True or False: “The Branch Davidians/Shepherd’s Rod—Who Are They?” by George W. Reid

The Biblical Research Institute (BRI) has resurfaced an article written in 1993 by George W. Reid, Th.D., former director of the BRI of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (G.C.S.D.A.) to provide its members with some “history” regarding The Shepherd’s Rod (SRod). This adaptation is republished here in its entirety. The original article was published in the Adventist Review, April 1, 1993. Unfortunately, the majority of this article is composed of misinformation, disinformation, and pseudohistory that has created harmful and false narratives associated with the SRod and how it relates and is perceived by Seventh-day Adventists (S.D.A.). This reply will serve to set the record straight. The comments of the editor will be italicized in braces. 

The Branch Davidians/Shepherd’s Rod—Who Are They? 

Information about the Shepherd’s Rod offshoot group called Branch Davidians. Reprinted with minor adaptation from the Adventist Review.

{The SRod is not an “offshoot group” called “Branch Davidians.” The SRod is the corpus of the writings of Victor Houteff (Mar. 2, 1885 – Feb. 5, 1955). He is the founder of the General Association of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists (G.A.D.S.D.A.) or Davidians for short. It’s an organization operating within the S.D.A. denomination. The “Branch Davidians,” “the Branch,” or the “Branch Seventh-day Adventists” (B.S.DA.) as they were formally known are an offshoot of the G.A.D.S.D.A. Their founder was Benjamin Roden (May 1, 1902 – Oct. 22, 1978). They are a separate organization that formed after the death of Victor Houteff in 1955. “Branch Davidians” are not Davidians, the G.A.D.S.D.A, or the SRod but hold differing views and positions contrary to the Bible, Spirit of Prophecy (SoP), and the SRod. Davidians do not fellowship or associate with Branch Davidians. The false narrative that Branch Davidians and the SRod are one and the same has been promulgated by the S.D.A. church for years. This disinformation has plunged the SRod into disrepute.}

The Branch Davidians of Waco, Texas, fame were themselves a division of a small offshoot group known as the Shepherd’s Rod, who left the Adventists Church in 1930. To meet a continuing need for information about this group, this brief article, reprinted with slight alteration from the Adventist Review, is provided for readers.

{The Branch Davidians are not a “division” of the SRod but an “offshoot” of the G.A.D.S.D.A as previously explained. The Branch Davidians and their compound was not in Waco but Elk, Texas, roughly 15 miles northeast of Waco. Inaccurate reporting by media outlets have placed the events surrounding the Branch Davidians as occurring in Waco, Texas. This is not correct.

In his article, Mr. Reid regards the SRod as an “offshoot” but are they really? In a religious context, an “offshoot” refers to a subgroup or sect that branches-off from a larger religious organization often due to differences in religious beliefs or practices. This typically results in a separation from the larger religious organization, e.g., Church of God Seventh-day, Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement (SDARM), International Missionary Society (IMS), etc. This is not the case regarding SRod believers since they remain faithful members of the Seventh-day Adventist church whether they have been disfellowshipped or not. However, being a member in terms of “church books” is of no value if your name is not written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, “Joining the church is one thing and connecting with Jesus Christ is quite another thing. Not all the names registered in the church books are registered in the Lamb’s book of life.”—Letters and Manuscripts — Volume 3 (1876 - 1882), Lt 51a, 1878, par. 26.}

The term “Shepherd’s Rod” strictly refers to the writings of Victor Houteff. In like manner, the writings of Ellen White are referred to as the “Spirit of Prophecy” (SoP). Inasmuch as Davidians and Adventists share the same fundamental beliefs, the real difference lies in their prophetic interpretation. The same can be said about Adventist ministers and theologians which all have varying views regarding prophecy but not all agree.  Nevertheless, the “Davidian” prefix refers to the “Kingdom of David” thus the name “Davidian.” As full-fledged Adventists, they advocate the S.D.A. church is God’s remnant body of believers but are at odds with its leadership. For more information regarding this dichotomy within the S.D.A church, read our Tract 2: The Great Paradox of the Ages—A Timely Revelation).

They also claim to be the repository of the “Elijah” message as prophesied in the Bible and forecast by Ellen White in the SoP, “Prophecy must be fulfilled. The Lord says: ‘Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.’ Somebody is to come in the spirit and power of Elijah, and when he appears, men may say: ‘You are too earnest, you do not interpret the Scriptures in the proper way. Let me tell you how to teach your message.’”—Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, pg. 475 (See also The Review and Herald, February 18, 1890, par. 16). That message also being the long awaited for “Loud Cry” message of Rev. 18:1 that Ellen White referred to as the “addition” that was to “unite” and “join” to “give power and force” to the third angel, “Then I saw another mighty angel [Revelation 18:1] commissioned to descend to the earth, to unite his voice with the third angel, and give power and force to his [third angel’s] message. ... The work of this angel [Revelation 18:1] comes in at the right time to join in the last great work of the third angel's message as it swells to a loud cry. … This message seemed to be an addition to the third [angel’s] message, joining it as the midnight cry joined the second angel’s message in 1844.” Brackets added.—Early Writings, 1882, pg. 277 (see also Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, 1858, pg. 194). These prophecies regarding a future messenger and message would naturally result in the unfolding of additional truth for “No one should claim that he has all the light there is for God's people. The Lord will not tolerate this. He has said, ‘I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it.’ [Revelation 3:8.] Even if all our leading men should refuse light and truth, that door will still remain open. The Lord will raise up men who will give the people the message for this time.”—Gospel Workers, 1892/1893, pg. 126

