From time to time, members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church come in contact with or hear about individuals who call themselves Davidian Seventh-day Adventists. There are actually several different groups that call themselves Davidians, and each group has their own unique version of "truth." Until the Branch Davidians received so much notoriety in Waco, Texas a few years ago, many Seventh-day Adventists had never heard of Davidians. David Koresh and 78 Davidians died in a fire at Mount Carmel on April 19, 1993, ending a 51-day standoff with federal authorities. Many Davidian groups are quick to demonize Koresh and point out that their particular group is in no way connected to Koresh's group.

Several Davidian groups maintain web sites on the Internet. Some of them pose as genuine Seventh-day Adventists in order to lure unsuspecting Adventists into reading their material or joining their discussion groups. Examples of Davidian web site names are: "Bread of Life," "Arms of God," "Quiet Moments," "SDA Pioneers" (this one truly appears to be a genuine Seventh-day Adventist site but is in reality a front for Davidians), and "Shepherd's Rod Information Center." At these web sites one will find quotes by Ellen White, references to the 27 Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists, health topics, and other indicators that would lead unsuspecting readers to conclude that the goal of the web site is to edify and educate church members on the Spirit of Prophecy and other topics of interest to Seventh-day Adventists. One must sometimes explore quite far into the web site before being able to determine that the ultimate goal of the site is to propagate Davidian heresies.

The term Shepherd’s Rod is often associated with Davidians because they all claim belief in the writings of the late Victor Houteff. Over several years Houteff authored a series of publications which are now referred to as the Shepherd's Rod. Although Houteff's writings provide the basis for the beliefs of all the different Davidian groups, it is important to note that each group has their own particular interpretation of those writings. The fact that their teachings differ so much from each other makes it difficult to discuss their beliefs, for no matter what subject one attempts to deal with, a spokesman from at least one Davidian group will protest that "we don't believe that!" or "you have misrepresented the message!"

Notwithstanding the fact that each Davidian group has their own unique set of doctrines, it is still worthwhile to seek to discover more about Davidians and how their beliefs differ from that of traditional Seventh-day Adventists. Davidians have never posed a major threat to the Seventh-day Adventist organization; but each year they have been able to lure a few unsuspecting (and usually disgruntled) church members into their fold.

The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has provided much written material over the past sixty years designed to educate their members about the Davidian SDA groups, but many of our members do not know this material is available or how to obtain copies of it. The information contained in this article draws heavily from that published material as well as from many personal observations of the author.

Davidians believe that the writings of the late Victor T. Houteff contain "new light" for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. In an official publication, one Davidian group claims that they hold several fundamental doctrines in common with the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Twenty-two doctrines are listed which are taken from the Year Book of the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination, 1940 edition, which defines such doctrines as the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the unchangeable law of ten commandments, the final destruction of the wicked, etc.

Following the list of common doctrines, it is then stated that "In addition to these fundamental tenets of faith held in common with the Seventh-day Adventists, the Davidian Association holds…,"—and then fifteen additional beliefs are listed, few of which have anything at all in common with established Seventh-day Adventist beliefs. (See Fundamental Beliefs and Directory of the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, 1943, pp 11-15.)

Again taking into account that each group has their own unique twist on doctrine, Davidians in general believe that, prior to the Loud Cry, a call will go out for all Shepherd’s Rod followers to travel to old Jerusalem where David’s throne will be set up upon which a "man" who is not Christ will sit to "judge" and "seek judgement." From Jerusalem, that group (the 144,000) will go out to proclaim the Loud Cry, the results of which will be the conversion of the "great multitude" of Revelation 7:9. Davidians believe they have been called out of the "decadent" Seventh-day Adventist Church, and thus have become the remnant of the remnant. They also claim that all Seventh-day Adventists who do not accept their doctrines will be slaughtered prior to the Loud Cry by angels wielding swords. They teach that there will be two more advents of Christ, an invisible one at which the kingdom will be established in old Jerusalem, and later a visible return after the Loud Cry is complete when both the 144,000 and the "great multitude" will be translated to heaven.

Seventh-day Adventists who are familiar with the sequence of major events that will take place from the present time to the return of Jesus can readily see from the above brief outline that the views of Davidian SDAs are definitely not in accordance with established church doctrine. Church officials, after years of examining Davidian beliefs, concluded and officially declared that the Shepherd's Rod contains heresy. And yet Davidians are put off and offended by the fact that they referred to as offshoots and heretics, and are not allowed membership in the organized Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Mrs. White wrote that "A line of truth extending from that time [when our church pioneers hammered out our distinct doctrines] to the time when we shall enter the city of God, was made plain to me." Series B, No. 2, p 57. Our Davidians friends would have us believe that the time line the Lord "made plain" to Ellen White did not include such important events as the setting up of a temporal kingdom in Jerusalem and the slaughter of Seventh-day Adventists who refuse to change their allegiance from the Seventh-day Adventist Church to the Davidian SDA Association.

One may argue that there may well be other events that will happen that were not distinctly revealed to Mrs. White. However, we must assert that if any claim of new events not revealed to Mrs. White is found to be out of harmony with the events that God did reveal to her is to be rejected as error. Seventh-day Adventist scholars and theologians, after many years of examining the events that the teachings of the Shepherd’s Rod claim will happen before we enter the city of God, have conclusively determined that those events are indeed totally out of harmony with light that was revealed to Mrs. White.

V. T. Houteff’s Hidden Agenda

Seventh-day Adventists are puzzled as to why people with such differing views from their own insist that they are genuine Seventh-day Adventists. The real reason that Victor Houteff, founder of the Shepherd's Rod movement, wanted his followers to remain associated with the Seventh-day Adventist Church is brought to light in the following statement taken from an article compiled by The Committee on Defense Literature of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists: "It was Mr. Houteff’s hope in the beginning that he might remain in the Seventh-day Adventist Church and leaven its membership with his peculiar teachings, and reform and reorganize the denominational organization in conformity with his wishes. He did not at first want to start a new church, or denomination, of his own, although he and his handful of followers had organized themselves outside of the Seventh-day Adventist Church on March 12, 1934. In order to achieve his objective he tried to keep as many of his followers and sympathizers as possible in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, in order that they might bore from within. At the same time he wanted as much of the tithes and offerings as possible to flow out to him, in order that he and his organization might bore from without. On January 15, 1935, he bitterly denounced, as both wicked and foolish, the policies of the Seventh-day Adventist Church regarding the use of the tithes and offerings, since they barred such men as himself and his agents from making use of them for the furtherance of his work. One month later¾on February 15¾he urged all of his sympathizers who could do so to remain in Seventh-day Adventist churches, saying: ‘Hence, if we separate ourselves by staying away from the churches, we give them the opportunity to accuse us of being an offshoot from the body, and ourselves lose the occasion to contact the people. Moreover, if we separate ourselves from the organization, then in the fulfillment of Ezekiel 9, when those who have not the mark are taken away [Seventh-day Adventists slaughtered by angels], we shall have no right to claim possession of the denomination.’" The History and Teachings of "The Shepherd’s Rod", October 1955.

Thus it is clear that Houteff’s goal from the beginning was "to claim possession of the denomination." Neither Houteff during his lifetime nor any of the scattered remnants of his original organization have ever come close to achieving that goal.

Victor T. Houteff was born in Raikovo, Bulgaria, March 2, 1885, and died at Waco, Texas on February 5, 1955. Because of controversies with the leaders of the Greek Orthodox Church and with the Bulgarian government, Houteff was expelled from the country of his birth. In 1907, he migrated to the United States where he was baptized into the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the year 1919.

Houteff had a sour experience at one of the denomination’s sanitariums which resulted in his critical attack on our institutions, claiming the people running them "are reactionaries, they are the modern priests, scribes and Pharisees…." V. T. Houteff, Timely Greetings, vol. 2, no. 35, (address of April 24, 1948), pp 12-16.

In 1929, while serving as an assistant superintendent of the Sabbath school at his home church in the Olympic Exposition Park area of Los Angeles, Houteff began to bring in his own peculiar ideas. He began to share his new beliefs with a few fellow members; but soon complaints were being lodged against him that what he was teaching was not in accordance with Seventh-day Adventists beliefs. After persistently refusing to cease teaching that which church leaders considered to be error, he was finally disfellowshipped.

Houteff often made the claim that the leadership in the Seventh-day Adventist Church never gave him a fair hearing; but it the consensus of church leaders that he was afforded every opportunity to present his ideas to some of the leading brethren and argue his position from the Bible and writings of Ellen White. It was not until he refused to stop teaching his particular views to other Adventists that Houteff was finally dropped from membership.

In opposition to all the counsel given him, he released his teachings in printed form, issuing a book titled The Shepherd’s Rod in December of 1930. He mailed copies to many denominational workers trying to gain their support. Continued efforts were made to save the man from heresy, but in spite of the conclusion of the leading church brethren that his views contained error, Houteff continued to build upon his theories by publishing a series of tracts in 1933.

