Davidian Questions and Answers
DAVIDIAN QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
You assert, without proof that your going to Carmel, Oct. 10 & speaking the parable of Ezek. 24:1-3 "shows that Ezekiel has come and written on the sticks," meaning, evidently, your teaching concerning the two sticks, as set forth in the Branch letters. But how can this be so when V.T.H. wrote upon the two sticks, and published the writing in Tract #8?
It is another case of progressive Truth. For Bro. Houteff to have given the interpretation of the two sticks that the Branch gave, would be cashing in on the Scripture out of time. Tract #15, p. 34, "The Scriptures as everybody knows are designed to present truth at certain times-meat in due season."
Bro. Houteff started us out on the light of the two sticks applying it the only way it could be, at that time, to Judah (the church) and Israel (the world). Seeing, it would be his job to divide the Sanctuary then it was that the application could be made to Israel, (church-the 10 tribes and Judah-law-giver-Mt. Carmel).
"No one prophet of God has ever forged a complete prophetic chain of events, with no links missing. Some people being of the parrot kind, utter parrot-like statements, never stopping to think what, they say, and seemingly never caring whether their statements stand or fall. Such are they who say that no other event or events can come before, between, or after those set forth in Sr. White's writings." Answerer No. 2, p. 76. Also Sr. White says, "We should not say that a Scripture means just this and nothing more and that a broader meaning cannot be attached to it." R.H. Oct. 21, 1890.
"The revelation of God's will, though, becomes clear to the intent of one's willingness to relinquish his theories and self-will." Tract #15, p. 36.
What could be easier for Satan to do than to send someone to Carmel, declare the parable of Ezek. 24:1-3, then make the resounding claim that by virtue of his doing so, that individual is Ezekiel and the one to whom he delivers the parable, his wife, and that consequently she died at even of the day he spoke to her? This is one of the enemies standard procedures. So it is right and proper and mandatory of all of us who are investigating the Branch to require it to develop solid Biblical and logical evidence in support of its position, before we can accept it for an established fact.
This is the very reason we are admonished over and over again to "take Pains" to investigate and to make sure you understand the reasons the messenger gives for his position. How else could we ever "try the spirits" and decide from the weight of evidence.
"Any interpretation of Scripture which fails fittingly to build an indestructible structure of truth and to bring a lesson of special importance for the time then present, is erroneous, uninspired by the Spirit of Truth - a vain thing." Tract #15, p. 34.
Shall we not sink the shaft deep into the mine of truth? Spiritual things are spiritually discerned.
If you are the king of Babylon, then how can letters be your prince's? As the king and his princes in the type were mortal beings and if the king in the antitype is, correspondingly a mortal being (you) then your princes necessarily must be mortal beings, not letters. What do you say to this?
Remember, Ezek. 24:1-3 is a parable of the king of Babylon; then it must be a likeness of what happened back there. The first account of the king of Babylon taking charge of the situation was back in the days of the tower builders. The people, instead of carrying out God’s plan, began to look out for their own interests so God confused their language and stopped their project. Again in the days of Israel when His people refused to listen to the prophets and began to build in their own way, the king of Babylon took over and confused their language, so to speak. In the great image, the head being all of gold when Daniel said, "Thou art this head of gold," he was speaking of some-one higher than Nebuchadnezzar. God tried to-impress king Nebuchadnezzar that He was King of kings, and that "He setteth up kingdoms and He giveth to whomsoever, He will; and He doeth according to His will in the army of Heaven, and among the inhabitants of earth; and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, what doeth thou?" Nebuchadnezzar certainly learned the hard way that God was king of Babylon.
So let us not get any narrow ideas about who the king of Babylon is or "His princes" either. We should profit by Nebuchadnazzar's experience. If you will read Letter No. 5 again, you will see that it does not say the Letters are his "Princes", but, "If thou wilt not go forth to the king of Babylon's Princes when they (princes) come for you, or answer the call of the letters . . ." Although the letters would have the same authority as the Princes, they are not called the same. The letters contain the thing that the Princes are advocating, and the Princes are all who sponsor the truths set forth in the letters.
If you are the antitypical king of Babylon, then who are, or were, the "prophets which prophesied" to Jerusalem (Carmel, as you apply it) that you would not go against them? I know of none. None knew you purposed to go against them as the antitypical king of Babylon to take them captive, until after you had been there and published it in letters.
The people at Carmel knew that the king of Babylon purposed to go against them before he came, so they must be the "prophets" which prophesied that he would not go against them.
And could antitypical Zedekiah be the present ruler or rulers at Mt. Carmel, then who are the Jews (Carmelites or Davidians), fallen to the Chaldeans (Branchites, I suppose), of whom Carmel is afraid, lest said captives deliver the Council into your hands?
