A True Davidian Vs A Branch Davidian

A True Davidian Versus

A Branch Davidian Who is Following the Truth?

upa7.org P. O. Box 722 Rogersville, TN [email protected] www.upa7.org www.shepherds-rod-speaks.org

Common Law Copyright by Universal Publishing Association-7, June 2004

(You can print a copy of this study for yourself and share it with others as long as you agree to: make no changes, claim credit for it, charge money for it, and include this copyright and the contact information at the end of the article.) Common Law Copyright by Universal Publishing Association-7, June 2004

True Davidians Versus Branch Davidians: Who is Following the Truth? Introduction: One of the grossest misconceptions forced upon the minds of Seventh-day Adventist (S. D. A.) leaders and laypeople alike is the idea that Davidians are a dangerous offshoot of the church who follow the teachings of David Koresh and the Branch Davidians. One source has stated that Koresh is “the sixth leader of the sixth splinter from the S. D. A. church.”1 e article from which this quote is taken tries to prove that Koresh and the Branch Davidians are the modern successors of the Shepherd’s Rod (SRod) movement that began in 1930, the “sixth splinter” from the mother church since its origin in 1844 as they imply. Nothing could be farther from the truth, as we shall see. e purpose of this study is to examine some of the pertinent historical and doctrinal facts that will clearly discredit such claims. is is a call to all honest hearted and clear-minded seekers for truth to give a fair hearing to both sides of the story before making a judgment for or against. Q: What is a Davidian? A: Davidians are Seventh-day Adventists who accept and practice all of the fundamental doctrines of the Laodicean Seventh-day Adventist Church (S. D. A.), which are based solely on 2

the Bible backed up by the Spirit of Prophecy (SOP). In addition, they accept the message of advanced light of revival and reformation that God has sent to the S. D. A. church to prepare it for the judgment of the living. is message, also known as the Shepherd’s Rod (SRod), announces the “great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Mal. 4:5) that will result in purification of the church separating 144,000 first fruits of the harvest (Rev 7:1-8, 14:1-4) who will be endowed with a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit in order to gather the second fruits of the harvest, the great multitude (Rev. 7:9), from the fallen churches of Babylon during the Loud Cry (Rev. 18:1-4, Early Writings, p. 277). e 144,000 will be the ones to reach the world with the final proclamation of the gospel, not the Laodicean church in its present 1

Shirley Burton, Director of Communication, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Memo to Phil Robertson discussing response to media inquirers regarding the “Waco Case”. Also published as, “Was David Koresh A Seventh-day Adventist”, Courier, Vol. 7, No. 7, May 21, 1993, p. 6. 2

Victor Houteff, Fundamental Beliefs of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, Universal Publishing Assn., 1943, b) Timely Greetings, Vol. 2, No. 10, pp. 21-31

condition of wholesale apostasy from God. e name Davidian derives from the following explanation. “We are the only people who have the message of the re-establishment of the House of David, and of restoring “all things” (Mark 9:12) and are therefore called Davidians.” -- Timely Greetings, Vol. 1, No. 9, p. 6

Q: Is a Branch Davidian the same as a Davidian? A: An unequivocal NO! Davidians follow the teaching of the Bible supported by the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, which are complied in the writings of the Shepherd’s Rod. Branch Davidians are comprised of various factions, which follow a strange mixture of doctrines, which are derived from the uninspired teachings of their two leading presidents/prophets from the past Ben L. Roden and his wife Lois Roden. Since the death of Ben in 1978 and latter Lois in 1986 several competing factions have risen up each claiming to have an inspired leader. David Koresh was just one of these individuals which also include less infamous persons such as Charles Pace, eresa Moore, Denton R. Brunken, and Doug Mitchell. Listed below are some of the prominent divergent teachings that most Branch Davidians hold in common that are in direct opposition to the Bible and the fundamental beliefs of Davidians. e appropriate references are given from the Bible, the SOP, and the SRod, which refute these errors and prove that Branch Davidians are radically divergent in their teachings with Davidians on several other theological and doctrinal issues.

Heterodox Doctrines of the Branch Davidians, NOT True Davidians Doctrine

Origin

Bible and SOP References

Keeping the ceremonial Ben Roden feast laws.

Col. 2:14-16, Eph. 2:15; Acts of the Apostles, p. 188-9, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 365-7. Timely Greetings, Vol. 2, No. 37, pp. 14-15.