The message of Rev. 18:1 as espoused in the SRod does not abandon any of the fundamental pillars of the S.D.A. church but sheds “light” on many of the uninterpreted prophecies in scripture heretofore unrevealed. It also brings clarity to many of the misunderstood prophecies that have been privately interpreted by S.D.A. theologians. It’s a message by an Adventist for Adventists. Unfortunately, many S.D.A. ministers and the laity alike have been deceived by Satan to believe that there is no more light and we as a people have all of the truth thus, “Much has been lost because our ministers and people have concluded that we have had all the truth essential for us as a people; but such a conclusion is erroneous and in harmony with the deceptions of Satan; for truth will be constantly unfolding.”—Signs of the Times, May 26, 1890, par. 2. Unfortunately, many have not heeded this counsel and are at risk of losing out! There has ever been a great fear among us as a people in accepting anything new or unfamiliar thus placing ourselves in a precarious predicament, “There is danger of our being so over zealous to keep out of Babylon that we shall commit her most noted blunder—that of sticking a stake and refusing to pull it up and advance. When we cease to unlearn errors, we shall fall like those who have gone before us. We have learned much, and no doubt there is much more for us to learn. Once we taught with confidence that the time for commencing the Sabbath was at 6 o'clock, but we had to give it up, and now that position appears dark, and we wonder that we were ever so blind. Once we applied the Laodicean testimony to the nominal Adventists, but to our own mortification we finally had to confess that so humiliating a reproof belonged nearer home. Many of us had to give up our position on oath-taking, and it may be that we still have other stakes to pull up. It is the ‘follow on’ and the ‘go through’ spirit that will finally land the remnant ‘without fault’ on the heavenly Mt. Zion. My conclusion is that we should give up no scripture truth, but that our false applications and interpretations of scripture, and consequent false ideas of order and propriety, should be given up as fast as possible.”—Review and Herald, Vol. 16, Nos. 1, 2, May 29, 1860 (M. E. Cornell).

In light of these statements, Davidians are simply Adventists that have accepted the “additional light” that was prophesied would come. That light being the message of the SRod. This makes them “upshoots” not offshoots.}

Beginnings of the Shepherd’s Rod 

The experience of the Branch Davidians was part of the saga of a breakaway splinter group that left the Adventist Church in southern California in 1930. Then and now they represent themselves as the true Seventh-day Adventists.

{Mr. Reid continues to refer to the Branch Davidians as if it were the SRod. He doesn’t make a distinction between the two organizations. It is like attributing the history and practices of the Church of God Seventh-day to the Seventh-day Adventist church simply because they share the phrase “Seventh-day.” He states, “the saga of a breakaway splinter group that left the Adventist church in 1930.” in another attempt to brand the SRod as “offshoots.” They did not leave the S.D.A. church in 1930 or at any time since the SRod’s inception in 1929. 1930 is simply the year “The Shepherd’s Rod, Vol. 1” was published and disseminated throughout the ranks of Seventh-day Adventism proclaiming revival and reformation. Mr. Reid also states that Davidians “...represent themselves as the true Seventh-day Adventists.” Is this how Davidians represent themselves? Is Mr. Reid attempting to make them appear as exclusive? “A true S.D.A.” is anyone that believes and lives out the truths of the Bible and the SoP” regardless if they have accepted the SRod.}

Victor T. Houteff, then an Adventist church member, introduced personal ideas into his Sabbath school classes, ideas he taught at private meetings as well. Following earnest efforts to reason with him, the congregation finally dropped him from membership in November 1930.

{Victor T. Houteff was a Sabbath School teacher in good standing in a Southern California congregation when he began sharing a unique understanding regarding the prophecies in Isaiah. He began to expound these views to his Sabbath School class and after church services when requested. His message was well received and as a result his Sabbath School class began to grow. A few of the elders in the church began to falsely accuse him of teaching contrary to established S.D.A. doctrines. This is what led to his being disfellowshipped from the S.D.A. church. This was done without a hearing or due process. Despite being excommunicated he continued to attend the S.D.A. church and encouraged others to do the same. His disfellowshipping should not come as a surprise as excommunications are exacted liberally within the S.D.A. church. There have been S.D.A. ministers removed from whole conferences for simply quoting too much of Ellen White’s writings during their sermons so either teaching “purported error” or “quoting too much of Ellen White” no one is safe of being censored, ostracized, or excommunicated. This is all done under the pretense that “division” is being caused among church members when Christ Himself stated that “division” is exactly what He came to bring (Luke 12:51-53 and The Great Controversy, 1911, pg. 45.}

Within two years Houteff had produced and circulated two large documents titled “The Shepherd’s Rod” promoting beliefs directly contrary to Adventist understandings. These, he claimed, were the genuine message of God. Building on Houteff’s assertion that he was the antitypical David, as well as on his claims to possess the prophetic gift, his group adopted the name The Shepherd’s Rod.

