well I might mention this, that
Brother Bingham was dowm in the Caribbeans at the time.

McGEE: At the time of Brother Houteff’s death? 

SAETHER: Yeah, his death. He was sent a cablegram right away
that Brother Houteff had died. As I recall he came back right
away. Of course, he didn’t like the setup, (pause) As I look
back over it I don’t know what we could have done better, than
to have had Mrs. Houteff as the leader because of this rivalry
between especially Brother Bingham and Brother Wolfe. We didn’t
know anything about Roden at the time. It wasn’t until in the
fall of the year— 

McGEE: Of 1955?

SAETHER: Of 1955—that Roden came to the fore.

McGEE: Brother Wilson did not resist the idea of Mrs. Houteff
being named vice president in his place?

SAETHER: He was sick at the time and I don’t know how it was that
his name was by-passed. As I see it now, he was considered incompetent.
I think maybe he was. There was something eating on
him. He was here—right here in this building in one of these
rooms, in what we called the dispensary.

We had a duplex here. This was one room and that was another and then we had a bedroom over there and kitchen in here, and a bathroom. The same setup
was on the other end of this duplex. It was used for a dispensary
for anyone that was sick. He was in here as I understand it. He was not out in field work. He was here as a patient.

McGEE: Anyway, he was in no position I suppose to object to this
and as far as you know he did not object to being replaced?

SAETHER: No. We had the authority to do it and, as I recall,
we considered that he was—because I’d talked with him here—he
and I were good friends.
He was a very amiable man but he could be stern, too. He
was stern when he was manager in Brother Houteff’s absence.

He had been a leader among the Adventists. And a man has to be, to be a president of a conference he deals with all kinds of people
especially the workers. There are quite a few workers in a
conference. 

McGEE: … Mrs. Houteff was now vice president and general manager. How did things develop from that point forward? 

SAETHER: The first thing that she said when we had our council
meeting was, “I want you men to go all over the camp,” I guess
we used to call it the camp. We figured this was just a camp,
see. We’re just camping out here for the duration.
When Brother Houteff first started this work he figured it
would be all over in a year. When he first started out there in
California there was just a unit there.

Well, then when they came here that was different but he called this a camp. He got
that from Ezekiel, that we should set up a camp and the church
is the city and that’s what we did...She said, “I’m interested in the Bible study and I want to do some private studying.” Well, it wasn’t long after that— 

...This was in 1955 and Mrs. Houteff cornered me one day in the office. We closed at noon on Friday so everybody could go home and get ready for Sabbath.  She cornered me there and she talked all afternoon to me, trying to persuade me
to her idea in Revelation 11. 

Well, one thing I could see and I acknowledged this right
away. I told her, “I can see you’re right in this, that those
days didn’t take place back in the Dark Ages as the church had
thought and as we thought. Brother Houteff thought and taught.

We taught that those days were the days of papal supremacy and
had to do with that. I could see that they don’t. They’re in
present time. That they apply now in any definite way, you
haven’t shown it. You haven’t got the proof, you haven’t got
the backing of it. Where is the proof of this?”

I was courteous with her, I wasn’t rough. I should have
even made fun of it but I didn’t. She was in earnest, I thought
she’d lost her mind.

….I thought that Mrs. Houteff was wrong but she talked all
afternoon. Hour after hour. Pleading with me. Just pleading.
What she should have done was taken it to the council. What she
did was go to each individual in the council and talk with them
about it. 

That’s what she must have done because in the fall of the year
we sent out a code—every month a code came out. In this code, on
November 9, we opened them—we got them over at the office—they
were sent out to the—that’s what was printed I think, as I recall.

Fifteen hundred had been sent out to the people and there it
says, “We’ve now entered these days.” When I opened it up I was
dumbfounded. I knew she talked to me about it but that’s the last
I heard of it. Not another word was said.

In March—it was in March that she told me this or April,
March, we’ll say. April, May, June, July, August, September,
October, November, eight months—not a word. Not a word was said.
In the council or anywhere else. It was just kept on the q,t.
Then, she come out and said we’d entered these days.