The investigative judgment for the living began its review on October 20, 1955

Ben Roden

Mark 13:33, Rev. 3:3, Great for the living began its review on Controvesy, p. 490-91, Answerer October 20, 1955 Book, Vol. 1, p. 94

The Holy Spirit is Feminine

Lois Roden

John 14:16-17, 26; 16:7-8, 13; 1 John 3:24, I John 4:1-4

Doctrine

Origin

Bible and SOP References

There must be a “sinful messiah” to represent fallen man in the judgment.

Teachings of David Koresh Rom. 5:12-19, Heb. 4:15, 2 Pet. applied to himself and be- 2:1-10, Matt. 24:23-26 lieved by his adherents.

Leader(s) claim the prophetic gift. Misapply Testimony to Ministers, p. 475 to themselves

Ben Roden claimed to be 1 Pet. 1:19-21, Amos 3:7, Isa. Elijah the prophet. This 8:20, 1 Cor. 14:31, Deut. 18:20-22 perpetual claim to the prophetic office is held by others in the Branch movement today.

Q: Was David Koresh a Seventh-day Adventist? A: He “was reared as a Seventh-day Adventist in Dallas (Texas)”3 and later baptized into the Tyler Texas S. D. A. church in 1979 at the age of 18 years.4 In 1981 he was disfellowshipped “because of lifestyle and divergent views.”5 His teachings were a strange admixture of doctrines and private interpretations of scripture, which included the use of the writings of Ellen G. White and concepts derived from the writings of the Shepherd’s Rod. He never studied or practiced the original “Shepherd’s Rod” message. Doctrinally, one could not consider Koresh a true Seventh-day Adventist as the result of his many blatantly unbiblical teachings. is includes advocating the keeping of the ceremonial feasts and festivals of the Old Testament6 and the concept that he was a new incarnation of Jesus Christ, the lamb of Revelation 5.7 He viewed himself as a sinful Messiah and claimed to be the one who was to give the interpretation of the seven seals in the Revelation.8 His reported lifestyle habits were also in direct contradiction to the counsels given in the writings of Ellen G. White. Former followers have

3

Adventist Today, May/June 1993, pp. 4.

4

Raymond Cotrell, “History and Fatal eology of the Branch Davidians”, Adventist Today, May/June 1993, p. 6

5

a) Burton, p. 5 b) George W. Reid “e Branch Davidians-Who Are ey?”, Adventist Review, April 1, 1993, p. 6

6

Koresh’s belief of keeping the ceremonial feast laws originated from the teaching of Ben L. Roden, the founder of the Branch Seventh Day Adventists. Don Adair, A Davidian Testimony, 1997, p. 196 7

Cotrell, p. 7

8

Ref. 1, p. 8

testified the Koresh had over ten wives, smoked, drank beer, ate meat, and had a passion for playing rock and rock music all of which are prohibited in orthodox Adventist teaching.9 Q: Was David Koresh the leader of the True Davidians? A: No, David Koresh, formerly known as Vernon Howell, was the leader of a small group of followers who called themselves “Branch Davidians.” is group was founded in 1955 by a man named Ben L. Roden under the original name of “Branch Seventh Day Adventists.”10 As we have seen David Koresh taught and practiced doctrines that were in direct contradiction with the Bible, the Spirit of Prophecy, and the Shepherd’s Rod, which all-true Davidians follow. Koresh was one of the successors11 of Ben L. Roden and his wife Louis Roden, not Victor T. Houteff the author of the Shepherd’s Rod and the founder of the Davidian movement. Let us now commence with a brief historical review of the true Davidian movement contrasted with the Branch Davidians so that we can more clearly understand some things about the origin and differences between the two movements. e Shepherd’s Rod message was formally introduced to the leading brethren of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist church in 1930.12 A Sabbath School Superintendent named Victor T. Houteff from the Glendale California S. D. A. church sent 33 hectographed copies of a book manuscript entitled e Shepherd’s Rod, Vol. 1 (255 pgs.) with the plea that they make a careful investigation of its contents and reply at their earliest possible convenience. Six years latter only two of the thirty-three brethren ever responded. e primary focus of the book was to introduce the message of revival and reformation to the S. D. A. church calling to their attention the sealing message by which God is going to purify His church and call forth the 144,000 first fruits and prepare them to go forth and give the Loud Cry message of Revelation 18:1-4 thereby enabling the great multitude second fruits to come out from Babylon, the fallen churches of the world, and gather together in the kingdom of God (Isa. 66:19-20).

9

A. Anthony Hibbert, Before the Flames, Seaburn Publishing, 1996, pp. 28-29.

10

Adair, p. 197, Hibbert, pp. 12-13.