If you will read Jer. 38:19 again you will see that it is not that Zedekiah was afraid lest the captives would deliver them (Council) into the Chaldean's hands, but he was afraid the Chaldeans would deliver them, (Council) into the Jews and they (Jews) mock him.
After having exercised authority over the Jews it would be too humiliating to be on the same level with them. Just as the Laodicean rulers were too proud to submit to the first king of Babylon, the Rod and just be one with the laity.
"And Zedekiah the king said unto Jeremiah, I am afraid of the Jews that are fallen to the Chaldeans, lest they (Chaldeans) deliver me into their (Jews) hands, and they mock me." Jer. 38:19.
If Carmel, the Sanctuary, actually died (ceased to be the living center of God's work on earth for this time) because she didn't accept you Oct. 10, then how come that since then, the Lord used her, a dead, decaying body, through whom to reveal the new light on the 42 months? Or don't you accept as light, the Code's statement on the 42 months?
You are right. If she died, how come she is now giving light? Nor we do not accept the Code's statement on the 42 months as light.
In fact, the Branch message proves that Mt. Carmel's interpretation of the 42 months is a subtle trick of the enemy to engulf God's people in deception and keep them in ignorance of the harvest that is now taking place. This question and answer series is published in behalf of the honest, lest they be caught in the same snare as the wicked, and say along with them, "The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved." Jer: 8:20.
What you write about man's knowing his wife is equally true of woman's knowing her husband. So if you, as Ezekiel can recognize Carmel as your wife, how come she can't recognize you as her husband? Could it be because she was married to V.T.H. and not to you, and does she consequently recognize only him as her husband, and therefore does not recognize you?
The fact that God is the Husband and the church has followed other lovers, she naturally would not recognize Him. Yes it is a case of following Paul, Apollos, Cephas or Bro. Houteff instead of Christ and His truth.
You simply assert without the slightest proofs that "Aholah is: Hosea's wife". How can you prove it?
Ezekiel proves that Aholah is the ten tribes (the church). Hosea married the church and sent the children to plead with her but Ezekiel didn't trust the job to the children. He himself went to Aholabah to plead with her.
On page 5 of Letter #51 para. 2 and 3, you say that for the church to have the "living testimony" it must have the living instrumentality. Why? Why cannot all the unpublished manuscripts which V.T.H. left behind all of which contain light by the "living testimony"? And why cannot the Codes publishing of light (if it is light) on the 42 months be adding "knowledge to knowledge"?
This is the same argument the S.D.A.'s used against the Shepherd's Rod in regard to Sr. White's writings. Bro. Houteff disproved it so many times that we should be thoroughly familiar with the answer to this argument.
Just because Bro. Houteff died in February, the 11th month, how can you logically and Scripturally make that fact equate with the 11th hour?
"The Harvest" charts the 12 months are numbered like the face of a clock. The month of February falling in the 11th hour you see. One of the children were the first to notice this co-incidence. Remember the co-incidence chart in Vol. 1 of the Shepherd's Rod? Where was the Scripture to prove it? The S.D.A.'s can never see that the Rod has Scripture to prove any of its teachings. Our Scripture and logic does not go over with them because they don't want to believe the Rod. We should take warning not to become blinded to truth because of prejudice and unbelief.
If you truly believe in the Inspiration behind the Shepherd's Rod Vol. 1, how can you say that what it says on page 224 about the judgment is wrong? And how do you make it say the judgment began in 1929 when every publication on the subject places the commencement of the judgment for the living at the opening of the 7th seal?
Please look at the chart on page 224 of S.R. Vol. 1. It plainly shows that the harvest begins in 1931 the 6th section. "It is evident that the harvest and the judgment are counterparts and that they take place when the Lord suddenly comes to His temple to purify the sons of Levi. Mal. 3:1-3." Answerer #2, p. 42.
So the Branch is not making the Rod say something that it doesn't say, but as Bro. Houteff would say "the truth is trouble free!" The student of advancing truth having carried out the admonition in Answerer #5, p. 29 "And now the only safe and sane procedure is to read closely every page of the solemn message contained in the Shepherd's Rod publications. Let not a line escape your attention. Study every word carefully and prayerfully. Be earnest and diligent in your perusal of truth and prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. 5:21.
I say the student of advancing truths having done this will have noticed on the chart (S.R. Vol.19 p. 133) where it shows the 430 years beginning with Luther in 1500 – “this figure is not exact.” Therefore the end of the period (1931) would not be exact. In fact on the chart on page 221 on the line at the top of the pages it gives the year 1931 and says "This date is not definite."