Many hearings were provided to allow Houteff to present his ideas and have them be put to the test of Scripture; but as is so often the case when an individual arises claiming to have new light for the church, he persisted in his belief that he was right and that all those church leaders in California who had examined his writings were wrong.

Copies of his writings reached the denominational leaders in Washington, DC, and the brethren there also quickly determined that Houteff’s teachings contained error. After discussing the matter, the General Conference Committee voted to prepare a leaflet to counteract the false teachings of The Shepherd’s Rod.

While his teachings were being examined by different groups of church brethren, Houteff signed with his own hand a letter which contained two solemn promises. The first was this: "In case the committee find error in the teaching of ‘The Shepherd’s Rod,’ and are able to refute same by the teachings of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy, Brother Houteff agrees to renounce the advocacy of the ‘Shepherd’s Rod,’ and to make public renunciation of same." The second promise signed by Houteff was that "Brother Houteff also agrees to discontinue the propagation of the ‘Shepherd’s Rod,’ so far as he can control same, in the Pacific Union Conference, during the time this investigation is being made." The History and Teachings of The Shepherd’s Rod, October 1955, p 15.

Yet during the time the investigation was being made, Houteff proceeded to organize his few followers into an association, with himself as its leader. In spite of the fact that the committees that investigated his writings found much error, he never renounced his writings as he had promised.

In 1934, the Autumn Council, with representatives from the various divisions of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist organization present, declared formally that: "Whereas, it is of paramount importance that Seventh-day Adventists should be united in teaching the distinctive truths of our message, and in meeting subversive errors; therefore, Resolved, That we, the delegates to the 1934 Biennial Council, hereby approve the principles contained in the current booklet, ‘A Warning Against Error,’ as prepared by the General Conference Committee, and that we likewise endorse the similar booklet published by the Pacific Press." Thus, the church formally declared that Houteff’s teachings contained "subversive error."

In 1935, Houteff purchased 189 acres near Waco, Texas and established a colony called Mt. Carmel Center. In August of that same year, he pronounced: "True we are establishing our headquarters on this mount that is found in prophecy, but our stay here shall be very, very short." The Symbolic Code, vol. 1, no. 14 (August 1935), p 5. Houteff believed that soon he and his followers would relocate to the Holy Land and there set up the temporal kingdom of David. Twenty years later, according to the Waco Tribune-Herald, the colony had about 90 people living at the center. And as we are all painfully aware, almost 60 years after the establishment of the place where the Houteff’s followers were to be only a "very, very short" time, the compound was burned to the ground.

In 1937, the group at Mt. Carmel was reorganized under the name of "The General Association of the Shepherd’s Rod Seventh-day Adventists." There was at that time a controversy within the organization over the fact that officers were not elected, but were appointed by Houteff himself.

During World War II, the group again reorganized under the name of "The Davidian Seventh-day Adventists," and set about to constitute themselves with formal membership and to bestow ministerial credentials so that their male members would be able to avoid being drafted into the military service.

No longer could they hide behind the claim that they were bona fide members and representatives of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. By their organizing and issuing certificates of membership to their followers, they confirmed the proclamation that had all along been made by genuine Seventh-day Adventists—that the Shepherd’s Rod was nothing more or less than an offshoot of the church. Over the years, the following inspired statement from the pen of Ellen White has proven to be an insurmountable barrier against successful Davidian infiltration into the Seventh-day Adventist Church: "God has a church upon the earth, who are His chosen people….He is leading, not stray offshoots, not one here and one there, but a people." Testimonies to Ministers, p 61.

In 1935, Houteff tried to evade the term "offshoot" by instructing his followers to remain within the ranks of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. But later when they drew up their constitution, bylaws, and a general statement of their beliefs and practices as a church body in a document they titled The Leviticus of the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, Houteff realized that it would be useless to keep on trying to hide the fact that his group was an offshoot; so he decided to acknowledge that fact by announcing that "The Davidians are an upshoot from decadent Seventh-day Adventism." The Leviticus of the Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, p 12.

In order to justify their existence as a separate church body, Davidian SDAs level charges of corruption and decadence against the remnant church, and in so doing they have entered into a work that would tear down the organized work that the Lord set up in the year 1863 known as the Seventh-day Adventist Church. "Those who start up to proclaim a message on their own individual responsibility, who, while claiming to be taught and led of God, still make it their special work to tear down that which God has been for years building up, are not doing the will of God. Be it known that these men are on the side of the great deceiver. Believe them not….They will deride the order of the ministry as a system of priestcraft. From such turn away, have no fellowship with their message, however much they may quote the Testimonies and seek to entrench themselves behind them. Receive them not, for God has not given them this work to do." Testimonies to Ministers, p 51.

After Houteff died in 1955, his widow along with the help of a few other leaders led his flock. On November 9 of that same year, "light" was received by the leaders at the Mr. Carmel center in Texas concerning events that were soon to transpire. A call went out that all believers in the Shepherd’s Rod were to assemble at Mt. Carmel by April 16, 1959. A press announcement was generated from Mt. Carmel which stated: "We expect that sometime this spring God will commence to set up His peaceful kingdom in the Holy Land. We believe that the Holy Land will be prepared for the setting up of God’s kingdom by the war of Zechariah 14….The April 22 date was calculated from the symbolic prophecy of the 1260 literal days of Revelation 11:3-6. Those days commenced November 9, 1955, and will end April 22, 1959. The events of verses 7 to 13 [that God will set up a king over all the earth, Jerusalem will be "safely inhabited," the Jews will be driven from Palestine, and a plague will fall upon all who have fought against Jerusalem] are to be fulfilled after April 22." Review & Herald, May 17, 1962, article titled "The Shepherd’s Rod Organization Disbands."

Also as part of their predictions, the Davidian SDA leaders affirmed that "We believe also that sometime this spring God will in a direct and terrible judgment as shown in Isaiah 66:15-20 and Ezekiel the ninth chapter, remove all the hypocrites from the Seventh-day Adventist denomination and also from among the Davidians." This was to be the long-threatened slaughter of Seventh-day Adventists who refused to accept Houteff’s doctrines.

Close to one thousand people loyal to the Shepherd’s Rod, including some who belonged to splinter groups, left all their possessions behind and gathered at Mt. Carmel. But after weeks, and finally months, passed without the predicted events taking place, the disillusioned souls, many of them who were now penniless, left Mt. Carmel in confused disarray to begin their lives again elsewhere. Some repented of their folly and returned to once again become loyal members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Had those deluded souls been ardent students of the Spirit of Prophecy as they claimed to be, they would not have fallen for any "time prophecy," for Mrs. White made it clear that after 1844, there would be no more time prophecies. That is, there were no more dates that could be calculated from Scripture upon which were to occur prophesied events. Mrs. White put it this way: "Time has not been a test since 1844, and it will never again be a test. The Lord has shown me that the message of the third angel must go, and be proclaimed to the scattered children of the Lord, but it must not be hung on time. I say that some were getting a false excitement, arising from preaching time…." The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol 7, p 971. Also: "Let all our brethren and sisters beware of anyone who would set a time for the Lord to fulfill His word in regard to His coming, or in regard to any other promise He has made of significance." Early Writings, p 75.

Shortly after that embarrassing experience which received worldwide attention, the Mount Carmel leaders requested and were given a hearing at the Seventh-day Adventist World Headquarters in Takoma Park, Maryland. During several meetings lasting a total of about 50 hours, the Davidian SDA leaders presented their foremost peculiar doctrines to the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination; but when discussing the prophecies of Revelation, it was conceded by the Davidian spokesmen that their interpretation of these texts were out of harmony with Mrs. White’s interpretation.

Seventh-day Adventist leaders took the opportunity to point out the several other inconsistencies between the teachings of the Shepherd’s Rod and the Spirit of Prophecy. Before the meetings concluded, the Davidian SDA representatives, because they could not meet the arguments presented to them from the Spirit of Prophecy, submitted a written motion requesting the elimination of Mrs. White’s writings in the further study of Bible prophecies—and this in the face of Houteff’s assertion that "The interpretation of these scriptures [dealing with prophecies in Revelation] is supported entirely by the writings of Sr. E. G. White, that is termed the Spirit of Prophecy." The Shepherd’s Rod, Vol. 1 (1930), p 11.

Earnest appeals by General Conference brethren were made to the Davidian SDA leaders, urging them to acknowledge their mistakes and unite with the Seventh-day Adventist Church to finish the work. [Note: a full copy of the "Report of a Meeting Between a Group of ‘Shepherd’s Rod’ Leaders and a Group of General Conference Ministers, July 27 – August 7, 1959" is available from the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists located in Silver Spring, Maryland.]