11

Douglas F. Mitchell, e Warfare Against Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists by David Koresh and Others. Found at http://www.the-branch.org 12

For a complete discussion of the events surrounding the introduction of the Shepherd’s Rod message to the SDA church and their subsequent response to it, please see: Victor Houteff, e Great Controversy Over “e Shepherd’s Rod, ” Tract No. 7, e Universal Publishing Assn., P.O. Box 2722, Hartford, CT 06146

Prior to this time Victor Houteff was a faithful S. D. A. who was baptized into the church in 1919. e important religious experiences of his early life have been recorded.13 Starting in 1928 as he was teaching from the Sabbath School lesson quarterly covering the latter chapters from the book of Isaiah, he recognized that much of which was recorded had a latter day prophetic application, especially in regards to the S. D. A. church. is understanding follows the inspired counsels given by Ellen White who said that the prophets of old spoke more for our time than the days in which they lived.14 Bro. Houteff’s teaching generated intense interest and most of the students migrated from other classes to join his class. is excited the envy and jealousy of the other teachers and soon his class was forced to move into a very small children’s room so that people would be discouraged from attending. To the dismay of the church leaders people filled the hallway and stood outside to listen through the windows. Next the elders banned Bro. Houteff from teaching in the church. At this time one of the sisters who lived across the street from the church offered her house for a meeting place. Soon a fairly large group was meeting there every Sabbath much to the dismay of the church elders who tried every tactic possible to prevent the church members from attending. Soon after, they dis-fellowshiped Bro. Houteff from the church without due cause or proper Biblical procedure15 and even tried to deport him from the country. ese tactics carried out by church leaders were of no avail as interest in the message continued to grow. At the same time though, considerable opposition and prejudice arose against Bro. Houteff and those who followed his teachings. Sadly the church leaders provoked some people to violently attack Bro. Houteff and even threatened his life on more that one occasion. e followers of the Shepherd’s Rod have routinely been treated with great contempt and subject to unchristian actions by often being verbally and physically abused for simply attending church services on Sabbath morning. On other occasions the church has resorted to the arm of the state by calling the police in trying to keep SRod adherents from their churches. As the General Conference (GC) failed to give a fair hearing to the teachings of the Shepherd’s Rod but rather vigorously condemned it and tried with every effort possible to keep church members from hearing or studying for themselves, Bro. Houteff was compelled to

13

Victor Houteff, Timely Greetings, Vol. 2, No. 35, pp.12-24

14

Ellen G. White, a) Selected Messages, Vol. 3, p. 419, b) Signs of the Times, April 2, 1896, par. 10

15

Proper Biblical procedure to disfellowship a member is given in Matt. 18:15-17 and I Cor 5. Several examples of illegal disfellowshipments are given in the scriptures, see: Acts 24, John 12:42-43, 16:1-4; Isa 66:5, Luke 6:22, 3 John 9-10. Ellen White describes her experience of being disfellowshiped from the Methodist church for “a breach of their rules”, see: Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 2, pp. 23-5. For explanations why faithful church members are illegally disfellowshiped from the church, see: TM 47, DA 232.2, COL 74.1, GC 140-1. For further cautions to be exercised th in disfellowshipment proceedings, see the SDA Church Manual, 16 Ed., pp. 186-90.

bring the message to the church even though the leading men rejected it. With only a small group of believers at first the followers of the SRod were forced out of necessity to organize together so as to bring the message to their brethren in the church and attend to the spiritual needs of those who took a stand for the message and had been often harshly rejected from fellowship in their local churches. In addition, to advance this message of “present truth the flock needs know” (Early Writings. p. 118), they redirected their tithes to begin to print the message and spread it throughout the denomination. e message continued to expand with the second volume of e Shepherd’s Rod Vol. 2 (300 pgs) appearing in 1932. In the following years up to 1955 numerous tracts and sermons (Timely Greetings) totaling over 1250 pages of literature were published, unfolding its truth from many different angles. e SRod literature has been printed by the millions and spread like the leaves of autumn throughout the S. D. A. denomination ever since and continues to this day. In 1934 the first Association was established in California, which later moved to Waco Texas in 1935 with a small group of a dozen believers. is “camp,” as it was referred to, was called Mt. Carmel Center and remained in operation until Bro. Houteff’s death in 1955. e first name given to the movement was the “General Association of Shepherd’s Rod Seventh-day Adventists” which later changed in 1942 to “Davidian Seventh-day Adventist Association” in the organization tract entitled “Leviticus”.”16 12