"Every Christian should remember that the truth is ever advancing it will not be found today where it was yesterdays and that therefore Christ's followers should advance with it. They will not follow the example of the Romans and the Jews." Answerer #2, p. 80.
"No man, however honored of heaven, has ever attained to full understanding of the great plan of redemption, or even to a perfect appreciation of the Divine purpose in the work for his own time. Men do not fully understand what God would accomplish by the work which He gives them to do, they do not comprehend, in all its bearing the message they utter in His name." Answerer #2, p. 76.
"With each approaching hour for truth to advance, came first one prophet, then another, in a long succession ending with John the Baptist. Then came Christ, the Apostles, the reformers, William Miller, and Sr. White, each one in turn teaching truths which could not be born out entirely by the writings of any one predecessor. To find all the Truth thus progressively revealed, the writings of all must be collaborated." Answerer #2, p. 81.
Instead of this question making us doubt the Inspiration behind Vol. 1, it makes us believe in it more than ever and to understand that "when the Spirit of truth is come, He will guide you into all Truth." Surely the "Latter rain" of truth contains everything necessary to help us to see all that is to follow.
Page 6, 4th paragraph from the bottom of the page: Here you say, "the Rod message was to only one house of Israel (the church S.D.A.)" which you hold to be the ten tribes. But through its many pages, the Rod identifies Laodicea as the 2 tribes (Judah) and Babylon as the 10 tribes (Israel). How are you ever going to bring the Branch and the Rod into harmony on this important point?
If you will notice, you have the answer to your question stated in the fact that the Rod identifies Laodicea as the 2 tribes-Judah. This is why the Branch says the Rod message went to only one house of Israel. Not until the latter rain had ceased was it pointed out that the Rod divided the Sanctuary, and Ezekiel wrote on the two sticks showing which was Judah, and which was Israel. Remember that although Laodicea was Judah (the 2 tribes) yet all 12 was in her.
"Let Leah represent the true church of Christ (SDA) and Rachael a sister church but not the true (Protestant) Zilpah and Bilhah the world (religious and irreligious). These are the mothers of the 144,000 and the way they are gathered. But while the 12 tribes come from many mothers they were begotten by the same father. So with the true, the 144,000. In that they are gathered from all churches and the world, they must be brought into one church at the same period of church history, by the same message (the 3rd angel's message.)" SR:1.
Tell me, what is the bow of Zech. 9:13? A card from a sister seems to make it the Branch. Is that what you understand it to be?
Yes, I understand it to be the Branch. The Lord takes the Rod (Judah) and bends it toward Him (C.O.R.) and then it is a bow. He then fills the bow with Ephraim; then this arrow (Ephraim) goes forth as the lightening and the Lord shall defend them and they shall devour and subdue with "slingstones" (the five prophetic messages of the Bible.)
How does the Branch figure the tenth month of Ezek. 24:1 and of Ezek: 33:21 to be our tenth month instead of the Jewish tenth month? And if the former is fulfilled last Oct. 10, the ninth year of Bro. Roden’s connection with the Rod, then how can the latter apply to next Oct. 10, when it is in the 12th year?
The Branch has not given Oct. 10 of next year as the date to fulfill Ezekiel 33:21. In fact, it has not explained that verse in any way except to point out that these dates referred to Ezekiel's captivity. The Branch letter has explained about why Ezekiel used civil time instead of Bible time. He goes by civil time but God goes by Bible time, therefore, since Ezekiel was to announce the day of the Judgment, the Lord arranged for the two dates to coincide this year. (Heaven and earth working together.)
What does the day of Atonement mean to us and what are we to do when it comes?
Read Lev. 23:26-32. "But when our High Priest shall begin the atonement for the living, there must be a message of present truth -sounding of the trumpet- urging everyone to lay hold on the Lamb of God (Christ) by which only, can he in figure, come to the sanctuary, confess his sins and secure his life...The words of the Master are in perfect harmony with the typical day of atonement, foretelling that it is a day of separating the tares from the wheat, or cutting off of the unrepentant sinners from among God's people (purification of the church). Therefore the harvest commences with the closing work for the church." S.R. Vol. 2, p. 164, para. 1-2.
The antitypical atonement begins this year on Oct. 22. Great Controversy p. 400. Read also G.C. 488:2; 489:3; 490:0-2; 487:2; 480; 426:0-2; 351:2; 353:1; 485:1; 418; 419.
"The work of Christ as man's intercessor is presented in that beautiful prophecy of Zechariah concerning Him "whose name is the Branch." Says the prophet: "He shall build the temple of the Lord; and He shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon His (the Father's) throne; and He shall be a priest upon His throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between Them both." Zechariah 6:12-13." Great Controversy, page 415, para.3.