After the Davidian SDA representatives returned to Waco, Texas, bickering broke out amongst the leaders. Some who had attended the meetings at the General Conference were honest enough to admit the inconsistencies between Mrs. White’s writings and those of V. T. Houteff, and left the group. A few splinter groups formed and broke away. Censure was heaped upon the leaders for the time-setting fiasco of April 22, 1959.

Then, in a newsletter from Mt. Carmel dated December 12, 1961, came the announcement that their beloved founder’s teaching concerning Ezekiel 4 and 9 was at variance with the Bible. To the dismay of the few Shepherd’s Rod believers who remained at that point, the Mt. Carmel leaders wrote: "Inasmuch, however, as the ‘Rod’ literature contains this misunderstanding on Ezekiel 9 and Ezekiel 4, (there are still other things which we have not dealt with as yet), its [Houteff’s interpretation of those Bible texts] further use is impossible. If the literature [Houteff’s writings] can no longer be used, it naturally follows that the work it promotes [there in Mt. Carmel] is automatically stopped….Now that we have discovered that the ‘Rod’ is not in harmony with the Bible on basic subjects, we understand why the 1959 [time setting] test turned out as it did." The Symbolic Code, February, 1962, pp 6,7.

In March of 1962, the leaders at Mt. Carmel formally submitted their "Notice of Resignation" in which they wrote: "But in our thorough examination of the ‘Rod’ in the light of the Bible, we came upon the realization that adjustments in many of our doctrines were required if there was to be harmony between them and the Bible. For we discovered that some cardinal teachings were predicated on concepts Brother Houteff and I or Sister White expounded which the Bible actually does not support….There is no alternative open to us but to resign since, as we view it, so vital a change in the basic doctrines is involved that it leaves the [Davidian] Association without its declared prophetic commission." On March 11, 1962, it was formally resolved that "said General Association of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists be, and the same hereby is, dissolved, and shall henceforth cease to exist." Review & Herald, May 17, 1962, article titled "The Shepherd’s Rod Organization Disbands." The Mt. Carmel center was officially closed, its leaders left, and the property and assets of the organization were left in the hands of an attorney.

In a letter dated October 16, 1989, and written to the pastor of a Seventh-day Adventist church in Vermont, Frank Holbrook, at that time the Associate Director of the Biblical Research Institute at the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, wrote: "But in the early ‘60s she [Mrs. Houteff] and her officers resigned and gave up the beliefs. This was sufficient—we thought—to destroy the "movement," and for about 20-25 years it was for all practical purposes dead. However, in recent years at least a dozen splinter groups have come into existence. They are separate and independent of each other—nor do they pull together.

"One of these groups—in the Waco area—is teaching that the Holy Spirit is of female gender! That group is so bizarre that it does not affect our people to any degree. But the group in Exeter, Missouri, is quite active and claims to be the one and only true descendant of the original Rod group….

"While there may be some new wrinkles (one group in Canada claims a prophet in their midst; and some of them are teaching that it is a sin to use credit cards), as far as we can tell, their basic doctrinal positions (based on misinterpretations of the Old Testament prophets) are still being taught….

"Such groups get a hearing by using copious citations from Ellen White (selected to slant to their view of things) and by criticizing the church."

Thus, new groups, all claiming to the true promoters of the Shepherd’s Rod messages of Victor Houteff, are still on a crusade to undermine the organized work of God. After the recent destruction by fire of the Waco compound, even more splinter groups have formed. Some believe that David Koresh was appointed by God to usher in the temporal kingdom of David, while others (who also claim to be "True Davidians") see him as a devil who went berserk and thought himself to be Christ.

But in the midst of all the confusion of many voices claiming to be the genuine promoters of the Shepherd’s Rod message, they all do have one thing in common: they are obsessed with luring unsuspecting Seventh-day Adventists, along with their tithes and offerings, into their own particular group.

Houteff once made this remarkable claim (that has since come back many times to haunt him and his followers): "Our being, as you know, unswerving adherents of…Sister White’s writings, full-fledged S.D.A.’s, we are sure that…Sister White’s writings support the ‘Rod’ one hundred percent." The Symbolic Code, vol. 7, nos 7-12 (July-December, 1941), p 5.

Can this claim be substantiated? Do the writings of Ellen G. White support Houteff’s doctrines "one hundred percent"? If Victor Houteff had the gift of prophecy, as proponents of the Shepherd's Rod claim, then nothing he wrote would contradict the light that had been given through Mrs. White. We will here demonstrate that many of Houteff’s teachings do in reality directly conflict with Mrs. White’s writings.

Victor Houteff was critical of those who used comparisons between his teachings and the writings of Mrs. White in order to expose him as a fraud. He wrote: "We are fully aware that the collocation of quotations from The Shepherd’s Rod and the Spirit of Prophecy…makes them appear to be in direct conflict with each other. But this false appearance has been effected by isolating the statements from their contextual connections….By the method they have used¾ disproving one person’s writings by comparison with another’s¾ any two books of the Bible can be made to contradict each other." The Great Controversy Over "The Shepherd’s Rod", p 20,24. Yes, some books of the Bible can be made to contradict each other¾ if the quoted texts are taken totally out of context. However, Houteff’s charge is essentially that in every case where his writings have been compared with those of Mrs. White, things are always taken out of context in order to prove that his writings are not supported by the Spirit of Prophecy.

In light of the overwhelming number of examples that have been presented by dozens of Seventh-day Adventist scholars over the past sixty years which show where Houteff’s doctrines are unsupported by Mrs. White’s writings, we find it hard to believe that in every case the texts presented have been taken out of context. We will leave for the reader to decide if the examples offered in this article are, indeed, taken "from their contextual connections."

We should point out that following the above statement, Houteff goes on to point out a few inconsistencies in certain statements made in Sabbath School publications that contradict each other as being evidence that the Seventh-day Adventist church itself is guilty of what it accuses Houteff of being¾ a false teacher. Since when has the church claimed that everything that they publish is without error? Houteff, on the other hand, on August 31, 1931, sent out a circular letter in which he stated: "We must conclude that the ‘Rod’ contains all truth, or there is no truth in it save the quotations of truth. Therefore, if we admit one truth revealed by the ‘Rod,’ then we must accept all as truth….Therefore, we take the position that the message in the ‘Rod’ is free from error in so far as the idea put forth is concerned." He repeated that statement in 1935, and reaffirmed it in 1947. [See V. T. Houteff, The Symbolic Code, vol. 1, no. 8 (Feb15, 1935), p 1; and Timely Greetings, vol. 1, no. 18 (address of Dec 7, 1947), p 10.]

Houteff claimed that his writings contained "all truth" and were "free from error." Some critics believe Houteff was claiming that his writings were infallible. Others would say that he was merely asserting that his writings contained no heresy. We will give Mr. Houteff the benefit of the doubt and say that he truly believed his writings did not blatantly contradict any light that God had revealed to his prophet Ellen White. Let us examine several of Victor Houteff's teachings to see if his writings are in harmony with what the Lord revealed to Mrs. White.

Davidians teach that a passage of Scripture found in Isaiah 11:6-9 proves that genuine followers of the Shepherd's Rod will remain in perfect safety during the time referred to as the Great Time of Trouble. The passage in Isaiah reads thus: "The wolf shall also dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’s den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea."

Davidians place the scene of peace and serenity as described by Isaiah in a kingdom on this earth before the second coming of Christ. Houteff taught that at some point in time his followers would move to Palestine and set up an organization that would orchestrate the Loud Cry. He promised his followers that they would live in perfect safety during the time when the rest of the world was going through the dreaded Time of Trouble.

Did Ellen White’s write anything about Isaiah 11:6-9 that would support Houteff’s assertion? Here is her commentary on what Isaiah wrote: "Those who accept the teachings of God’s word will not be wholly ignorant concerning the heavenly abode. And yet, ‘eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him.’ 1 Corinthians 2:9. Human language is inadequate to describe the reward of the righteous. It will be known only to those who behold it. No finite mind can comprehend the glory of the Paradise of God.

"In the Bible the inheritance of the saved is called a country. There the heavenly Shepherd leads His flock to fountains of living waters. ‘My people shall dwell in a peaceable habitation, and is sure dwellings, and in quiet resting places….’ The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid…and a little child shall lead them.’ ‘They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain,’ saith the Lord." The Great Controversy, pp75,676.

The scene that the Bible portrays in Isaiah 11 is presented by Houteff as being in a kingdom on this earth prior to the return of Christ, while that very same scene is said by Mrs. White to portray the "heavenly abode." Will you believe Houteff or Mrs. White?