During Bro. Houteff’s tenure as the spiritual leader of Mt. Carmel Center he had to deal with a number of fanatical elements who often came into the camp to introduce their own private opinions of scripture and draw away followers after them. One of the most prominent of these individuals was Ben L. Roden who lived in nearby Odessa, Texas. Although he claimed to believe the message, taught it, and was able to win at least one convert, his character was known to be a reproach to the message. On one occasion Bro. Houteff called him to Mt. Carmel for a personal reprimand for his uncomely behavior involving the removal of the doors of the Odessa S. D. A. church because they wouldn’t allow his family to enter one Sabbath.17 He apparently made a media publicity stunt out of the incident by calling the local newspaper. According to Davidians who lived on Mt. Carmel his presence around the camp was always viewed with suspicion even though he worked on the farm in the camp for a brief period in 1953.18 Roden was never recognized as a teacher or minister of the message with one accord to the Divine purpose it called for. He frequented around the camp waiting for his opportunity to move in as an office seeker and draw people after himself. Bro. Houteff’s comments on the topic of position seeking are revealing.

16

Symbolic Code, Vol. 8, Nos. 1-12, p. 24.

17

Adair, p. 17

18

Hibbert, p. 11

“Plainly, one who aspires to position simply for self-exhaltation, especially when such an office hold out spiritual responsibilities as does a church office, such a one should not be given any consideration whatsoever. And if he already has any station of responsibility, he should be relieved of it, for such high-minded leaders are spiritually blind…Moreover, this class of leaders, dead to Christ and alive to themselves, as a rule love to parade, and even to exaggerate their religious deeds…This class of men are naturally clever…Multitudes are still charmed by such so-called good men, and multitudes unquestionably accept their decisions as if they were God’s decisions. “Take for example Jesus Christ…Instead of preaching Himself, though, He preached the Truth…He simply spoke of Bible truth, and gave God, not Himself, the credit.”19

e true motives of Ben Roden were not fully revealed until after Bro. Houteff’s death in 1955. Roden entered in among the Davidians and proclaimed himself the Elijah the prophet who would never die and thus was able to deceive many who were not well grounded in the message of the SRod. Earlier there had been division in the camp over whether Bro. Houteff would ever die since he represented, the antitypical Elijah the prophet who was predicted by Sis. White (TM 475) to come in spirit and power to announce “the great and dreadful day of the Lord” prior to the second advent of Christ. Some believed Bro. Houteff would never die since Elijah never tasted death, but what they failed to recognize that Elijah was a type of the 144,000 living saints who were to be translated without seeing death20 and not the type of one person. Furthermore, as John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah to announce the first advent of Christ and died, so to the antitypical Elijah who was to come just prior to the Second Advent would also die! us Roden was able to capitalize on the false belief of certain Davidians and stepped in at the right time to exalt himself as the Elijah the prophet who would never die. Plainly, the SRod message teaches that one person, not a multitude of ministers, would come in the spirit and power of Elijah in the last days. Ben L. Roden never brought the message announcing the Judgment of the Living to the S. D. A. church; this was a work God appointed to one man, Victor T. Houteff. “That as the Elijah of Christ’s first advent was one person, and also as the Elijah of Mt. Carmel of old was one person, not a multitude of priests, then by parity of reasoning the Elijah of today must also be one person, not a multitude of ministers.” -- General Conference Special, p. 32 “Since the promised Elijah is to be the last prophet to the church today, as John the Baptist was the last prophet to the church in his day, and since the last work on earth is the judgment for the Living, the truth stands forth like the light of day that Elijah’s message is the message of the Judgment of the Living, the last, which in the very nature of the gospel is of far more importance and consequence than any other message ever borne to a people.” -- General Conference Special, pp. 22-3. 19

Victor Houteff, Timely Greetings, Vol. 2, No. 28, pp. 15-18

20

Ellen G. White, Prophets and Kings, p. 227.2

us Ben Roden began his movement in 1955 in Odessa, Texas and named it “e Branch Seventh Day Adventists” based on a misapplication of Jer. 23:5 to himself. He was able to get the mailing list from the old Mt. Carmel center that gave him free access to spread his false doctrines throughout Davidia. In this way he was able to win over some converts who believed that Roden must be the Elijah the prophet who would never die. Now, to complete another side of the story, Bro. Houteff warned shortly before his death that a “knockout blow” would arise from professed friends of the faith and this event would result in a scattering of the flock according to the following statement. “Unparalleled, therefore, is the urgent that every eleventh-hour church member now quickly and solidly brace himself against the Enemy’s effort to deliver a knock-out 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 the priest in Christ’s day.” -- White House Recruiter, p. 33