{The “two large documents” Mr. Reid is referring to are two books entitled The Shepherd’s Rod, Vols. 1 and 2. They were published in 1930 and 1932, respectively. Victor Houteff’s expositions of scripture in these volumes by no means contradict the Fundamental Beliefs of the S.D.A. church but serve to validate them by means of parables, types, and symbols. On the other hand, privately interpreted expositions of the scriptures are prominent within the S.D.A. church. They are riddled with contradictions of both the Bible and the writings of the SoP. These men base their interpretations by the use of commentaries because, “Many think that they must consult commentaries on the Scriptures in order to understand the meaning of the word of God, and we would not take the position that commentaries should not be studied; but it will take much discernment to discover the truth of God under the mass of the words of men. How little has been done by the church, as a body professing to believe the Bible, to gather up the scattered jewels of God's word into one perfect chain of truth! The jewels of truth do not lie upon the surface, as many suppose. The master mind in the confederacy of evil is ever at work to keep the truth out of sight, and to bring into full view the opinions of great men.”—The Review and Herald, December 1, 1891, par. 6. Bible commentaries are not the means the Lord has employed to reveal His precious truths but Inspiration for “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7. Therefore we must “...Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.” 2 Chronicles 2:20. “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men [prophets] of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” Brackets added. 2 Peter 1:21.

Victor Houteff never claimed to be “anti-typical David” as Mr. Reid asserts; however, he did state as Ellen White before him, that his message bore divine credentials. Ellen White and Victor Houteff were not the only ones to claim this authority but John the Baptist (John 1:23), Peter (2 Peter 1:19), and other Biblical authors have claimed the same.  The title of “The Shepherd’s Rod” ascribed to his literary works was determined by Providence unbeknownst to Victor Houteff and had nothing to do with any reference to “anti-typical David” or a claim to the prophetic gift, to wit: “The only rod God’s people have ever been asked to hear is this “Shepherd’s Rod.” At the time we gave the name to this book, we knew nothing about the prophecies in the book of Micah [6:9], neither did we know this passage was there. We mean to say it is not any of our knowledge of this particular scripture that compelled us to name the book by that title, but we feel it was done by the same divine providence that brought about the entire truth, in order to fulfill the scripture.” Brackets added.—The Shepherd’s Rod, Vol. 1, 1930, pg. 243.}

In 1935 Houteff and 11 followers moved to a newly purchased farm near Waco, Texas, which they named Mount Carmel Center. By 1937 a tentative organization was functioning, calling itself “The General Association of the Shepherd’s Rod Seventh-day Adventists.” The group continued zealously producing and distributing its literature, infiltrating Adventist churches in search of anyone who could be persuaded to join them.

{In 1935, Victor Houteff and his associates moved their office from Los Angeles, California to Waco, Texas where 189 acres of undeveloped land was purchased overviewing Lake Waco. There was no farm purchased. They were organized in 1934 not 1937 as “The General Association of the Shepherd’s Rod Seventh-day Adventists” but later in 1943, the organization adapted the name “The General Association of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists.” Inasmuch as this is the organizational name, they simply refer to themselves as “Davidians” in addition to their Adventist title. Strangely, Mr. Reid states that they infiltrate Adventist churches. How do you “infiltrate” the church you attend every Sabbath? Nevertheless, the goal of the SRod is to proclaim the truths of God’s Word and prepare His people for the final events that will close this earth’s history as their Adventist brethren have been endeavoring to do since 1844.}

The U.S. Selective Service draft in 1942 confronted Shepherd’s Rods with a quandary. Draftees could be granted Sabbath privileges only if they could be shown to be bona fide members of a recognized religious group advocating that belief.

{S.D.A.’s of conscription age that were disfellowshipped for accepting the message of the SRod were provided membership to the Davidian Seventh-day Adventist Association. This provided them religious protection during wartime. Those that retained their membership with the Adventist church didn’t need to do this. There was no “quandary” as Mr. Reid suggests but a simple solution was provided for these faithful S.D.A.’s that were abandoned by the S.D.A church during wartime because of their beliefs. The leaders never dropped their claim to being Seventh-day Adventists as Mr. Reid claims but were disfellowshipped from the S.D.A. church. They did not have a choice in the matter. In fact, many tried to retain their memberships but needed to renounce the truths of the SRod to be able to keep their names in the church books. This they refused to do.}

Being unrecognized as members by Seventh-day Adventists, Shepherd’s Rod draftees faced serious difficulties. Therefore the leaders dropped their claim to be regular Seventh-day Adventist members and registered with the United States government under the name Davidian Seventh-day Adventists. They issued certificates of membership and documented their ministers. The transition to a separated group in 1942 was almost complete; however, they continued to insist that they comprised the true and faithful Adventists.

{Davidians have never separated as “regular” Seventh-day Adventists as Mr Reid claims. Mr. Reid’s false narrative is an attempt to rewrite the history of the SRod to designate SRod believers as “offshoots” by his stating, “The transition to a separated group in 1942 was almost complete...” There was no “transition to a separated group” being “almost complete” from the S.D.A. church as Mr. Reid wants his readers to believe. The G.C.S.D.A. has been misleading its ministers and laity since 1930 by labeling Davidians as “offshoots” so members do not associate with them. If the S.D.A. church prides itself in religious liberty, why is it so intolerant of the SRod? Why don’t they just disprove it from the Bible and the SoP? Since this is something they have not been able to do disinformation has been the watchword to dissuade church members from communicating with them. Indeed, certificates of fellowship and ministerial credentials are issued to Adventists that adhere to the principles as delineated in the Bible, SoP, and the SRod. This is what organizations do in order to keep track of their members, Bible workers, and ministers. It has nothing to with separation but organization.}

Shortly before his death in 1955, Houteff announced that following a period of 1260 literal days, Christ would initiate His kingdom. His wife, Florence, succeeding to leadership, identified the 1260 days as extending from November 9, 1955, to April 22, 1959. As the fateful day approached, a call was issued for the faithful to dispose of property and come to Mount Carmel Center. An estimated 800 persons arrived, many bringing the proceeds from the sale of possessions.