A staunch defender of Davidian doctrine once told me that Seventh-day Adventists are "obsessed with Time of Trouble" and are overly worried about how terrible it will be for the elect of God during that time. It is true that many Seventh-day Adventists are very concerned about what God's people must go through during the Time of Trouble, and those concerns are based on the writings of a true prophet. Mrs. White wrote many vivid descriptions of what the people of God must endure. The following passage is from the chapter in the book The Great Controversy titled "The Time Of Trouble": "The people of God will not be free from suffering; but while persecuted and distressed, while they endure privation and suffer for want of food they will not be left to perish." (page 629). Ellen White revealed that the Time of Trouble would be "a time of fearful agony" for God's people. (Ibid, page 630.)

In another description of what the people of God must endure during the Time of Trouble, Mrs. White described how many "will be cast into the most unjust and cruel bondage" and how "the beloved of God pass weary days, bound in chains, shut in by prison bars, sentenced to be slain, some apparently left to die of starvation in dark and loathsome dungeons." (Ibid, page 626.) Do those scenes portray God's people dwelling in perfect safety during the Time of Trouble? Contrast these scenes that Mrs. White portrayed with Houteff's scene of the lamb and the leopard lying down with the kid, and the calf and the young lion scampering around together. Mrs. White wrote of the persecution, the distress, the cruel bondage, and the privation and hunger which lies in store for those who remain loyal to God when the rest of the world turns against them. Houteff, on the other hand, misapplied Isaiah's description of the heavenly abode to lure his followers into a sense of false security, assuring them they would dwell in perfect safety during the Time of Trouble.

One final point about Houteff's attempt to assure his followers that they would escape from the trials and sufferings of the Time of Trouble. The popular doctrine of the "Rapture" as taught by the nominal Protestant churches is just another version of the same idea--that God’s true followers will be spared from suffering through the Time of Jacob’s Trouble by being "raptured" up to heaven prior to that time. But whether the theory presents the saints as being raptured to heaven prior to the Time of Trouble, or dwelling in Palestine as described in Isaiah 11 during the time when the world is in the throws of the last great conflict, a false sense of security is established in the minds of those who have been taken in by the lie.

When Will Christ Set Up His Kingdom And Rule On The Throne?

The cornerstone of Davidian doctrine is the idea that God will set up His kingdom prior to the close of probation, and that the throne of David will be established in Palestine upon which a "man" (who is not Christ) will sit to "judge" and "seek judgment." Remove that cornerstone doctrine, and the rest of Houteff’s doctrines will topple.

How does the theory that God will establish a kingdom on earth prior to the close of probation stand in comparison to what Mrs. White wrote on the subject of Christ’s throne? Houteff claimed this novel idea of the throne being set up before the return of Jesus was "new light" that God had shown him, but is it supported by light that had already been revealed prior to Houteff’s arrival on the scene? The following light revealed in the inspired writings of Ellen White will answer the question: "Not until the personal advent of Christ can His people receive the kingdom. The Saviour said: ‘When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: and before Him shall be gathered all nations: and He shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats….Paul says: ‘Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God…’1 Corinthians 15:50. Man in his present state is mortal, corruptible; but the kingdom of God will be incorruptible, enduring forever. Therefore man in his present state cannot enter into the kingdom of God. But when Jesus comes, He confers immortality upon His people; and then He calls them to inherit the kingdom of which they have hitherto been only heirs." The Great Controversy, pp. 322, 323.

In no uncertain terms, the Holy Spirit has revealed that "Not until the personal advent of Christ can His people receive the kingdom." Houteff, in plain opposition to this revealed light, claimed that the kingdom would be set up, not only before "the personal advent of Christ," but even before probation closes.

Further evidence that Mrs. White’s writings do not support this particular idea of Houteff’s may be found in this quote: "So the throne of glory represents the kingdom of glory; and this kingdom is referred to in the Saviour’s words: ‘When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit on the throne of His glory….’ Matthew 25:31,31. This kingdom is yet future. It is not to be set up until the second advent of Christ." The Great Controversy, p. 347.

Note the contradiction: Houteff taught that the establishment of Christ’s throne will be before the close of probation; but Mrs. White revealed that "Not until the personal advent of Christ can His people receive the kingdom" and "When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit on the throne of His glory."

Houteff went to great lengths to build upon his idea that the kingdom of God would be set up prior to the return of Jesus, and as he built his theory, he added the idea that since the throne of the kingdom is set up before Christ returns, then one must conclude that the person who sits on the throne is not Jesus but a real "man." Has it not always been the intention of Satan to sit on God’s throne and be worshipped? We know from the apostle Paul that a "man" will try to sit in the place of God, and that man is the pope¾ the antichrist. No man but the Man Christ Jesus has the right to sit on Christ’s throne as a judge.

This next example is one in which the contrast between what Houteff espoused and what the inspired pen of Ellen White clearly revealed is blatant. Houteff taught that the old covenant is the only covenant that has to this day existed, and that the new covenant is yet to be fulfilled. Here is what he taught on this matter: "The old ‘covenant’ or agreement between God and His people was upon the promises of both parties based thus [then he quotes the old covenant as written in Exodus 19:8 and Deuteronomy 28:1-9].

"The above paragraph describes the first covenant, which covers the period from the time it was made to the imminent and final ingathering of the twelve tribes as a kingdom, and which covenant has been broken by the Old and the New Testament churches until this very day….But the covenant, which the Lord is now about to make, is to be unlike the old. The commandments of God (Exod 20:1-17) will not be written on tables of stone (Exod 31:18), but ‘in fleshly tables of the heart,’ and at that time all shall ‘know the Lord….’

"This is the second covenant, which God is about to make, and the law of God, being written on the heart, will be perfectly kept; then, and not before, will the blessings, which His ancient people failed to realize, be fully ours." Tract 8, pp68-70.

Right away one sees the hidden meaning of this theory, which has been the accusation of Satan since the beginning of the Great Controversy¾ that the law of God cannot be kept. Houteff’s teaching of the two covenants leads to the conclusion that people are incapable of keeping God’s law, and that we must wait for some future day for that to happen.

Did Mrs. White agree with Houteff’s assertion that the new covenant, which enables a person to keep God’s law, is yet to be fulfilled? Her testimony regarding this matter is this: "As the Bible presents two laws, one changeless and eternal, the other provisional and temporary, so there are two covenants. The covenant of grace was first made with man in Eden, when after the Fall, there was given a divine promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head. To all men this covenant offered pardon and the assisting grace of God for future obedience through faith in Christ. It also promised them eternal life on condition of fidelity to God’s law. Thus the patriarchs received the hope of salvation….

"Another compact¾ called in Scripture the ‘old’ covenant¾ was formed between God and Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. The Abrahamic covenant was ratified by the blood of Christ, and it is called the ‘second,’ or ‘new,’ covenant, because the blood by which it was sealed was shed after the blood of the first covenant. That the new covenant was valid in the days of Abraham is evident from the fact that it was then confirmed both by the promise and the oath of God…." Patriarchs & Prophets, pp 370, 371.

"Every time a soul is converted, and learns to love God and keep His commandments, the promise of God is fulfilled, ‘A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put in you.’" The Desire of Ages, p 407.

Houteff asserted that the new covenant is one that God is "about to make" (that it is still future), but the Spirit of Prophecy teaches us that "the new covenant was valid in the days of Abraham" and that "Every time a soul is converted…the promise of God is fulfilled, ‘A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put in you."

 Another Subtle Heresy Taught By Houteff

Seventh-day Adventists have been accused by nominal Protestants of elevating Mrs. White’s writings to the same level as the Holy Scriptures. That, of course, is a false claim; for we view Mrs. White’s writings to be an inspired commentary of the Word of God, but they are not to supercede Scripture. One thing is certain, however, and that is that Ellen White never made the assertion that we can obtain a true knowledge of the Bible only through her writings. Can the same thing be said of Victor Houteff?

In Zechariah 4:1-6 and 12-14, Zechariah was wakened from sleep by an angel and saw a golden candlestick, a bowl on top of it, and "seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps." He also saw two olive trees (or branches), one on the right and one on the left, from which oil passed through two golden pipes. He asked the angel what the branches and pipes were, and the angel said that "These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth."

Now let us see what application Houteff gave to this scene. He wrote: "The two pipes through which the oil is carried into the bowl, can only represent the channels (prophets) through whom the oil is transferred from the Bible into the bowl, in the period during which both olive trees (Old and New Testaments) live¾ in the Christian era.

"Let the reader take a searching look at the visual illustration on page 19 [of his tract], and he will see the utter impossibility of he candlestick’s (the church membership’s) and of the tubes’ (ministers’) themselves, extracting oil direct from the olive trees. The interpretation of the Scriptures, therefore, being entrusted to the two pipes (prophets) in the Christian Era shows that ‘no prophecy of the Scriptures is of any private interpretation,’ but is of inspiration only….

"The interpreters (the two golden pipes), therefore, are the only ones who are enabled to bring forth meat in due season (golden oil) from the Scriptures (olive trees) into the storehouse (golden bowl) of present truth, and by the aid of the ministers (seven tubes) to pass on the oil to the church (candlestick), that it might illumine with the light of life this dark and dying world of ours." Tract 6, revised, pp 23,24.

