Shepherd's Rod?

[JoeMo]

This Sabbath, we had a newbie show up at our church who had some very vocal "new" ideas.  Without getting into details, a couple of us went home and did some research on this guy's theories.  We both concluded that this guy was somehow associated with Shepherd's Rod (aka Davidian SDA church).  I'm confident that he will be back next week; since we tolerated him and visited so long with him after church.

Ours is a small close-knot congregation that is considered "liberal".  We don't limit our studies to SDA doctrine; in fact we frequently study the writings on non Adventists (like Joel Richardson, Joseph Prince, and Jonathan Cahn)  In general, we are not adherents to the claims of EGW's exclusive "infallible" prophecies.  Therefore, we are on opposite ends of the spectrum with Shepherd's Rod.

If it is true that he is associated with Shepherd's Rod, how should we handle this as a church? Should we "tolerate" this guy and his cultish theology in the name of religious liberty, or should we ask him not to come back? 

[CoAspen]

If SR or an off shoot of them, He will argue with you using EGW most exclusively. I would doubt that he will stay for long since you will be the opposite of him. Maybe he is on a mission, who knows! Treat him like any other person.

[Gail]

Depends on how much time you feel like wasting. Ask him what his motivation is for sharing his new ideas.

[Stan]

We have health with SR one too many times here.

[Gregory Matthews]

Depends upon whether or not he causes a commotion.

[BillCork]

Ask the conference for guidance. Some have established guidelines.

[Ron Lambert]

Some may not be old enough to remember, but I remember that in the early 1960's the Shepherd's Rod's predicted the commencement of final events and the end of the world after what they figured was the "120 years of Noah." That would have terminated in 1964. They used to pass out literature massively at any SDA gathering to try to push their prediction. Of course, they were wrong. It is amazing they have the nerve to continue trying to proselytize the church to accept them as being led by the Lord, and someone we should follow. It is obviously that their real motive was and is ego. They wanted us to follow them, let them be in control. Many of their theological positions are easy to refute. But the fact is that history has already discredited them and rendered them obsolete and irrelevant, and they are really not worth anyone's time.

As for some their more egregious misinterpretations of Bible prophecy, such as the Seven Seals--what is needed is to reaffirm the principles of sound interpretation of Bible prophecy: (1) All prophetic symbols must be defined by the Bible alone. (2) All prophecies must be applied in the time period of history indicated by the context, with no re-applications unless explicitly stated. (3) Reasonable literary analysis--especially taking into account how a given phrase or narrative might be used elsewhere in Scripture--must determine whether a given portion of prophecy is to be taken literally or figuratively.

These three rules of prophetic interpretation are the only means to avoid what the Apostle Peter forbade when he said: "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 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 1:20, 21). These three rules I have given are the only way possible to avoid a "private interpretation." The second sentence, 2 Peter 1:21, explains why the Bible alone can and should be taken as the sole definer of all prophetic symbols, and why we must take things in context. Let us ever keep in mind that the Bible is God's Word, not our word to do with as we might imagine.

 

[phkrause]

8 hours ago, JoeMo said:

If it is true that he is associated with Shepherd's Rod, how should we handle this as a church? Should we "tolerate" this guy and his cultish theology in the name of religious liberty, or should we ask him not to come back? 

I agree with CoAspen, treat him as anyone else. Eventually, if he's really there to recruit, and not there for fellowship, he will disappear.

[Stan]

Shepards Rod tend to be thieves, they use all the resources of adventism and do not give anything back.  My experience is they crave persecution and love to give reports how they were kicked out of camp meetings, and better yet, picked up and carried out as they squat and tell the members if they want them out, they have to carry them out.

 

Leeches is a good word.

[CoAspen]

Stan! Tell us how you really feel!!!

[JoeMo]

Thanks for the advice.   I am meeting with our pastor tomorrow.  I like the idea of treating him like anyone else until/unless he becomes disruptive.  I'm confident he won't find any "takers" in our church.  That being said, it's just a suspicion at this point.  If he indeed shows up the next few Sabbaths, we will know.  He said he had no "home church" because most people disagreed with his theology.

[Gregory Matthews]

 

He has no home church:  Because for practical purposes the SR has essentially gone out of existence.  For the majority of its members, they must search for a place to call home.  If  this is what is involved with him,  welcome him.  Develop a relationship.  But, keep control of the situation and do not let him become disruptive.

What concerns me is the comment that he was vocal about new ideas.

 

 

[CoAspen]

I hope he doesn't have the initials CC.

 

[JoeMo]

From Wikipedia:

The major themes of the Rod message published by Houteff are listed below with brief explanations:

1. A Call for Reformation It is believed that the Adventist church had become lax in its standards, practices and devotion to God. It is also believed that the church’s institutions have changed from the original founder’s pattern of operation and purpose. Reformation on an individual and corporate level is needed to correct these areas. In recent years the Adventist church has agreed that reformation is needed, though it sharply differs with Davidians as to how it should be brought about.