{There was no such announcement by Victor Houteff before his death in 1955. Florence Houteff was the one that made the false prediction regarding her idea of “1260 literal days” not the SRod or Victor Houteff. In fact, he has never set a prophetic date and advises that the time surrounding these events are not to be known, “The SRod sets no date either exact or approximate for the closing of the judgment of the dead or for the beginning of the judgment of the living. The time of these events is not to be known until the one is past and the other begun.”—The Symbolic Code, California, 1935, Vol. 1, No. 7, pg. 8. Not only does the SRod not set prophetic dates and speak against time setting but the SoP states the same, “There will never again be a message for the people of God that will be based on time.”—The Review and Herald, March 22, 1892, par. 7.

Florence Houteff did not succeed the leadership after Victor Houteff’s death but usurped it from E.T. Wilson who was vice president of the organization at the time and would have naturally succeeded the leadership. This period of 1955 to 1961 is referred to as the “Florence Houteff Crisis” by Davidians. This crisis ultimately led to the “Knockout Blow.” This was the attempt by Florence Houteff to dissolve the organization. She was the wife of Victor Houteff and secretary of the organization. She was highly esteemed and influential among Davidians and considered a friend. Victor Houteff stated four years before his death that Davidians should brace themselves for an attempt by Satan to deliver a “knockout blow” to the organization by “professed friends of the gospel,” to wit: “Unparalleled, therefore, is the urgency that every eleventh-hour church member now quickly and solidly brace himself against the Enemy's effort to deliver a knockout blow.  We must be alert, too, to realize that the blow is to come from surprisingly unsuspected foes—from professed friends of the gospel, who are no less pious than were priests in Christ's day.”—The White-House Recruiter, 1951, pg. 33. This prophecy was fulfilled to the very letter 11 years later in 1961 by Florence Houteff and her council when she renounced the SRod, SoP, and Adventism as a whole and began to sell off the assets of the organization. This is the story that is not being told.}

When the day came and went, unmarked by the expected event, disillusionment led to fracture of the Shepherd’s Rods into smaller groups, the largest remaining at Waco and adding the name “Branch.” Some members returned to Seventh-day Adventist churches.

{There was fracturing within the organization before and after Florence Houteff’s prediction. Many of its ministers and members were opposed and protested Florence Houteff’s office, private interpretations, and false prediction well before 1959. This was to no avail. The SRod’s message began to lose its tenor shortly after her usurpation of its leadership. The “largest group” did not remain in Waco after the false prediction adding the name “Branch.” No such thing had occurred. Mr. Reid is referring to the “Branch Davidians” as the evolution of the SRod in yet another attempt to rewrite the history of the SRod to merge these two separate and distinct groups into one. This false narrative continues to this day. The “Branch” offshoot of fanatics began four years before her unrealized prediction of 1959, not after.} 

Following an unsuccessful effort by Adventists for reconciliation, late in 1961 Mrs. Houteff renounced the Shepherd’s Rod teachings as in error and shortly moved to disband the group.

{In 1961, two years after her failed prediction, Florence Houteff and her officers met with some of the leaders of the General Conference in Elk, Texas  for a number of weeks. During this time, the General Conference men tried to “win” Davidians back to the “fold.” These meetings ended in futility since they never left the “fold” so there was no one to “win” back. In the process, they attempted to refute the SRod but were unable to even after 30 years of being exposed to it. Nevertheless, Mr. Reid failed to mention that Florence Houteff not only renounced the SRod but Ellen White’s writings and Adventism. Unfortunately, these facts are not being circulated. Just because a person believed something at one point and abandoned it later is no proof that it is error, e.g., O.R.L. Crosier was an early Adventist believer that was given “the true light” regarding the cleansing of the sanctuary as presented in his article, “The Law of Moses,” published in the Day-Star Extra on February 7, 1846. Regarding his article, Ellen White said, “The Lord shew me in vision, more than one year ago, that Brother Crosier had the true light, on the cleansing of the Sanctuary, &c; and that it was his will, that Brother C. should write out the view which he gave us in the Day-Star, Extra, February 7, 1846. I feel fully authorized by the Lord, to recommend that Extra, to every saint.”—A Word to the “Little Flock,” 1847, pg. 12. Ultimately, O.R.L. Crosier renounced the Sabbath, the Investigative Judgment, and Adventism. Is his renunciation of his previous beliefs “proof” that it is error? The same can be said about Demas who was a fellow laborer with Paul (Philem. 1:24) but ultimately abandoned the faith and Paul and followed the world (2 Tim. 4:10). Is this proof that Christianity is error? These abandonments of the faith only serve to prove the Bible correct for it has prophesied that many will depart from the faith (1 Tim. 4:1, 2).}

However, one of the factions gained possession of the Mount Carmel Center. Eventually the center came under the control (in 1984) of Vernon Howell, who had been disfellowedshiped in 1981 from the Tyler (Texas) Seventh-day Adventist Church. Howell later changed his name to David Koresh. Under his leadership the group radicalized its program and stockpiled heavy firearms, prompting the February 28 raid by law enforcement authorities—ending in a shootout and standoff that propelled the Branch Davidian group into the media limelight worldwide.