Did you catch the subtle insinuation in Houteff’s explanation of the scene in Zechariah? He tried to convey the "utter impossibility" of God’s people and even the ministers of obtaining a true knowledge of the Bible except as received through God’s prophets.

How does this claim of Houteff fair in comparison to what Mrs. White had to say? She wrote in regards to the same scene in Zechariah: "The continued communication of the Holy Spirit to the church is represented by the prophet Zechariah under another figure, which contains a wonderful lesson of encouragement for us….From the two olives trees, the golden oil was emptied through golden pipes into the bowl of the candlestick and thence into the golden lamps that gave light to the sanctuary. So from the holy ones that stand in God’s presence, His Spirit is imparted to human instrumentalities that are consecrated to His service. The mission of the two anointed ones is to communicate light and power to God's people. It is to receive the blessing for us that they stand in God’s presence. As the olive trees empty themselves into the golden pipes, so the heavenly messengers seek to communicate all that they receive from God. The whole heavenly treasure awaits our demand and reception; and as we receive the blessing, we in turn are to impart it. Thus it is that the holy lamps are fed, and the church becomes a light bearer in the world.

"This is the work that the Lord would have every soul prepared to do at this time….We should daily receive the holy oil, that we may impart to others….From the two olive trees the golden oil flowing through the golden pipes has been communicated to us." Testimonies To Ministers, 509-511.

Is it clear whom the two pipes represent? "Let every man who enters the pulpit know that he has angels from heaven in his audience. And when these angels empty from themselves the golden oil of truth into the heart of him who is teaching the word, then the application of the truth will be a solemn, serious matter." Testimonies To Ministers, p 338. The two pipes represent the holy angels who bring the truths of God’s word directly to "the heart of him who is teaching the word," whether that person is a minister or a layman sharing the Word with others who wish to discover Bible truth.

Remember, we are establishing the fact that Victor Houteff claimed that he had the gift of prophecy. He even went so far as to claim that it is impossible for people to understand the Bible aside from his interpretation of Scripture. In an official publication of the Davidian SDAs, the claim is made that "the prophetic gift in the Seventh-day Adventist church (through the medium of which the church was brought forth in 1844 and nurtured and preserved for seven decades) ceased its manifestation in 1915 [upon the death of Ellen White] and was not remanifested until 1930…." Fundamental Beliefs and Directory of The Davidian Seventh-day Adventists, 1943, pp 11,12. Of course, 1930 was when Houteff began writing his Shepherd’s Rod messages.

Hazel Hendricks, who beginning in 1933 was a follower of Victor Houteff for seven years, but who later came to see the error in his teachings, authored a booklet where she wrote: "The author of the Shepherd’s Rod would convey the thought to God’s people that they can obtain knowledge of the Scriptures only through him. According to his teachings on this very point, the thought he wishes to convey in his tract is that the two pipes represent Mrs. E. G. White and himself; and as Mrs. White is dead, that leaves him to communicate the ‘oil’ to the church." The True Witness Speaks: The Teachings of The Shepherd’s Rod in the Light of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy, p 10.

Was the Spirit of Prophecy manifested in the writings of Victor Houteff? When God was establishing Ellen White as His special messenger, plenty of evidence was provided that pointed to her special gift. It is common knowledge that Mrs. White would be taken off in vision during public meetings where the gift could be witnessed even by skeptics. All present could verify the supernatural manifestations that accompanied her visions (loss of breath, no eye-blinking, supernatural strength, etc.). Over a period of several years, the evidence that Mrs. White possessed the prophetic gift was too overwhelming to deny.

Does V. T. Houteff meet the tests of a Bible prophet? Where has it ever been established that he also possessed the gift of prophecy? He never acknowledged that visions and dreams—God’s appointed methods of revealing light to His prophets—were the ways through which he received special "light" from the Lord. Houteff, in fact, claimed that the "light" he received from God came to him through several years of Bible study.

The Spirit of prophecy is filled with warnings to avoid those individuals who constantly arise claiming that God has sent them with "new light" to give to the church. This is not to say that there is no more light to receive; but if gross error is to be found in that which is called "new light," then it must be rejected. Houteff, whose writings contained multiple errors, insisted that he had the prophetic gift and that all Seventh-day Adventists must accept his teachings or be destroyed. But he is only one of many individuals who fulfilled Mrs. White’s prediction that "Men who want to present something original will conjure up things new and strange, and without consideration will step forward on these unstable theories, that have been woven together as a precious theory, and present it as a life and death question." Selected Messages, Book Two, p 15.

Does The Mount of Olives Split Twice?

The Davidian SDA people claim to believe in the inspiration of Ellen White, but we have shown that Mrs. Whites writings do not support the idea that the kingdom of God will be set up in Palestine prior to the close or probation. Houteff was once asked why he believed that the scene described in Zechariah 14:4, which describes the Lord descending on the Mount of Olives, took place before the close of probation. He was shown that Mrs. White wrote that this scene described the New Jerusalem descending after the close of the thousand years. His answer was that what Sister White wrote was right, but that hers was a "secondary application." His explanation of the text was the primary application which was the setting up of the throne prior to the close of probation. He did not offer an explanation as to how the Mount of Olives could be twice split asunder and become a "very great valley."

As previously stated, if the doctrine of setting up the kingdom of David in Jerusalem prior to the close of probation is proved to be false, then the rest of the Shepherd’s Rod doctrine comes crashing down. Obviously, Mrs. White never received such a teaching from God, for as we have already noted, she once wrote: "A line of truth extending from that time [when our church pioneers hammered out our distinct doctrines] to the time when we shall enter the city of God, was made plain to me." Series B, No. 2, p 57. In that "line of truth," she saw the Loud Cry, the Sunday Law, the Time of Trouble, the seven last plagues, the second coming, and all the other major events that took place up to the time when the redeemed enter the city of God. It is inconceivable that God left out of that time line such an important event as the setting up of a temporal kingdom in old Palestine where a throne would be established upon which would sit a finite man in the place of the living Christ.

Ezekiel 9

No discussion of the Davidian SDA organization would be complete without examining their interpretation of Ezekiel chapter 9. The basic teaching of Houteff was that any Seventh-day Adventist who rejects the Shepherd’s Rod message will be destroyed by angels wielding swords, and that the slaughter will take place prior to the Loud Cry and the close of probation. Does his interpretation of Ezekiel 9 find support in Mrs. White’s writings? Let’s find out.

Houteff wrote this concerning Ezekiel 9: "According to Ezekiel 2:3; 3:1,4,5,7, the prophet was to bear his message to the whole ‘house of Israel….’ Yet he did not understand the meaning of the vision….

"Since at the time of the vision, the house of Judah, the two-tribe kingdom, was in captivity in the land of the Chaldeans, and the house of Israel, the ten-tribe kingdom, was in dispersion among the nations whither it had been carried away and scattered some years before (2 Kings 17:6), there was no possibility of Ezekiel’s delivering the message to them. And as it is to both the house of Israel and the house of Judah (Ezekiel 9:9),¾ the twelve tribes¾ consequently it was prophetic in Ezekiel’s time….

"And finally as no slaughter such as the one described in Ezekiel 9 has ever occurred, its fulfillment is obviously yet future." Tract 1, pp11,12, second revised edition.

Houteff here makes three astonishing statements: (1) that Ezekiel did not understand the meaning of the message he was to deliver; (2) that he did not take the message to whom he was told to deliver it to; and (3) that the slaughter foretold has never occurred, and must therefore be a future event. Let us turn to the Spirit of Prophecy to see if Mrs. White supported these three statements.

Mrs. White wrote concerning the prophet Ezekiel: "While Jeremiah continued to bear his testimony in the land of Judah, the prophet Ezekiel was raised up from among the captives in Babylon, to warn and to comfort the exiles, and also to confirm the word of the Lord that was being spoken through Jeremiah. During the years that remained of Zedekiah’s reign, Ezekiel made very plain the folly of trusting to the false predictions of those who were causing the captives to hope for an early return to Jerusalem. He was also instructed to foretell, by means of a variety of symbols and solemn messages, the siege and utter destruction of Jerusalem."

"Even these words were received with mocking derision…. ‘Tell them,’ the Lord declared,…I will speak, and the word that I shall speak shall come to pass; it shall be no more prolonged: for in your days, O rebellious house, will I say the word, and perform it, saith the Lord God.’" Prophets & Kings, 448-450.

How thankful we are that the Lord gave us the Spirit of Prophecy so that we may have a divine commentary on Scripture. The above words of Ellen White reveal the three theories of Houteff regarding Ezekiel to be groundless.