2. The 144,000: Revelation chapter 7 The fundamental purpose of the Shepherd’s Rod message is to identify the corporate identity of the 144,000 of Revelation 7. This topic has been a much-discussed subject in Adventism for many years. Houteff believed that he received revelations that unlocked the mystery. First, he asserted that they were the same company as the “marked ones” found in Ezekiel 9 (see the next section). Next, he described them as Christian Jews that had lost their racial identity over the centuries. Finally, he described them as the ones who would preach to all nations and gather an innumerable company of people who would accept their teachings. Regarding this final point, he stated that the S.D.A. church had taught nearly identical views just three years prior to the publication of his first book, and he felt that it should not have been a point of contention.

3. Ezekiel 9 Though  it is largely attributed to his views, Houteff was not the first writer connected with Seventh-day Adventism to fuse Ezekiel 9 with Revelation 7. Adventist pioneer James White was the first to make the link in their first publication. His wife, church prophetess Ellen White, made the connection later in more detail.^[15] Houteff relied heavily on the link from Ellen White but is unique in describing the event in detail as the beginning of the “investigative judgment for the living” (see the next section). He is also unique in describing it as the final purification of the church and placing its fulfillment just prior to the gathering of the innumerable company.

Houteff maintained that the “slaying” mentioned in the text was a literal, future event performed by angels. A statement published by the Ellen G. White estate twenty-five years after his death appears to substantiate this assertion. He is also sometimes falsely credited with teaching that Davidians will perform the slaying depicted. His writings do not reflect such teachings and contains a direct denial of this, dismissing such notions as “absurd.”

4. The Investigative Judgment for the Living The concept of the “investigative judgment” is almost exclusive to Seventh-day Adventists. The coming of Christ is believed to be imminent. Just prior to the Second Coming of Christ, a judgment is to take place in heaven that constitutes a review of the records to see who will be saved and lost (see Dan. 7:9, 10). In common with Adventists, Davidians believe that this judgment began in 1844 with the dead. Houteff explained that the judgment for the living was not only an investigation of the records in heaven, but also an investigation of the people on earth; first in the church, then in the world. He never set a date for when this would occur, but he did assert that it would begin in the Adventist church and was depicted in Ezekiel 9 and Matthew 13:30. The 144,000 would be those who survived the judgment in the church.

5. The Pre-Millennial Kingdom This concept represents their widest departure from Adventist theology. The Middle East has a significant role in the Davidian understanding of end-time events. In modern Adventist eschatology it has little to none. Davidians believe that a kingdom will be set up in Palestine just prior to Christ’s return based primarily upon numerous Old Testament prophecies (such as Hosea 3: 4, 5; Mic. 4, Eze. 36, 37; Jer. 30, 31; Isa. 11). It is believed that it will be a kingdom of peace where none, human or animal, will harm another. Houteff claimed that every prophet in the Old Testament scriptures predicted this kingdom. He explained that the current State of Israel did not fulfill those prophecies. Mainstream Adventists view these prophecies as conditional based on ancient Israel’s obedience; some may never be fulfilled and some may be fulfilled in principle but not necessarily in every detail.

Florence Houteff published a prediction that the forty-two month period of Revelation 11:3–6 began in November 1955 and would terminate on April 22, 1959...The date passed without the predicted events materializing. Confusion and embarrassment set in. The Davidian movement began to fracture. Many adherents left the organization. Some joined the Branch Davidian movement,

[Unchained]

I would treat a member of the Shepherd’s Rod the same way I would treat a catholic, baptist, a Jehovah’s witness or an adventist; with respect and kindness.

It is easy to discover if a person truly is receptive to the truth, and you will also soon learn if a person merely wants a platform for his own ideas. In my experience outsiders tend to rapidly destroy their own influence if they are unwilling to listen to others.

 

[Gerr]

On September 6, 2016 at 2:06 PM, JoeMo said:

 

Ours is a small close-knot congregation that is considered "liberal".  We don't limit our studies to SDA doctrine; in fact we frequently study the writings on non Adventists (like Joel Richardson, Joseph Prince, and Jonathan Cahn)  In general, we are not adherents to the claims of EGW's exclusive "infallible" prophecies.

Maybe you can tolerate and study his ideas too?

[JoeMo]

On 9/23/2016 at 6:01 PM, Gerry Cabalo said:

Maybe you can tolerate and study his ideas too?

We invited him back to address our SS class, but he refused; saying he didn't find any likely candidates at our church.  He was right.  Tolerance and respect is different from acceptance.  Any belief system that places human wisdom at the same level or above scripture is a "cult" in my opinion.

[Gail]

Candidates? That is what he came there for? It sounds like he wasn't there to give but to take away.