{None of the “factions” gained possession of “Mount Carmel Center.” It was sold shortly after the death of Victor Houteff and prior to Florence Houteff’s prediction of 1959. Mr. Reid has “Mount Carmel Center” in Waco, Texas confused with “New Mount Carmel Center” in Elk, Texas. This was where Florence and her executive council moved the organizational headquarters of the SRod after the death of her husband. After the events she predicted did not come to fruition, the executive council of which she was the head, liquidated “New Mount Carmel Center” and put it up for sale. Ultimately, Ben Roden, the founder of the Branch Davidians purchased it after which decades later Vernon Howell rose to prominence.}

Shepherd’s Rod Teachings 

The question arises, What are the main teachings that distinguish Shepherd’s Rods from Seventh-day Adventists? In brief, the differences center on a series of assertions having to do with last-day events.

{The primary differences between Davidian and Adventist theology are associated with the prophetic interpretation of certain passages of scripture and of the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy. Regarding its interpretations, the SRod claims Inspiration as its authority as did Ellen White and other Biblical authors. Divine revelation has always been God’s method of revealing truth from Moses all the way down to Ellen White, “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:21. Neither will the, “...Lord God...do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7. This cannot be said of private interpreters which believe that inspiration is not required but strictly rely on diligent study. These individuals have failed to heed the warning, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” 2 Peter 1:20.}

Perhaps the most important is the idea that a Davidic kingdom of absolute righteousness is to be established in Palestine prior to the close of probation. This was the event foreseen for April 22, 1959. By divine intervention, Arabs, Jews, and others would be displaced to make room for this kingdom, whose citizens would be the 144,000, including Shepherd’s Rods and certain others.

{There is to be a pre-millennial kingdom as predicted in the Bible. The Biblical evidence is overwhelming. This is the church triumphant. Its citizens will be composed of people from every kindred, tongue, people, and nation. Ellen White was given much light and truth and has authored many books filled with counsel and guidance for the people of God living in the last days but the light regarding this pre-millennial kingdom was not hers to give. The same can be said about the disciples regarding the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 and other truths that were later revealed as truth progressed. Christ made this clear when he said, “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” John 16:12-14. In other words, truth has never been revealed all at once to any one person. Ellen White is not an exception. Her limited understanding regarding the prophecies related to this pre-millennial Kingdom doesn’t negate its validity as no man has ever understood the truth in its entirety, “Each has his part to act; to each is granted a measure of light, adapted to the necessities of his time, and sufficient to enable him to perform the work which God has given him to do. But no man, however honored of Heaven, has ever attained to a full understanding of the great plan of redemption, or even to a perfect appreciation of the divine purpose in the work for his own time. Men do not fully understand what God would accomplish by the work which he gives them to do; they do not comprehend, in all its bearings, the message which they utter in his name.”—The Great Controversy, 1888 edition, p. 343. For more information regarding this Kingdom of Glory, i.e., the church triumphant, read our Tract No. 8: Mount Sion at "The Eleventh Hour" (second edition).}

Shepherd’s Rod teachings deny that messianic prophecies such as Isaiah 7:14 (“Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son. . .”) and Micah 5:2 (“But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, . . .out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel”) met complete fulfillment with Jesus, arguing that they should apply to the coming Davidic kingdom. Shepherd’s Rods see themselves as called to announce the approach of this Davidic kingdom. Afterward, it is said, Jesus will return to establish another kingdom with the Second Advent, which is to follow the close of probation.

{This is false. The SRod teaches that the messianic prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 is referring to Jesus Christ. This is what the SRod actually says, “‘Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.’ Isa. 7:14, 15. It is agreed that the child here spoken of prophetically, is Christ.”—Tract 6: Why Perish? (third-edition), 1942, pg. 27.

“‘Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel.  Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.’ Isa. 7:14, 15. These verses certainly forecast the first advent of Christ...”—Timely Greetings, 1948, Vol. 2, Nos. 19, 20, pg. 4

“Isa. 7:14, 15 —‘Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel.  Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.’ No one would deny, as mentioned in our last week’s study, that this is a prophecy of Christ's first advent.”—Timely Greetings, 1948, Vol. 2, Nos. 19, 20, pg. 25.

“‘Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel.  Butter and honey shall He eat, that He may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.’ Isa. 7:14, 15. Surely all of us agree that this passage of Scripture is a forecast of the Emmanuel of Matthew 1:23—Christ at His first advent.”—Timely Greetings, 1950, Vol. 2, Nos. 45, 46, pg. 3. It is evident by the foregoing quotations from the SRod that Isaiah 7:14 has nothing to do with a premillennial kingdom but everything to do with Jesus Christ.

What about Micah 5:2? “Mic. 5:2—‘But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.’ There is no doubt that this verse predicts the birth of Christ, ‘the Judge of Israel,’ ‘Whose goings forth’ have been from everlasting. —Timely Greetings (revised-edition), 1953, Vol. 1, Nos. 25, 26, pg. 18

The preceding evidence from our publications on the contrary should make it abundantly clear to the reader that Mr. Reid is not familiar with the SRod. He is just simply parroting the misinformation and disinformation that has been promulgated by the denomination since 1930. Indeed, the True Witness is correct regarding these men by His stating that they’re “...wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.” Rev. 3:17.