e professed friends of the gospel turned out to be none other than the wife of Bro. Houteff, Florence and the council she appointed to lead the work after the death of her husband. Contrary to a false report that the GC and all other S. D. A. sources systematically repeat, Mrs. Houteff was never appointed by her husband to lead the message after he died.21 In fact, a man named E.T. Wilson who was the Vice President of the Executive Council at the time of Bro. Houteff’s death was the one who should have rightfully continued as the leader of the message, but Mrs. Houteff appointed herself and nearly everyone agreed since she was well liked by Davidians and it was thought to be the one to lead the work since she was so familiar with the message. Anyway, the knockout blow was caused by her false prediction of the forty-two month prophecy in Rev. 11:2-12 and Dan 12:6-7.22 Prior to Bro. Houteff’s death he was revising the material in Timely Greetings, Vol. 2, No. 15 when he recognized that there was a future application of this forty-two month period. As Davidians were aware of this they became intensely interested to know the answer to this future fortytwo month prophecy. In fact on the night of his death Mrs. Houteff asked her husband what was the explanation of this prophecy. He replied that he would have her answer in the morning. at night he died so the prophecy remained unexplained! is event was witnessed by a Davidian nurse named Sis. Peterman who was assisting in the care of Bro. Houteff. He was in the local Waco hospital for heart problems at the time.

21 22

1

a) SDA Bible Encyclopedia, p. 329. b) Vance Ferrell, e Davidians of Waco, p. 13

For a more complete account of this pivotal event in the history of the Davidians, see: Hibbert, Chapt. 8 and Adair, Chapt. 19.

Shortly after Bro. Houteff’s death, Mrs. Houteff announced in the Symbolic Code (the official newsletter of the Association) her prediction for the fulfillment of the forty-two month prophecy. She claimed that the forty-two months began at Bro. Houteff’s death in the year 1955 and would end three and one half years later on the date of April 22, 1959.23 She predicted that the end of this prophetic period was going to be the slaughter of Ezekiel 9 (purification of the S. D. A. church) and the establishment of God’s Kingdom on earth (Dan. 2:44) in harmony with conventional SRod teachings. Her error was that she fell into the trap of time setting, the prediction of a future date for some important event to occur as a fulfillment of some Bible prophecy. Unfortunately she and the foolish Davidians who followed her forgot the admonitions given in the SOP against such practices. “The preaching of a definite time for the judgment, in the giving of the first message, was ordered by God. The computation of the prophetic periods on which that message was based, placing the close of the 2300 days in the autumn of 1844, stands without impeachment. The repeated efforts to find new dates for the beginning and close of the prophetic periods, and the unsound reasoning necessary to sustain these positions, not only lead minds away from the present truth, but throw contempt upon all efforts to explain the prophecies. The more frequently a definite time is set for the second advent, and the more widely it is taught, the better it suits the purposes of Satan. After the time has passed, he excites ridicule and contempt of its advocates, and thus casts reproach upon the great advent movement of 1843 and 1844. Those who persist in this error will at last fix upon a date too far in the future for the coming of Christ. Thus they will be led to rest in a false security, and many will not be undeceived until it is too late.” --Great Controversy, p. 457 "We are near the end, but if you or any other man shall be seduced by the enemy, and led on to set the time for Christ's coming (to purify the church, Mal. 3:1-3), he will be doing the same evil work which has wrought the ruin of the souls of those who have done it in the past.” --Testimonies for Ministers, p. 60-1 [brackets and italics added] “There will always be false and fanatical movements made by persons in the church who claim to be led of God --those who will run before they are sent, and will give day and date for the occurrence of unfulfilled prophecy. The enemy is pleased to have them do this, for their successive failures and leading into false lines cause confusion and unbelief.--Letter 28, 1897.” -- Selected Messages, Vol. 2, p. 84

Prior to the predicted date, Mrs. Houteff announced in a later Symbolic Code a “Solemn Assembly” which resulted in the gathering of over 1,000 Davidians from all over the United States and Canada at the New Mt. Carmel center to wait for their deliverance to the kingdom.24 At this point it should be mentioned that prior to Bro. Houteff’s death he announced that the property of old Mt. Carmel should be sold off since the city limits of Waco 23

Symbolic Code, Vol. 11, No. 1, p. 13, Vol. 5, p. 12.