The first of Houteff’s claims was that Ezekiel did not understand the meaning of the message he was to deliver. He concludes that because Ezekiel was "astonished," that meant he did not understand the vision. Yet the inspired commentary declared that the message God gave to Ezekiel was to "warn and to comfort the exiles," to make "very plain the folly of trusting to the false predictions of those who were causing the captives to hope for an early return to Jerusalem," "to foretell, by means of a variety of symbols and solemn messages, the siege and utter destruction of Jerusalem" and all the reasons why God was going to destroy the city, such as the spiritual leaders "offering incense before the idolatrous representations that had been introduced into hidden chambers within the sacred precincts of the temple court." From this we can see that Ezekiel definitely understood the content of the message he was sent to deliver. The Spirit of Prophecy does not support the assertion put forth by Houteff that Ezekiel "did not understand the meaning of the vision."

The second claim of Houteff was that Ezekiel did not take the message to whom he was told to deliver it to. The Bible itself states in Ezekiel 2:3, "I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation." Where is the evidence that Ezekiel did not fulfill that commission? Mrs. White wrote that "the prophet Ezekiel was raised up" for the very purpose of warning and comforting the exiles; and that Ezekiel’s warnings "were received with mocking derision." How could the people receive the words of warning if Ezekiel never told them?

And the final claim of Houteff was that the slaughter foretold has never occurred. He wrests from its true meaning the text which said the vision "is for many days to come, and he prophesieth of the times that are afar off." But the Lords asserted: "Thus saith the Lord God: There shall none of my words be prolonged any more, but the word which I have spoken shall be done." (chapter 12:27,28.)

Bible historians and the Spirit of Prophecy agree that Jerusalem was destroyed in fulfillment of Ezekiel’s prophecy when Nebuchadnezzar marched his armies into Jerusalem, destroyed the city and slaughtered the Jews. Houteff misapplied the "sword" spoken of in Ezekiel 21:3 to mean a literal sword. The Lord said, "Thus saith the Lord, behold I am against thee, and will draw forth My sword out of his sheath"; and again in verses 9 and 10, "A sword, a sword is sharpened, and also furbished: it is sharpened to make a sore slaughter." This is where Houteff got the notion that God would send angels to slaughter with a sword Seventh-day Adventists who rejected the Shepherd’s Rod message; and every Shepherd’s Rod splinter group to this day believes in Houteff’s fanciful theory.

The predictions of Ezekiel were predictions that Jerusalem would be destroyed for their great wickedness, and Seventh-day Adventists have always taught that the armies of Babylon were the agencies that God (or the "sword") used to accomplish this punishment of His people.

The Lord told Ezekiel that the punishment would be in "times that are afar off," but He also qualified that time by saying that the fulfillment would not "be prolonged any more." The prophecy was not fulfilled immediately, but it was fulfilled in Ezekiel’s lifetime. The Lord told Ezekiel that an eyewitness who would escape the destruction would give him an account of the destruction: "He that escapeth in that day shall come unto thee, to cause thee to hear it with thine ears [that the city was destroyed]." Ezekiel 24:26.

To clear up any final doubt that the destruction of Jerusalem in Ezekiel’s day by the armies of Babylon was the fulfillment of the vision given to Ezekiel, we off this inspired comment of Mrs. White: "In the ninth year of Zedekiah’s reign, ‘Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem,’ to besiege the city. The outlook for Judah was hopeless. ‘Behold, I am against thee,’ the Lord Himself declared through Ezekiel. ‘I the Lord have drawn forth My sword out of his sheath: it shall not return anymore…I will pour out Mine indignation upon thee, I will blow against thee in the fire of My wrath, and deliver thee into the hand of brutish men, and skillful to destroy’ (Ezekiel 21:3, 5-7, 31)." Prophets & Kings, p 452.

Mrs. White did apply the destruction of Jerusalem both in Ezekiel’s day and in the year 60 AD to the general destruction of the wicked in the last days. "In the destruction of the impenitent city we see a symbol of the final destruction of the world." This destruction is applied to the "world" and not just to unfaithful Seventh-day Adventists. And we know that this destruction will come by means other than by a literal sword wielded by angels.

The Davidian SDAs teach that there will be a literal slaughter of Seventh-day Adventists who reject their message, and that the slaughter will take place prior to the Loud Cry. Yet the Spirit of Prophecy teaches that disloyal Seventh-day Adventists will leave the church during the Great Shaking and join the ranks of the enemy. There they will perish along with the rest of the wicked, being destroyed, not by sword-wielding angels, but by the seven last plagues and by the brightness of Christ’s glory when He returns to rescue His loyal followers.

One Davidian group has released an audio tape which is a study of Zechariah chapter 6. On the tape the speaker reads an Ellen White quote (found in Testimonies Volume 3) which deals with the sealing of the 144,000. His goal is to convince his listeners that unsealed Seventh-day Adventists will be destroyed in a separate destruction than that of non-believers who are outside the church. In the quote the speaker read from Testimonies Volume 3, Mrs. White contrasted the "true people of God" with those in the church who "excuse wrongs" and "murmur in their hearts…against those who would reprove sin." She explains that the "figure of each man having a slaughter weapon in his hand" (as described in Ezekiel 9) is shown to be symbolic of the destruction of those Seventh-day Adventists who do not repent and receive the seal of God. No problem so far. We totally agree with Davidians who say that angels in Ezekiel 9 who have slaughter weapons (swords) are symbolic of the fact that God will destroy unfaithful Seventh-day Adventists some day.

But, regarding the destruction of those unfaithful church members, we ask this question: When will they "fall"? Ellen White declared that they "will fall in the general destruction of the wicked, represented by the work of the five men bearing slaughter weapon." Testimonies, Vol. 3, pp 266, 267. The point we are about to establish is of critical importance, for it illustrates more clearly than any of the arguments put forth so far in this article that Houteff's teachings contradict the teachings of Ellen White concerning major events that will occur prior to the end of time.

Mrs. White puts the "fall" of unsealed church members at the time of "the general destruction of the wicked." Make sure that you understand this point before going on. We are talking about when unfaithful Seventh-day Adventists will be destroyed. Davidians teach that unsealed Adventists will be destroyed before the Loud Cry, which comes before the close of probation. But Mrs. White places their destruction at the time of "the general destruction of the wicked." And the general destruction of the wicked does not happen until after the Loud Cry and after the close of probation. The wicked non-believers will be destroyed by the seven last plagues and not by the destroying angels of Ezekiel 9. It is only logical to conclude that if unfaithful Seventh-day Adventists are destroyed at the same time as "the general destruction of the wicked," then they will also be destroyed by the plagues, which occurs during the time of the "general destruction of the wicked."  Our Davidian friends would have us take a literal interpretation of Ezekiel chapter 9; but Mrs. White wrote clearly that "They [the unsealed Adventists] will fall in the general destruction of the wicked, represented by the work of the five men bearing slaughter weapons." Note the use of the word "represented" in the above quote. The "five men bearing slaughter weapons" in Ezekiel 9 is a representation of what will occur during the time of the general destruction of the wicked--it is symbolic of that event. There is nothing in the writings of Ellen White that makes that time of slaughter apply to a special time of destruction that occurs before the close of probation. To accept the Davidian teaching on this matter would be to defy all logic.

Yet the Davidian speaker on the sermon tape goes to great lengths to try and convince his listeners that the general destruction of the wicked and the slaughter of unsealed Seventh-day Adventists are two different events at two different times. He would have us believe that unsealed church members fall not only before probation closes, but even before the Loud Cry. The rest of the wicked, he says, fall in the plagues after probation closes. Yet, with all his verbal footwork, he is still faced with the fact that Mrs. White put the "fall" of unfaithful Seventh-day Adventist church members at a single time and event, which she calls "the general destruction of the wicked." And that event will take place after probation closes.

Contrasting the Davidian doctrine of the destruction of unsealed church members with what the Spirit of Prophecy actually teaches on the subject is important, for it perfectly illustrates how Davidians distort the Spirit of Prophecy to make it say what they want it to say. They quote Mrs. White, then seek to undo what she wrote by offering private interpretations of various Bible symbols and texts, which end up being nothing less than fanciful interpretations that have no basis whatsoever in logic or upon sound theological principles.

 Much more could be said about the wrong interpretations of Victor Houteff regarding Ezekiel 9, but we must go on to other topics. Those who wish to further study the subject of Ezekiel 9 as contrasted between V. T. Houteff’s theories and the writings of Mrs. White should call or write the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and request the pamphlet written by Hazel Hendricks titled The True Witness Speaks: The Teachings of the Shepherd’s Rod in the Light of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy.

Those who now embrace the Shepherd’s Rod message will someday witness the Loud Cry taking place and wonder why the slaughter did not occur. Perhaps some will open their eyes at that time, give up their false ideas, and come over to the true remnant church.