There is no such belief in the SRod that Jesus Christ will establish “another kingdom” at his second coming as Mr. Reid states but the culmination of His Kingdom.}

Houteff also interpreted the parable of wheat and tares and the harvest of Revelation (Matt. 13:36-43; Rev. 14:14-19). These he applied to the present time period, anticipating the coming of the Davidic kingdom. Instead of describing events to occur at Jesus’ return, Houteff believed the harvest of grain began January 1, 1931, with a vision he received appointing him to call out the 144,000. The harvest of tares, he taught, will be a divine slaughter of Adventists who reject his message, fulfilling the prophecy of Ezekiel 9.

{Mr. Reid states that Victor Houteff “...believed the harvest of grain began January 1, 1931, with a vision he received appointing him to call out the 144,000.” Not only did Victor Houteff never believe or teach such a thing but neither did he claim of ever having a vison. Again, Mr. Reid’s unattested assertions only serve to prejudice the minds of Adventists by stating things that the SRod does not say or teach. He states these things as “facts” or “history” without presenting any attestation for any of his claims. Nevertheless, the verb “slaughter” is the language employed by both the Bible and the SoP regarding Ezekiel 9. The author is uncertain as to what Mr. Reid is referring to by “harvest of tares” as he’s never heard of such a phrase. Ezekiel 9 is the Judgment for the Living and will affect both Adventists and non-believers, “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?” 1 Peter 4:17. Read our Tract 3: The Judgment and the Harvest (third-edition) for an in depth exposition of these subjects.}

Yet Jesus clearly assigns the harvest and the separation of grain from tares to His return at the end of the world, which follows the close of probation (Matt. 13:39-43).

{Below is a snippet regarding the phrase “end of the world” from our publications as written by Victor Houteff in 1935. The reader should intelligently make his decision as to what this phrase actually means allowing the Bible to be its own interpreter and contrast it with the position formerly taken by the S.D.A. church, and the one currently adhered to by the General Conference men.

“‘The tares and the wheat are to grow together until the harvest; and the harvest is the end of probationary time.’  [Christ Object Lessons, pg. 71] If the English language means anything then the statement here quoted certainly could not place the harvest after probationary time has closed but rather before.

   How could the harvest be after the close of probation if ‘probationary time’ is before the close of probation, seeing that it does not say, ‘the harvest is’ after ‘the end of probationary time.’ Hence, it is plain that the harvest must precede the close of probation; that is, the harvest is the end—the last part of ‘probationary time’—and with it probation closes. Moreover, Jeremiah prophetically saw that after the harvest was past and the summer ended (the time men were to be saved) the wicked said: ‘The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and we are not saved.’ (Jer. 8:20.)

   If the harvest is after the close of probation, why should they say, ‘The harvest is past, the summer Is ended,’ for they certainly could not say these words before probation closes, neither could they after the second coming of Christ, for then they would be dead and could not speak? Consequently, the only time these words could be spoken is in the period between the close of probation and the second coming of Christ, which fact places the ‘harvest’ before probation closes.

   Furthermore, in Matt. 13:30 the Lord says: ‘In the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares.’ The words, ‘In the time of harvest,’ show that the harvest is a period of time. Moreover, in ‘Early Writings,’ p. 118, the Spirit of Prophecy says: ‘Then I saw the third angel. Said my accompanying angel,... “he is the angel that is to select the wheat from the tares, and seal, or bind, the wheat for the heavenly garner.”’

   If the third angel is to do the separating, and inasmuch as the third angel’s message is to be proclaimed before the close of probation, not after, it shows that the harvest in which time the angels seal and bind, occupies the time while the third angel’s message is being proclaimed. Plainly then, the words, ‘The harvest is the end of the world,’ denote the very last period of probationary time which brings the world to its end. The Spirit of God through Paul Interprets the term, ‘The end of the world,’ thus: ‘But now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.’ (Heb. 9:26.)

   We all know that the world did not come to its end 1900 years ago when Christ was sacrificed, and yet it is said, ‘In the end of the world.’ However, the truth of Paul’s statement is this: As the sins of man are blotted out in the Judgment since 1844, it proves that Paul was looking forward to our time when Christ ‘by the sacrifice of Himself’ in the time of the judgment of the living is to blot out our sins. Obviously then, the term, ‘The end of the world,’ applies to the time of the Judgment of the living, in the time of the Loud Cry, In the end of probationary time,’—the last message that closes this world’s history. Moreover, the S.D.A. denomination has for years been teaching that the end of the world began in 1798. See ‘Thoughts on Daniel; p. 387; (in connection with Dan. 12:4); also ‘Bible Readings for the Home Circle,’ p. 324. The denomination has never had any official pronouncement as to the truth of the harvest, but now in their attempt to refute the SRod, they are changing their position of what they once taught the end of the world is.

   It would not be out of place in this connection to relate my experience of what I heard just shortly on this subject. Eld. G.W. Wells, one of the field secretaries of the Gen. Conf. early in 1935 devoted nightly meetings for a whole week in an endeavor to refute the SRod in which time, night after night, he taught that the harvest is the ‘end of the world—the second coming of Christ’—the beginning of the millennium.