24

Symbolic Code, Vol. 14, No. 8, pp. 11-12.

were rapidly encroaching on the camp25. e sell-off began in 1954 and continued until 1957. Mrs. Houteff and her council then bought new property near Elk, Texas, about 30 miles from Waco, and named it “New Mt. Carmel Center”. Several homes were built along with a very large building for her solemn assembly. As the predicted day approached even the local newspapers came and interviewed the people and published articles about the event. Since they did not understand the message of the SRod they often reported many incorrect statements, for example that the Davidians were gathered for the second coming of Christ rather than the deliverance from Ezekiel 9. is is one of the ways that misinformation arose regarding this event. Well, after much pleading with the Lord to fulfill their expectations, the predicted date came and went and nothing happened! Soon the word spread throughout the media and the church; this prompted S. D. A. Conference officials to seize the opportunity and capitalize on this folly by arranging a series of meetings to try to win back Davidians into the mother church.26 As a result of this tragic disappointment, many Davidians who misplaced their trust in the arm of flesh renounced the message and were scattered abroad, or joined with Ben Roden. Only a small remnant remained faithful to the teachings of the message. Rather than admit their wrong prediction about the forty-two month prophecy, Florence Houteff and her council added one error upon another in trying to justify their colossal blunder. After going over the whole SRod message they came up with the new interpretation that every time Bro. Houteff used the word “church” in his writings he meant the fallen protestant churches of the world and not the S. D. A. church. is caused the Council to announce in 1960 a new direction for the message that they should take it to the fallen Protestant churches rather than to the S. D. A. church as the message clearly taught. ey even went so far as to buy a radio station so that they could broadcast the message everywhere and wrote up a new series of tracts to meet this objective. Within two years the work went into disarray. e Council meet again in closed meetings with the General Conference in 1961. Finally, by the end of the year, Mrs. Houteff and her council could no longer bear the continued weight of their blunders and she publicly denounced the message by stating that both Sis. White and Bro. Houteff were false prophets and all that we needed to be saved was to read the writings of the Apostle Paul. She also recommended that if Davidians still believed in the kingdom that they should join R. W. Armstrong’s Radio Church of God! e remaining council members also left the message with two suffering violent deaths shortly thereafter. e mother church was naturally very pleased with this news and to this day has been able to very successfully use it in an underhanded effort to discredit the true teachings of the SRod and furthermore, discourage members in the church from investigating it for him or her 25

Symbolic Code, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 3-4

26

Hibbert, p. 175

selves. is unfortunate betrayal of the message by Florence Houteff and her council was recognized by the honest at heart Davidians to be the “knockout blow” that Bro. Houteff had predicted. In the meantime the remaining faithful Davidians reorganized in 1961 by holding a special session in Los Angeles, California to continue on with the work that God had commissioned through the message. Let us not forget Ben Roden who was still roaming around Davidia looking for converts. Being the opportunist that he was, Roden strongly denounced Mrs. Houteff as a false prophet since her predicted date had passed unfulfilled and tried to convince people to follow him as Elijah the prophet who would never die. Following Mrs. Houteff’s renouncing of the message she went into hiding and remains there to this day.27 Her council divided up the first tithe among themselves claiming it was their back pay and entrusted the remaining assets of the Association (second tithes, offerings, and all the property) in the hands of a lawyer named Tom Street. Eventually after a long drawn out legal affair over many years in the Texas courts a portion of the second tithes were returned to the long time workers at old Mt. Carmel under Bro. Houteff. e property, which amounted to over 500 acres and several buildings, was up for grabs since the Council dissolved without appointing any successors. Over time the remaining assets were liquidated down to 77 acres. At this time Roden and his believers moved in and squatted on the land and refused to leave, even under court order. Claiming to have a right to a portion of the unclaimed second tithe they eventually forced a resolution which Roden and his clan where able to garner around $32,000 and finally buy out the title after a long drawn out battle with other groups of Davidians who eventually surrendered their efforts to regain the disputed turf. A permanent home for the Branch movement was finally established in 1968.28 e faithful Davidians who did not follow Roden’s strange doctrines were scattered about at this point and were not able to organize together in time enough to oppose him in the court. e court not knowing anything about the history or doctrines of the Branch movement was more than willing to let Roden have his object and get the awkward case off of their hands. is remained the permanent headquarters of the Branch movement until it was put under siege and later burned out by the United States government on April 19, 1993. On the other hand, faithful Davidians who now began to understand something about the predicted “knockout blow” and the rise of usurpers such as Ben Roden, as Bro. Houteff warned about, reorganized the Association in Los Angeles, California (1961), appointed a new Executive Council, and once again began to publish the original tract literature of the SRod. Since this time God’s storehouse of present truth has moved and reorganized several times and in order to locate it today one must “seek and ye shall find.” Over the years many 27

Florence (Houteff) Aiken has reportedly died in October of 2008.