It has already been pointed out that Davidian SDAs seek to mingle amongst Seventh-day Adventists. They have been known to move to a particular location (especially where they can find a group of Adventists in the process of establishing a new church congregation) and get themselves on the membership roll. Then they begin to share their "new light" with anyone who will listen.

Is there any way to spot a Davidian SDA amongst traditional Seventh-day Adventists? There are many Davidian groups claiming to be the true followers of the Shepherd’s Rod and each have their own unique brand of doctrine and practice. Since there are so many different beliefs amongst all the Davidian groups, it can be somewhat difficult to find common denominators to help identify someone as a Davidian. In general, however, there are a few clues to look for that a person might be a Davidian. Not all, but many Davidians (1) drop to their knees when anyone prays; (2) never places their tithe or offerings into the offering plate in a Seventh-day Adventist Church; and (3) believe that women must wear a hat in the sanctuary. At least one group of Davidians now refers to Christ as "Yahshua" and believes that Sabbath-keepers must also keep all of the annual feasts such as the Feast of Tabernacles and the Day of Pentecost. But there is one subject they all do seem to have very much in common, and that is their strange fascination with the subject of the 144,000.

Many Seventh-day Adventists are confused as to who make up the 144,000, and for that reason, many are lured into studying this subject with Davidian SDAs. Some who have never studied the subject thoroughly are charmed by the picture of the 144,000 as painted by the Davidian Adventists. Therefore, Davidians often use this subject as their opening wedge into the minds of unsuspecting Seventh-day Adventists.

Davidian SDAs believe that the 144,000 will be the sealed, sinless, and safe inhabitants of that perfect kingdom of David to be set up in the Holy Land prior to the close of probation. Therefore, they teach that the identity of those who make up the 144,000 will be known before the close of probation and that they will assume control of the "church militant" and will finish the work of God.

This is in contrast to Mrs. White’s understanding that the 144,000 will be those who occupy a special place in the heavenly abode, having suffered through the Time of Trouble and triumphed over the beast and its image. Nowhere in the writings of Ellen White is it found or even implied that the identity of the 144,000 will be revealed before the close of probation., much less that this group would occupy the Holy Land and from their headquarters direct the activities of the Loud Cry.

John the Revelator saw in vision a scene of the 144,000 standing upon Mount Zion. He described the vision this way: "Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father’s name written on their foreheads." Revelation 14:1. NKJV.

Referring to this vision, Houteff wrote: "Let it be carefully noted that in his vision, John saw the 144,000 stand not on Mount Zion in heaven, but upon earth, for had it not been otherwise, he would not say ‘I heard a voice from heaven.’….In view of the fact that the 144,000 stood on Mount Zion while the elders and the beasts were before the throne, the 144,000 were, therefore, sealed while the judgment was in session. Moreover, Christ being seen with them in His symbolical form (a lamb), again proves that they stand with Him on Mount Zion during the probationary time¾ while the judgment is in session." Tract 8, p 4,6,7.

Note that Houteff places this vision of John on the earth (although the logic he uses to establish this theory is highly suspect). Contrast his theory of the scene taking place on earth with the following light on the subject of the 144,000 as revealed by God’s true prophet: "In holy vision the prophet saw the ultimate triumph of God’s remnant church. He writes:

"’I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: and they sung as it were a new song before the throne:…and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forth and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth….In their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.’" Acts of the Apostles, pp 590,591.

Note that she places the vision of John, not on earth, but at the time of the "ultimate triumph of God’s remnant church." That time of ultimate triumph comes after the return of Christ when the redeemed are taken to the city, wherein is the "sea of glass." In order to make this vision appear to take place on earth, Houteff had to invent the idea that there still remains two returns of Jesus¾ an invisible one wherein the 144,000 will be sealed when the temporal kingdom is set up in Palestine, and a visible return during which the 144,000 and the ones they ushered into the kingdom (the great multitude) are translated without seeing death.

More evidence may be presented from the pen of Ellen White that places the 144,000 in heaven: "While John was shown the last great struggles of the church with earthly powers, he was also permitted to behold the final victory and deliverance of the faithful. He saw the church brought into deadly conflict with the beast and his image [note the contrast here to the idea of living in perfect safety at headquarters in Palestine], and the worship of that beast enforced on pain of death. But looking beyond the smoke and din of the battle, he beheld a company upon Mount Zion with the Lamb, having, instead of the mark of the beast, the ‘Father’s’ name written in their foreheads.’" Testimonies, vol. 5, pp 752,753.

How clear it is that John’s vision looked "beyond the smoke and din of the battle" that took place in the struggle against the beast and its image, on to the heavenly scene which John described in Revelation 14:1, the scene that Houteff places on this earth and not in heaven.

Mrs. White, describing a scene she saw in vision, wrote: "We all entered the cloud together, and were seven days ascending to the sea of glass, when Jesus brought the crowns, and with His own right hand placed them on our heads. He have us harps of gold and palms of victory. Here on the sea of glass the 144,000 stood in a perfect square." Ibid., vol 1, pp 60,61.

Note that they ascended to the sea of glass, which is where John saw the 144,000. To ascend means to go up¾ to ascend up into the cloud of angels that accompany Jesus when He returns. From there the redeemed are taken off to heaven, and there it is that John saw the 144,000 standing on the sea of glass.

Mrs. White described the 144,000 who stood on the sea of glass as those will be "translated from the earth, from among the living….These are they which came out of great tribulation; they have endured the anguish of the time of Jacob’s trouble." The Great Controversy, p 648.

To summarize, the important point is that the 144,000 will not acquire their status as first fruits until they shall have "been translated from the earth." Far from the group presented by Houteff as living in safety in Palestine and directing the conversion of the "great multitude," the 144,000’s experience will include having gotten the victory over the beast, his image, mark and number; and being translated from among the living after enduring the anguish (the hunger and thirst) of the time of Jacob’s trouble.

The 144,000 will not take charge of the church militant, as taught by the Davidian SDAs. The view that has always been held by Seventh-day Adventists is that the 144,000 will serve God in His heavenly temple after the church is triumphant and safe in heaven.

In spite of the vast number of Ellen White quotes that the Davidians link together to try and prove their theory concerning the 144,000, the truth is that their ideas cannot be harmonized with the plainest of statements of Ellen White that the scene of John’s vision took place in heaven and not in this old sinful world (as Houteff taught).

Oh how cautious we should be about accepting any teaching that would raise to a state of sinless perfection any person or group of persons prior to the close of human probation. And anyone who is entertaining the idea that an erring, finite human being will sit on Christ’s throne before Christ Himself appears in the clouds of glory, would do well to revisit the true meaning of the term "antichrist." Only those who are willing to be deceived will believe that there is a human being alive today who is worthy to sit on Christ’s throne in His stead. The fact that Davidian SDAs make this unbelievable claim is evidence that the spirit of antichrist is still alive and well.

Another Teaching of Houteff Contradicted By Mrs. White

Houteff taught that God did not show Enoch the truth about the flood. He wrote: "Jude proves that Enoch was a messenger of God, and yet that he warned his generation of the destruction of the world by the second advent of Christ, when, if fact, the flood was the event which was to and subsequently did destroy the world of Enoch’s time! Enoch simply was not shown the truth of the flood. Therefore, he preached the destruction then in terms of the coming of Christ." The Symbolic Code, vol 1, no. 10 (April 15, 1935), p 9.

Mrs. White clearly differed with Houteff’s claim when she wrote: "God communed with Enoch through His angels, and gave him divine instruction. He made known to him that He would not always bear with man in his rebellion—that His purpose was to destroy the sinful race by bringing a flood of waters upon the earth." Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p 54. And again, "Through holy angels, God revealed to Enoch His purpose to destroy the world by a flood…." Patriarchs & Prophets, p 85.

Houteff asserted that "Enoch simply was not shown the truth of the flood," while Mrs. White clearly taught that "God revealed to Enoch His purpose to destroy the world by a flood." Can Houteff’s charge that Mrs. White’s writings are always taken out of context with his own statements be substantiated in the above example? Words mean things, and the words of Houteff regarding Enoch have a meaning that is directly opposite to Ellen White’s words. So much for his boast that "we are sure that both the Bible and Sister White’s writings support the ‘Rod’ one hundred percent."

Houteff often made statements concerning various Bible texts with which he offered no proof that his interpretation was the truth.

For example: "The seven years of plenty and the seven years of famine in the days of Joseph in ancient Egypt represent the world’s history in two sections of time as previously explained, namely, B.C. and A.D." The Shepherd’s Rod, vol 1 (1930), p 19.

Houteff also taught the fanciful theory that the wheat mentioned in Ezekiel 4:9 is the doctrine of justification by faith as taught by Martin Luther; the barley is the doctrine concerning the Holy Spirit as taught by John Knox; the beans are the doctrine of grace as preached by John Wesley; the lentils are the doctrine of baptism by immersion as taught by Alexander Campbell; the millet is the doctrine of the 2300 days as taught by William Miller; and the spelt is the doctrine of the Sabbath in connection with the sanctuary as revealed through Ellen White. (See The Shepherd’s Rod, vol 1, (1930), pp 117-120.

And where is inspired proof presented for these and other fanciful ideas that literally fill the writings of Houteff? Houteff, when confronted with that question, responded by writing: "Anyone who will take the pains to study the subject, now published in The Shepherd’s Rod, Volume 1, will find an abundance of ‘Scriptural proof.’" The Great Controversy Over "The Shepherd’s Rod", p 6. So in order to confirm that a statement such as "the seven years of plenty" represents the world’s history prior to the birth of Christ, one is expected to wade through vast amounts of Houteff’s written material searching for the scriptural proof that such a statement is truth.

Houteff, by making such unfounded interpretations of Scripture, surely fits the description of Mrs. White when she wrote: "In order to sustain erroneous doctrines or unchristian practices, some will seize upon passages of Scripture separated from the context…With the cunning of the serpent they entrench themselves behind disconnected utterances construed to suit their carnal desires. Thus do they willfully pervert the word of God. Others, who have an active imagination, seize upon the figures and symbols [such as the wheat, barley, beans, etc.] of Holy Writ, interpret them to suit their fancy, with little regard to the testimony of Scripture as its own interpreter, and then they present their vagaries as the teachings of the Bible." The Great Controversy, p 521.

------------------------------------

We could go on and on giving examples of where Mrs. White’s writings do not support Houteff’s teachings. It would take a book to deal with every point of doctrinal difference that exists between the Davidian SDAs and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. And we should point out that even between the many groups who claim to be the genuine keepers of the "Rod" there is a lot of controversy over what constitutes truth. Suffice it to say that enough evidence has been presented to prove that Houteff’s claim that the Writings of Mrs. White support his teachings "one hundred percent" is totally unfounded.

In spite of the claims of Victor Houteff that his teachings were never given due investigation by the leading brethren of experience, the truth of the matter is that Seventh-day Adventist scholars and theologians have repeatedly over the past sixty-plus years examined his doctrines and continue to this day to pronounce much of the content of the Shepherd’s Rod to be heresy.

Often Davidian SDAs will search out those church members who feel like the church has betrayed them or failed to satisfy their spiritual needs, for they know that such individuals are highly motivated to find something new. Thus many are unknowingly seduced into accepting the errors of the Shepherd’s Rod.

Many who are charmed by the unique teachings of the Shepherd’s Rod have only a surface understanding of Seventh-day Adventist doctrines. They consider themselves wise enough to discern truth from error and find the Shepherd’s Rod material to sound plausible. But little do they realize that as they continue to read the publications of the Shepherd’s Rod, over a period of time the thoughts and beliefs of the Shepherd’s Rod becomes their thoughts and beliefs. Once the error has been embraced, a mountain of evidence may be presented to show that Houteff’s teachings contain error, but they are no longer are able to discern truth from error.

In order to break down the prejudice that Seventh-day Adventists have against Davidian SDAs, Davidians often quote the admonition of Mrs. White that "No matter by whom light is sent, we should open our hearts to receive it with the meekness of Christ." Gospel Workers, p 301. It is good to study that which comes purporting to be new light, for to take a stubborn attitude that there is no more light to be revealed is not wise. But do not allow the Davidians to twist the real meaning of Mrs. White’s counsel. Davidians would have us emphasize the word "whom"—"no matter by whom light is sent…." In other words, the insinuation is that even if someone from an offshoot organization brings us new teachings, we "should open our hearts to receive it."

The real emphasis, however, should be on the word "light"—"No matter by whom light is sent…." The question is: "Are the strange teachings of the Davidians genuine "light," or is it a mixture of truth and error? Having investigated their so-called "new light" and seen that it is out of harmony with light that has already been revealed in Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy, one should conclude that the message of the Shepherd’s Rod is not to be received.

With all that the reader has now learned about the Shepherd’s Rod and its founder, V. T. Houteff, we offer these final statements from the pen of Ellen White which, we hope you will see, perfectly fits the Shepherd’s Rod: "He [God] is leading, not stray offshoots, not one here and one there, but a people." Testimonies to Ministers, p 61. "God has made His church on the earth a channel of light, and through it He communicates His purposes and His will. He does not give to one of His servants an experience independent of and contrary to the experience of the church itself. Neither does He give one man a knowledge of His will for the entire church, while the church…is left in darkness." The Acts of the Apostles, p 163.

"There are little companies continually arising who believe that God is only with the very few, the very scattered, and their influence is to tear down and scatter that which God’s servants build up. Restless minds who want to be seeing and believing something new continually are constantly rising, some in one place and some in another, all doing a special work for the enemy, yet claiming to have the truth. They stand separate from the people whom God is leading out and prospering, and through whom He is to do His great work. They are continually expressing their fears that the body of Sabbathkeepers are becoming like the world, but there are scarcely two of those whose views are in harmony. They are scattered and confused, and yet deceive themselves so much as to think that God is especially with them. Some of these profess to have the gifts among them; but are led by the influence and teachings of these gifts to hold in doubt those upon whom God has laid the special burden of His work, and to lead off a class from the body." Testimonies, vol 1 pp 417,418.

"False teachers may appear to be very zealous for the work of God, and may expend means to bring their theories before the world and the church; but as they mingle error with truth [and we have established that Houteff did just that], their message is one of deception, and will lead souls into false paths. They are to be met and opposed, not because they are bad men, but because they are teachers of falsehood, and are endeavoring to put upon falsehood the stamp of truth." Testimonies to Ministers, p 55.

Author’s Note: I have had the sad experience of losing Seventh-day Adventist friends to the Davidians. Virtually all of my friends who in the past embraced the teachings of the Shepherd’s Rod eventually left the Davidian movement, but none have ever returned to the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

I know that rejecting truth and embracing error will destroy a person’s soul; and therefore I am determined to warn unsuspecting Seventh-day Adventists about the heresy contained in the Shepherd’s Rod.

In my study of this elusive offshoot, I have compiled a vast amount of their published material. Nothing I have ever read in Houteff's writings speaks to my soul as do the writings of Ellen White. I have read accounts of persons who once sat at the feet of Victor Houteff and believed he was God's chosen prophet, only to later come to their senses and realize that he was only a misguided soul who truly believed that it was he who would sit on David's throne when the kingdom was established prior to the Loud Cry. Houteff never made that claim in writing, but he did impress that point upon those who were close to him.

One fact becomes very evident from a study of the history of the Shepherd’s Rod offshoot, a fact that many of them may not even be aware, and that is that since the movement was launched by Victor Houteff in the 1930s, there have been so many offshoots from the original offshoot that it is impossible to sort out who the "legitimate" representatives of the "Rod" really are. Of course, all of them lay claim to that distinction.

It can be a very frustrating experience to discuss doctrine with Davidians. They are the original spin artists. No matter how clear or how abundant the evidence is that they teach error, they have some comeback that twists and distorts the truth. Very early in my association with them I discerned that modern Davidians share the same defiance of church authority and distrust of church scholars that Victor Houteff possessed. I have found that their membership is mostly composed of former Seventh-day Adventists who felt they were mistreated or otherwise became disgruntled. They are gullible enough to believe that their particular small band of well-intentioned but misguided souls will someday be called upon to gather the masses into what they call the Great Multitude. Meanwhile they continue their mission to subvert the organized work. That, to me, is the height of deception and arrogance.

Seventh-day Adventists and Davidians hold some beliefs in common, but their similarities only run parallel to a point. Beyond that, the two paths diverge off in opposite directions. Davidian teachings of last-day events are totally out of harmony with that time line which God revealed to Ellen White. If you would know end time events, turn to the last few chapters of the book The Great Controversy, not to the writings of V. T. Houteff.

While the Seventh-day Adventist Church is busy carrying out their commission to take the gospel to every nation, we must sit by and watch a small handful of isolated groups who call themselves Davidians busy with the task of undermining the faith of church members in their leadership and in the long-established doctrines of the church. While loyal and dedicated Seventh-day Adventists are making determined and successful efforts to preach the three angels messages, Davidians sit on the sidelines and tell us we are going about it all wrong, and that we had better join them before God sends angels to destroy us. In spite of the inability of the several Davidian groups to harmonize on particular points of belief, the one common denominator amongst all of them is that they all believe they are on a mission from God to convert members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to their particular way of thinking.

Author's Note: Since the mid-1980s I have witnessed once-loyal Seventh-day Adventists get caught up in various Davidian groups, only later to leave the movement and renounce their former Adventist beliefs. I felt a burden to warn my SDA brethren about this formally declared offshoot, and this article is the result. If you have any comments you would like to share about Davidians or this article, please e-mail me at BeaconLightSermons@yahoo.com.

Return To sdabeaconlight.org Home Page