   At the close of his meetings, on the Sabbath afternoon, Eld. R.L. Benton, pres. of the Southwestern Union Conf. staged another tirade against the SRod at which time he displayed a chart showing that the harvest is from the close of probation to the second coming of Christ. The following Wed., Eld. W.H. Clark, Home Miss. Sec’y of Texas Conf. conducted the prayer meeting, at which time in answer to my question he placed the harvest before the close of probation. Here is the point. In ten days’ time three S.D.A. ministers, paid by the S.D.A. treasury, all occupying responsible positions, gave three different interpretations on the harvest, which facts prove that the denomination as a body, even among the leading men, there exists no special agreement on this subject. Then, in the face of such blindness, the adversaries of the SRod caution the laity against accepting error! O, what a sad deception!” Brackets added.—The Symbolic Code, Texas, 1935, Vol. 1, No. 14, pgs. 10, 11.}

A major theme of Shepherd’s Rod teaching has been an interpretation of the prophecy of Ezekiel 9. At a point prior to probation’s close, we are told, divine agencies will destroy those Adventists who reject the appeals of the Shepherd’s Rod. This represents an invisible coming of Christ to establish the Davidic kingdom prior to probation’s close. Later, Jesus is to come in visible glory to establish His kingdom following the seven last plagues.

{Ezekiel 9 is a major theme of both the Bible and the writings of the SoP not just the SRod. Ezekiel 9 has not been fulfilled and is still looming over the Adventist church and ultimately the world. There is no record in the annals of ancient or modern history of such an event. It is the closing work for the S.D.A. church, “The spirit of hatred which has existed with some because the wrongs among God's people have been reproved, has brought blindness and a fearful deception upon their own souls, making it impossible for them to discriminate between right and wrong. They have put out their own spiritual eyesight. They may witness wrongs, but they do not feel as did Joshua, and humble their souls in humiliation because the burden of souls is felt by them. The true people of God, who have the spirit of the work of the Lord and the salvation of souls at heart, will ever view sin in its real, sinful character. They will always be on the side of faithful and plain dealing with sins which easily beset the people of God. Especially in the closing work for the church, in the sealing time of the one hundred and forty-four thousand, who are to stand without fault before the throne of God, will they feel most deeply the wrongs of God's professed people. This is forcibly set forth by the prophet's illustration of the last work under the figure of the men, each having a slaughter weapon in his hand. One man among them was clothed with linen, with a writer's inkhorn by his side. ‘And the Lord said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.’”—The Review and Herald, June 8, 1873, pars. 3, 4

The prophecy of Ezekiel 9 is unbeknownst to many S.D.A.’s. This is because the G.C.S.D.A. has failed to warn its members of this event but are ever ready to disfellowship anyone who teaches or talks about it. Sadly, the hypocrites in the church have been hindering the work of God for years and thus must be bodily removed by His angels so that the S.D.A. church can go forth unfettered and triumphantly proclaim the “Loud Cry” of the third angel all over the world, “And I saw that the Lord was whetting His sword in heaven to cut them down. Oh, that every lukewarm professor could realize the clean work that God is about to make among His professed people! Dear friends, do not deceive yourselves concerning your condition. You cannot deceive God. Says the True Witness: ‘I know thy works.’”—Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, pg. 189. Does this testimony sound strange? Is the reader not aware of such a warning? This is what the Bible says regarding the same event, “For, behold, the Lord will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. 16 For by fire and by his sword will the Lord plead [this is not His second coming as he will not be pleading at His return—Rev. 22:11] with all flesh: and the slain of the Lord shall be many. 17 They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one tree [leader] in the midst, eating swine's flesh [violating health reform], and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the Lord. 18 For I know their works and their thoughts: it shall come, that I will gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory.19 And I will set a sign [sign and seal are synonymous—Rom. 4:11] among them, and I will send those [survivors] that escape [this judgment] of them unto the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud, that draw the bow, to Tubal, and Javan, to the isles afar off, that have not heard my fame, neither have seen my glory; and they shall declare my glory among the Gentiles.” Brackets added. Isaiah 66:15-19

Regarding Ezekiel 9, Mr. Reid states, “This represents an invisible coming of Christ to establish the Davidic kingdom prior to probation’s close.” Ezekiel 9 does not represent an “invisible coming of Christ” to establish the Davidic Kingdom. Frankly, I’m uncertain to what Mr. Reid is referring. Nevertheless, Ezekiel 9 and this pre-millennial Kingdom are two separate events. Read our Tract No. 8: Mount Sion at "The Eleventh Hour" (second edition) for details regarding what the Bible says concerning this pre-millennial kingdom.}

Adventists, in contrast, see the prophecy’s primary meaning in the Babylonian conquest of Judah, although parallels with the visions of Revelation 7:15,16 indicate analogies with certain final events. But those events will follow the close of probation.