28

Hibbert, pp. 17-19.

false teachers and splinters off of the original Shepherd’s Rod have arisen besides Ben Roden and David Koresh in the devil’s attempt to confuse and mislead the true Davidians who come in and follow the message with fidelity, not adding to or subtracting one jot or tittle from what inspiration has revealed.29 Meanwhile, Roden kept control over the Branch group until his death in 1978 which proved that he was a false prophet who made a prediction that he was Elijah the prophet who would never die but ended up dying (see: Deut. 18:20-22). At this point Roden’s wife Lois took over leadership as president/prophetess of the group. Assuming the prophetic mantle she then introduced her false teaching that the Holy Spirit was feminine and that women should be ordained as ministers. She also started a magazine entitled SHEkinah, which attracted a fair amount of interest in certain Christian circles.30 It was in 1981 that Vernon Howell joined the Branch movement. Soon he became the archrival to the Roden’s son George who also thought that he was to be the next prophet and leader of the movement being that his mother was aging. When Lois finally died in 1986 there was an intense battle between Vernon and George for the leadership of the group as they both claimed to be the incarnate Christ and visible leader of the Branch Davidians and the New Mt. Carmel Center. According to Doug Mitchell, current President of the Branch Davidian Seventh-day Advents (BDSDA), David Koresh was office seeker who started up a rival Association in 1983-84 called “Davidian Branch Davidian Seventh-day Advents” (DBDSDA). He apparently gathered a group of sympathizers, Clive Doyle and Perry Jones being his principle advocates, and attempted to win over the influence of Lois Roden and her adherents. e rivalry between Howell and Lois’s son George was so heated that Howell and his followers were forced to move away from the new Mt. Carmel Center and live in the woods around Palestine Texas for a few years. A year after Lois Roden’s death in 1986 Howell filed a court document claiming to be the president of the BDSDA’s. In late 1987 Howell and some of his followers made a military style assault on the new Mt. Carmel property, which at the time was under the control of George Roden. Although no one was killed the authorities were brought in and the case ended up in court. During the court hearing George was charged for contempt of court for an unrelated charge, which led to a short term incarceration and Vernon Howell, 31

29

For more details regarding the history of God’s true storehouse and the numerous counterfeits that have arisen since the knockout blow please free to contact us at the address at the end of this article. e original Shepherd’s Rod tract literatures are also available upon request, without cost. 30 31

Adair, pp. 294-95

Mitchell, op cit. Mitchell and other Branch minister Steve Penner claim to be part of the true Branch Davidian “Church” which currently is located at P.O. Box 1004, Kingsland, TX. ey assert that Howell/Koresh illegally usurped the Branch church name and property through a cloak of deception and legal maneuvers in the local courts.

who later changed his name to David Koresh32 became the uncontested leader of the Branch Davidians until the tragic burnout on April 19, 1993. George was forced to leave Waco and relocated to Odessa, Texas and was later permanently institutionalized sometime in 1988 after murdering another man living with him who had prior ties with the Davidian movement but later renounced the message and was promoting anti-Semitic neo-Nazi propaganda. In the period from 1988 to 1992 Koresh and his right hand man, Dale Perry Jones, traveled widely seeking recruits for their movement almost exclusively between S. D. A.’s and various Davidian groups scattered about. He was particularly successful in getting several people from the Loma Linda California area and the Diamond Head S. D. A. church in Honolulu Hawaii. At the time of the government raid on new Mt. Carmel in February 28, 1993 there were almost 100 followers living in the camp. One of the habits of the group that caught the government’s attention was Koresh’s fondness for collecting guns. is is a perfectly legal right in America under protection of the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution, but the type of activity that true Christians would shun. He also supposedly had several wives some of whom were already married. e alleged reason for the government raid on the camp was because Koresh was in violation of certain gun registration laws. As we will see the underlying reason for the government involvement was deeply rooted in the religious controversy between the S. D. A. church and the Shepherd’s Rod message. 4

e raid on new Mt. Carmel on February 28, 1993 resulted in the death of four government agents and left sixteen wounded. Several Branch Davidians were also wounded and killed. is started a 51-day siege that lasted until April 19, 1993 and attracted worldwide attention. At this point the government initiated a raid that resulted in a sudden gigantic fire that engulfed the entire compound and eventually claimed the lives of 79 men, women, and children who were living inside. e problem that loomed large in the minds of many Americans is why did the US government show up to issue a simple warrant of arrest for an alleged gun law violation with a gun-firing helicopter and over 100 federal Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) agents armed with automatic weapons? Many other disturbing questions arose later as the result of follow up investigations which revealed that the government was likely involved in a massive cover-up and got caught lying about the true cause of the gigantic fire. At first they told the media that the Branch Davidians committed mass suicide by starting the fire themselves. e General Conference slyly concurred with this notion by mentioning, in the same breath, a likeness of Koresh and his followers to Jim Jones and the People’s Temple cult who committed mass suicide in 1978.33 Later investigations by independent sources showed such compelling evidence from many difference angles that the gov32

David being the name of the ideal king of Israel and Koresh the Hebrew name of Cyrus the Persian king who released the Jews from Babylonian exiled. Both names are types of Christ. Cotrell, p. 7 33

Willaim G. Johnsson, “Pain and Perspective”, Adventist Review, June 3, 1993, p. 4

ernment had started the fire and were partially responsible for the deaths of Branch Davidians that it opened up a new US Senate investigation over the case. Investigative reports also revealed that they not only started the fire but made every effort to make sure that no one got out of the building alive and that no tangible evidence would be left to incriminate their dark deed.34 Why would the government want to go to such efforts to even justify murder and their deliberate attempts to destroy the evidence? Could it be that the General Conference of the S. D. A. church had some role in enticing the U. S. government to make a raid on the Branch Davidian compound due to their deep-rooted hatred of the Shepherd’s Rod message? Was their motive in resorting to almost “superhuman efforts”35 to discredit the SRod message by associating true Davidians with the fanatical and extreme views of David Koresh and the Branch movement? e analysis and evidence given in Adair’s book presents a compelling case to answer some of these troubling questions based on a historical and theological grounds that can only be understood from the perspective of having knowledge of the SRod movement, its teachings, and its struggle with the S. D. A. church leadership. In the intense media coverage that occurred during the debacle, the GC went to very effort to distance themselves from Koresh and his followers and their uncomfortable connections with Adventism and took the opportunity to convince the world that the Branch group was nothing more than an extension of a renegade “offshoot” of the S. D. A. church that started in the 1930’s with the Shepherd’s Rod and that David Koresh was merely a successor of Victor Houteff, a blatant distortion of truth as we have seen. is could explain why the government would go to such a major effort to cover up the evidence, when after the siege they realized that they were drawn into a religious controversy that they had no legal right to be involved with and had no understanding of its beliefs. One could also understand their desire to distance themselves from this situation due to the previous embarrassment with an incident at Ruby Ridge Idaho where federal FBI agents were convicted for the murder of members of a small fringe group in a similar scenario involving guns and nontraditional political/ religious ideologies. We must not forget that because Branch Davidians believe in keeping the ceremonial laws, which the Bible says, were nailed to the cross (Col 2:14), they are in reality denying that Christ is the antitypical sacrificial lamb. is denial of Jesus Christ when they claim to be 34

For excellent VHS documentaries, see: Waco: e Rules of Engagement, 1997, Firth Estate Productions. Waco: A New Revelation, 1999, MGA Films, Inc. www.waco-anewrevelation.com. Both of these videos are available from www.worldnetdaily.com. Probably the best written documentation about the government cover up regarding the events surrounding the Branch Davidian burn out can be found in the book: Carol Moore, e Davidian Massacre, Legacy Communications and Gun Owners Foundation, 1995. 35

“e clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light lest it should shine upon their flocks.” Ellen G. White, e Great Controversy, p. 608

Christians amounts to blasphemy (Rev. 2:9) and coupled with the fact that they followed a sinful messiah (David Koresh) rather that a sinless one (Jesus Christ) also makes them idol worshippers of the worst kind. We must not remove from accountability the fate that the Branch Davidians brought upon themselves for blatantly erring against the Word of God, which they professed to follow. How can God protect blasphemers and idolaters who should know better? So where does this leave us who are determined to be faithful to God’s Word until the end? We can only study the message each for ourselves to know what it teaches and to follow its instruction to the letter so that we can “strive with all the power that God has given us to be among the hundred and forty four thousand.”36 In the end God is the ultimate judge of those behind the scenes who are responsible for this sort of spiritual wickedness in high places. Let us go forward with the high commission given by our Redeemer and “press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” --Phil. 3:14 In conclusion, David Koresh was one of the many successors of Ben and Lois Roden, false prophets with many unbiblical and erroneous teachings. e true prophet that Sister Ellen G. White predicted would come in the spirit and power of Elijah was Victor T. Houteff.37 Read and weigh the evidence for yourself, otherwise you will never know the truth. --End of Study -For further information or additional questions, please contact us at:

upa7.org P.O. Box 722, Rogersville, TN 37857; email: [email protected] Common Law Copyright by Universal Publishing Association-7, June 2004 (You can print a copy of this study for yourself and share it with others as long as you agree to: make no changes, claim credit for it, charge money for it, and include this copyright and the contact information at the end of the article.)

36

Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 970

37

Ellen G. White, Testimonies to Ministers, p. 475