Hermanson was getting his mail—they were distributing the
mail over in the office, to the office workers. He got his code,
too, with the mail and he gave us each our code. The codes had
been sent out. Taken dovm to the post office. So they’d gone
out to all the people.
I said, “Did you see this?” “Yes.” “We’ve now entered these
days, ” I said. “If we’ve entered those days they’re gonna end
some day and then what?” “Well,” he says, “she wrote it. It’s
her responsibility.”

SAETHER: Right then and there what I should have said and insisted
on, was that this thing should be brought before the council and if
it could be proven we’d accept it. But, if it can’t, we’ll tell the
people there’s a mistake made. How easy that would have been compared
to what happened. Well, I didn’t know what to do about it.

McGEE: How did things develop after the fall of 1955 when this
message went out? How did things develop here at Mt. Carmel?

SAETHER: It was quite a shock to many of the Davidians that Brother
Houteff died. Some felt that he never would die, that he’d be the
king in the new kingdom. He taught, and we all believed, that there
was to be a kingdom. There were some things we couldn’t understand,I couldn’t. But I couldn’t get a better answer. That was my policy,
if you can’t give a better reason, a better answer, better not say
anything. Why criticize something if you can’t have a better answer
for it? I couldn’t see through some of those things.

McGEE: All right. Then along comes this message that we’re in
the last days—”We’re in these days.” How did the people respond
to that over the next year or two?

SAETHER: I think there was division came in then, more than before.
This came out November 9, [1955]. About October 9 or 10, somewhere
around there, we received a letter from Springfield, Missouri,
general delivery. The group of Davidians wanted to come to Mt.
Carmel, in a group, and they wanted our permission to come as a
group. If it was satisfactory we should let them know by a certain
date and if not they were going to come then.

….In two or three days here came a whole group of people from
West Texas. I knew almost all of them. There was a woman that—
she was just a young woman. She was just a girl here and married
while she was here. They left and she had three children in the
interim.

They were here, too, with her There were two other
women from California, I think, that I’d never seen. But the
Rodens and the Bowlings and different ones from out there who
lived out in West Texas, They came in and they—we had seats in the office. We had
sort of a lobby out there in front and had curtains. Not curtains
but counters, on three sides, with openings, two openings. It
made a really nice lobby there. 

…They wanted to pray and have the children pray, too.
What did the children know about this and they were famished?
They were healthy young children. They looked like they hadn’t
been fasting at all because they were just as healthy as any children
you ever saw. The father was really a husky fellow. He had
been a student here, too. The mother was a strong woman. Well,
they went on and we couldn’t get head or tail. Some of the people were actually discourteous to us.

McGEE: Now, these people had just suddenly showed up from West Texas?

SAETHER: Yes. But they came in answer to The Branch. Now they had—
this letter was signed The Branch. Well, who’s The Branch?

Finally after a long time we understood that they were the ones
that wrote this letter. And The Branch. Well who’s The Branch?
They didn’t tell us who The Branch was for a long time. Finally,
it was Brother Roden. He acted like he was modest but we subsequently
found out that this modesty was just all put on.

McGEE: What had he done? Had he written inviting them to come
here? Had he sent out a —

SAETHER: He—they’d all lived out there. He knew them out—
they evidently met together and they had the phones. They all
lived right there. I’d never been right there at Odessa but
I knew about where that was. Little towns all around there.

I just thought it was daffy, you know. I didn’t realize—I
didn’t realize the seriousness of it. To me it was just foolishness.
Them putting on a demonstration like that.

But what it was, Dr, McGee, they were using incantation. That’s
the way incantation was. Either by words or action, by song. They
do something. What was it designed for? It was designed to terrorize
us. To make us fear, fearful, that fire was coming down and destroy
us unless we’d leave. Then if we’d leave what would happen? They’d step in and take over. 

That was the idea. That’s what they wanted us to—they
were going to scare us. Nobody was scared. I never saw any
intimation that any of the people there—the office workers
were there—and the council members. Just about every available
person was there.

McGEE: So this group showed up from the Odessa area? What happened
that day, that night?

SAETHER: They pulled out and—

McGEE: Did they pull out because the council decided that they
were not welcome or —

SAETHER: No, They were just going to leave us to our fate.

McGEE: Oh, yes. I see

.McGEE: All right. He was with this group from Odessa and they
were talking about The Branch which was the term which he had
created or they had created to describe their particular movement?

SAETHER: That’s right.

SAETHER: It seems, too, that later—after Brother Houteff’s death—
and in that year of 1955—Bingham was electioneering already. What
he wanted to do—he was asked to come here but he refused to come
here. After Brother Houteff’s death—as I understand it—it made
him sick, I guess, because he said he couldn’t carry on his work
so he went home to his home, where his mother lived, in California.

SAETHER: This was Bingham. His wife was here. He’d been separated
from her ten years, I guess. He wanted to go out and visit all the
people. Well, Mrs. Houteff said he should come here. He worked
here in the office. But he wouldn’t come.

McGEE: All right. Let’s continue with that story then. What
happened with that group in the immediate future?

SAETHER: They came again on the twenty-second of October. This time they really—well, I’ll tell you, I’ve forgotten what their position then was. They went away and if they didn’t come back on the twenty-fifth. Now the twenty-fifth was what we call our
Day of Days. Back in 1938 when Brother Houteff was gone to
Europe, there was a rebellion then. Headed by M, J. Bingham
against Elder Wilson’s regime.

McGEE: Um-hum. Well, what happened on this Day of Days, October 25,
1955? The Rodens, you say, were back here on October 25.

SAETHER: Yes, and it was the same thing, trying to get a foothold
some way or other.

McGEE: Were they able to get a foothold?

SAETHER: Not with anybody here, I don’t think. As I recall, there
wasn’t anybody that went with them or—

SAETHER: Yes, those people are deceitful, those Rodens. Deceitful.
They’re treacherous. Because they’re possessed of the devil.
They must be. They’ve resorted to various forms of incantation.

….I went back to the office later on and the wind was out of
their sails. They were allowed to come in the office. That is,
two or three at a time. Roden was in there. He wanted to buy
some charts and Hermanson asked him, “Are you prepared to pay your bill here?” When he came here as a gardener he ran quite a
bill. He just ignored what he said. He didn’t pay any attention
to it. I’m pretty sure that he still owes that bill. He didn’t
pay it. He volunteered to come and have an organic garden. 

It takes something to put a large family—to come and stay for
months at a time and no income. That was his agreement but he
owed this seven hundred dollars anyway, for rent and food and
one thing and another.
That indicates the kind of a leader they had behind them. It’s of the devil.

McGEE: …Mrs. Houteff had said that we were in these days. That was in 1955. Did she
continue to elaborate on her prophecy during 1956 and 1957?

SAETHER Yes, It was in the code that was sent out to our own
people.

McGEE: What kind of response did she get to that?

SAETHER: Some of them believed and some of them didn’t. There
was a division. The very fact that about a thousand people came
here in 1959 showed that they had some reservations as to whether
they believed or didn’t believe. Some of them became believers.

McGEE: How did things develop in the council during 1956 and 1957?
Did the council go along with Mrs. Houteff? Did she continue to
exert leadership?

SAETHER: Yeah, I think so. I was really the only one who was at
loggerheads in regards this moving but I went along with it. Not
very enthusiastic, but I went along with it. It was a—it was
something that— We had opposition on the outside. There was
Bashan and there were the Rodens, there were the Binghams.

…I was approached by Sister Houteff in regard to this question
of there’d be twelve hundred and sixty days in—all one Friday
afternoon. I can see that it didn’t go on back in the Dark Ages
but I couldn’t see how it applied today. What evidence was there that those days were beginning? I can’t see it today. There
is no evidence. And, there wasn’t any then. I think that we
ought to have let the people know that we were mistaken. We
were mistaken.  (Interview no. 8, p.336-383)

…To be continued  with part four

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 2 of 6)

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)

Jewels from Bro. Saether’s Interview (Part 1 of 6)

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

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 value 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 early 2000’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

3) 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

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.