{Is Mr. Reid referring to modernist or fundamentalist Adventists? In other words, the ones who advocate, support, and quote uninspired commentaries or those who study the Bible and the SoP as their basis of scriptural authority? This modern private interpretation regarding Ezekiel 9 as presented by Mr. Reid as being a “Babylonian conquest of Judah” is fallacious and doesn’t bear any ancient historicity. Ezekiel 9 is still pending fulfillment and is no analogy. Ellen White states, “Study the ninth chapter of Ezekiel. These words will be literally fulfilled; yet the time is passing, and the people are asleep.”—Letters and Manuscripts — Volume 24 (1909), Lt 106, 1909, par. 17. The phrase “will be literally fulfilled” refers to two things: It has not been fulfilled by the use of the term “will be” and the adverb “literally” is no analogy. Furthermore, not only is it future and literal but Ezekiel 9 and Rev. 7 are referring to the same event, “This sealing of the servants of God is the same that was shown to Ezekiel in vision. John also had been a witness of this most startling revelation.”—Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, p. 445. This “sealing” and/or “marking” as depicted in both of these chapters are synonymous and occur before the “Four Winds” blow (Rev. 7:1-3). Moreover, the “Four Winds” symbolize the “Mark of the Beast” decree or Sunday Law, to wit: “The time is coming when we cannot sell at any price. The decree will soon go forth prohibiting men to buy or sell of any man save him that hath the mark of the beast. We came near having this realized in California a short time since; but this was only the threatening of the blowing of the four winds. As yet they are held by the four angels.”—Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, pg. 152. Mr. Reid suggests that these events follow the close of probation. So is the “Mark of the Beast” before or after the close of probation? “The Lord has shown me clearly that the image of the beast will be formed before probation closes; for it is to be the great test for the people of God, by which their eternal destiny will be decided.”—1888 Materials, pg. 700. If Rev. 7 and Ezekiel 9 are synonymous with the sealing of the servants of God before the “Four Winds” (Mark of the Beast) blow and occur before the “close of probation,” where does Mr. Reid get the idea that these events follow the “close of probation?” What purpose would they serve if probation has closed for all humanity? For more information regarding Ezekiel 9, read our Tract 1: Pre-"Eleventh Hour" Extra – The Dardanelles of the Bible.}

The fracturing of the Shepherd’s Rod movement that began in 1961 has led to a wide variety of additional beliefs promoted by different subgroups. Vernon Howell’s special interpretation of the seven seals of Revelation (6:1-8:1) offers an example.

His declaration that he alone holds a satisfactory understanding of the seals is used to bolster his claim to be the Lamb who alone can open the seals (Revelation 5). His interpretation stands in marked contrast to the Adventist understanding, which sees Jesus as the Lamb and the seals as reaching across 2,000 years from the time of Jesus to His return.

{Vernon Howell’s “additional beliefs” belong to his specific Branch Davidian offshoot group. We are unfamiliar with their doctrinal beliefs. They have not affected the SRod writings or beliefs as they have remained the same. Fanatics and offshoots is something that cannot be controlled. The S.D.A. church has many of its own. This doesn’t mean that the denomination is not true but just that Satan is actively at work. Vernon Howell aka “David Koresh” was a part of the Branch Davidians not the SRod or Davidians. His interpretations of the Seven Seals of Revelation 6-8 vastly differ from those of the SRod just like many of their other beliefs.

As discussed earlier, the fracturing came in 1955 after the death of Victor Houteff and culminated in 1961 when Florence Houteff renounced the SRod, SoP, and Adventism. The “fracturing” of a movement doesn’t mean anything other than prophecy continues to be fulfilled. The early Christian church fell away (2 Thessalonians 2:3) as the apostles were dying off. Should I renounce being a Christian just because the church fell away at one point? Should I renounce Adventism because part of our legacy was associated with William Miller’s misunderstanding of the event regarding Dan. 8:14? Or should I consider renouncing the S.D.A. church because around the turn of the century Dr. Harvey Kellogg began to teach, promote, and advocate pantheism within the ranks of Adventism? Similar events such as these will follow until the end of time. These unfortunate events should not come as a surprise because “...your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.” 1 Peter 5:8.}

Sifting Truth From Error—Questions to Ask 

The experience of the Shepherd’s Rods and similar groups illustrates the hazards, not in holding strong religious faith, but in distorting it. As Ellen White reminds us, “the track of truth lies close beside the track of error” (Review and Herald; Oct. 22, 1903). Several simple but important tests should be applied by every believer who wants to build solid faith while hedging against error.

 {The experience of the SRod and that of the Branch Davidians are two different experiences by two different organizations. The SRod is thriving and growing in all parts of the world while the other is defunct. Davidians continue to reach their Adventist brethren with a message of revival and reformation and will continue to do so until the earth is “lightened with his glory.” Rev. 18:1.}

1.    Is there a heavy concentration on one or two main points?

2.    Am I hearing a careful pursuit of understanding, or an urging toward quick conclusions?

3.    Does the person or group distance themselves from the larger body of believers? Such separation robs us of the balance provided by hearing the whole church.

4.    Does the promoter or group emphasize impending danger to the point of creating a feeling of desperation? A true walk with Christ builds hope and confidence, not terror.

5.    Is undue attention given to the ideas of one person?

6.    Am I urged to accept uncritically whatever is promoted, buttressed by the use of selected Bible texts and Spirit of Prophecy quotations as proofs?

Ours is a perilous age for Christians, not only from unbelief, but a willingness to believe too much. The false lies beside the true. The drives of human needs and the hype of marketing, both in products and ideas, push us to make the most crucial of decisions on shallow evidence. Christ has a better way: careful searching of His Word and placing utter trust in Him alone.

Reprinted from Adventist Review, April 1, 1993

Distributed by the Biblical Research Institute

https://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/materials/the-branch-davidians-shepherds-rod-who-are-they/

{This article by Mr. Reid of the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference included numerous claims, assertions, and characterizations promoted by its publication which were not true or correct which this article has served to debunk. Whether his intentions were to mislead S.D.A.’s or not we do not know. Typically, those that mislead are they themselves misled. For more information as to what the SRod actually believes contact us: info@ShepherdsRod.com or visit us at UniversalPublishing.com for FREE literature.}

Share this: