Behold Your King

-3-

BEFORE THE KINGDOM

(Laying the Foundation)

It is Christ Himself Who says: “For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, saying, this man began to build, and was not able to finish” (Luke 14:29). For years many have been building this “tower”, so to speak, regarding “David” and have been “mocked” by “Rod” enemies who use the teaching that ‘David’ is a redeemed human as an excuse for rejecting the whole Message because it is obvious to even the average Bible student (SDA or non-SDA) that there is no firm “foundation” in the Bible for such a teaching.

What Foundation is Needed?

This is why pains were taken in Chapter One to clearly define the “Incarnation” and the “Spirit of Prophecy” (fundamental doctrines of the SDA Church), “Theocracy” and the “Restitution of all Things”. All the fundamentals of Christianity as outlined in Fundamental Beliefs (especially Belief #3 which outlines the nature of Christ — the Incarnation) must therefore be our foundation. Nothing less will do.

‘David’ and the ‘Spirit of Prophecy’

All professed Rod Believers will agree that all the Prophets had that “Spirit”; that is, Enoch, Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, John, E.G. White, and V.T. Houteff all had that “Spirit” which enabled them to prophesy. So we are again told: “To have the Spirit of Prophecy is to have the Spirit who uttered the Prophecies and Who only can interpret Them . . .and consequently only holy men of God in the Spirit can interpret the Scriptures” (2 T.G. 14:17).

But that “Spirit” is what the Bible calls the ‘Spirit of Christ’ (1Pet. 1:10; 5 Code 1-5, Page 6). This brings us to a crucial point in our study: Is the ‘Spirit of Christ in the Prophets’ (Ibid) a real thing or is it imaginary?

In the 1895 General Conference Bulletin, we are told: “By the Holy Spirit the real Presence of Christ is in us and dwells in us” (See 1895 GCB, Page 329). Therefore the “Spirit of Prophecy” is Christ Himself manifested in the Prophets. This transaction — Christ literally being in the Prophets — is just as mysterious as the Incarnation itself To try to explain it is to venture into the realm of the impossible. Yet it is just as real as God Himself is real without our being able to explain how He happens to be Who He is. And this phenomenon is not restricted to the Prophets. All genuine Christians must experience this mysterious transaction. The Bible calls it ‘the mystery of God’: “Christ in you, the hope of Glory” (Colossians 1 :27).

This work is accomplished through the Holy Spirit. This is the essence of true Christianity. The only difference between the ordinary Christian and one (a Prophet) who has the “Spirit of Prophecy” is that the ordinary Christian is not endowed with that aspect of the Holy Spirit — the “double portion” (2 Kings 2:9) — which enables him to “prophesy”. Simply put: All true Christians have the Holy Spirit as a Guide, but not all have the special Gift of the “Spirit of Prophecy”.

Some may have other special Gifts such as the “spirit of wisdom” (Eph. 1:17), the “spirit of understanding” or the “spirit of knowledge” (Isa. 11:2; 1 Cor. 12:8) etc, “…but the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For one is given the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge, by the same Spirit” (lCor.12:8). But, are all Apostles? Are all Prophets? Are all Teachers?” (lCor.12:29).

The answer is obviously a resounding “NO”! Yet it is the same Spirit — the Holy Spirit — in all, whether Prophet, Apostle, Teacher, the “man of wisdom” or the simple Deacon (Eph.4:1 1-13). The Prophet, to repeat, has a “double portion” of the Holy Spirit — the “Spirit of Truth”; and Inspiration says the Spirit of Truth is the “Spirit of Prophecy”, thus: “… only the Spirit of Truth which is the Spirit of Prophecy, can lead us into all Bible Truth” (5 Code 1-5, Page 6).

This understanding of the “Spirit of Prophecy” brings to view an essential point which many have over-looked, and it is this: As the Incarnation reveals Christ as man and God, so too the “Spirit of Prophecy’ reveals a Prophet as a man with Christ in him. When Christ spoke therefore, it was God who spoke. Similarly, when a Prophet speaks under Inspiration, it is Christ who speaks. Special care must be taken to avoid confusing the flesh and blood individual from the “Divine Person” speaking through that fleshly body. In other words, there was a “Divine Person” in Christ who was a fleshly, biological man, and it is this ‘Divine Person’ “Who spoke as no man ever spake”. That “Divine Person” was the ever-existent Eternal God Himself.

Similarly, there is a “Divine Person” in a Prophet. And that “Divine Person” in a Prophet is Christ Himself As one who is regarded by professed Rod Believers as a Prophet one must be able to distinguish V.T. Houteff as a fleshly, mortal man from the ‘Spirit’ — the “Divine Person” that was in him. Failing to do this and focusing on Victor Tasho Houteff will result in losing sight of Christ — the “Divine Person” Who was purportedly in Houteff. This was the problem with the Church in 1888 which prompted E.G. White’s written analysis regarding the underlying reason for the Church’s grave mistake in rejecting the Message of Jones and Waggoner: “…many had lost sight of Jesus. They needed to have their eyes directed to His Divine Person” (Testimonies To Ministers, Page 92).

When, therefore, a statement such as: “Now is your opportunity to feast on ‘meat in due season at the hand of God’s chosen shepherd” (2 T.G.2:23) is read, the question to be asked is: “Who is it speaking?” Is it V.T. Houteff? For example the Psalmist David wrote: “Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth: my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine holy one to see corruption” (Psalml6:9,1O).

The question which one must ask is: “Who is it speaking here? Was David speaking of himself when he said the “holy one”? Obviously not, because the Apostle Peter says that, “He (David) seeing this before[hand] spake of the resurrection of Christ, that His soul was not left in hell, neither did His flesh see corruption” (Acts 2:31). Yet David wrote the Psalm in such a way that anyone who reads it without understanding the dynamics of the “Spirit of Prophecy” would be sure that David is speaking of himself.

God’s Chosen Shepherd

Yet this is exactly what many Rod believers are doing with statements such as the one in 2 TG.2:23. When, therefore, one reads: “Now is your opportunity to feast on ‘meat in due season’ at the hand of God’s chosen shepherd”, one must understand that in actuality it is Christ who is this “shepherd” speaking through the Prophet — V.1. Houteff. It is in this sense one can call V.1. Houteff “David”. As long as we understand that “David” is not a new name for Victor Tasho Houteff but is the name of the ‘Divine Person’ in him. This is a mystery, and it is only those with spiritual discernment will see it, and understand it.

One can, therefore, in a sense, say, that V.T. Houteff walked around with ‘David” in him, so to speak. Christ, therefore, was manifested in V.T. Houteff, as the real ‘Divine Person’ — the “David”! V.T Houteff, from the Pulpit of Mount Carmel Center in his day explained this very point about himself when he said: “I know it is not a Bulgarian from the Rhodope Mountains who has made scholarly Americans scratch their heads. It is not possible that such a one could have shaken the Denomination from center to circumference. If you do not know Who it actually is, then you had better find out without delay” (1 T.G. 18:22).

Ironically, that Sermon, given on November 23, 1946, was entitled: “The End of Human Idols and Their Worshippers”. In light of this, all professed believers in the Message that he brought should soberly, and solemnly ask the question: “Who was it that “actually” caused the Denomination to shake? Was it V.1. Houteff or was it someone else”? For one thing, Houteff says plainly that it was not he (the Bulgarian) who did it. Who was it, then? The clue is in the capitalized “W” in the pronoun “Who” when he said “If you do not know Who it actually is…”.

That word “Who” clearly refers to Christ — the “actual” Person (“David”) Who did it through V.1. Houteff. When therefore Houteff died in 1955 did “David” die? In other words, is the “Spirit of Christ”, the “Divine Person” (the One Who actually shook the Denomination, and Who was in V.1. Houteff) in a grave somewhere southern U.S.A.? The answer is obviously “NO”. Ah! then, when V.T. Houteff died, therefore, “David” was very much alive and well, then, as He is now! Again, this is a mystery which only the “wise” will see, understand and profit from. Those who love to worship “human idols” will never see it, or even if they do, will never accept it. See Romans 8:7.

All reading these Pages should make sure that the impact of the Truth discussed in the above Paragraphs is fully grasped. Put another way: The death of V.T. Houteff in no way affected the “Spirit of Christ” since the Spirit of Christ is an ever-living Person. This principle can be seen also in the experience of the mortal man Christ Himself. Christ, the man died, but He Who was from eternity did not! Thus, E.G. White wrote: “When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Divinity did not sink and die. That would have been impossible” (5 B.C. 1113).

Thus, the fact that when Christ died God (“Divinity”) was still alive, so too when V.T. Houteff died Christ (“David”) was and is still alive!

The ‘Invisible Christ’

Consider carefully the answer which Inspiration gives to someone who asked to harmonize the seemingly contradictory statements found in the Writings of E.G. White:

“How do you harmonize Gospel Workers, Page 44, Paragraph 2, with The Shepherd’s Rod; Volume 2, Page 240, Paragraph 2, presented comparatively as follows:

‘The messenger is not the Lord Himself, …he is the one who shall prepare the way for the Lord. “– The Shepherd’s Rod; Volume 2, Page 240.

“Christ, the Messenger of the covenant brought the tidings of salvation. “– Gospel Workers, Page 44.

“ANSWER: While on page 44, Gospel Workers applies the title “Messenger of the Covenant” to Christ, on page 20 it applies it to Moses. In juxtaposition, these are seen as follows:

“When Moses was chosen as the messenger of the covenant, the word given him was, ‘Be thou for the people to Godward.” — Gospel Workers, p. 20.

“Christ the messenger of the covenant, brought the tidings of salvation.” — Gospel Workers, Page 44.

“Whereas Gospel Workers applies the term to both Moses and Christ, Christ Himself applies it to John the Baptist. He said “unto the multitudes concerning John.. .But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send My messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.” Matt. 11:7, 9, 10, 14.

“As God had made both spoken and written covenants with His ancient people that He would send them Moses, John, and Christ, they came in fulfillment of those covenants. And each having brought a message, each in his own time was the Messenger of the Covenant. Nevertheless, the words of Malachi make plain that the Messenger of the Covenant is, in the strictest sense Elijah the prophet (Mal. 3:1-5; 4:5), the last messenger who prepares the way of the Lord. (See Testimonies to Ministers, p. 475.)

“In the last analysis, however, the title Messenger of the Covenant belongs to the Holy Spirit. For example, 1 Peter 3:18-20 states that Christ preached to the antediluvians by the same “Spirit” Who “quickened” Him. But as He preached by the Spirit in the person of Noah, not of Himself, He thereby unfolded the truth that the Holy Spirit is in all His messengers alike. Thus “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Pet. 1:21. Briefly summarized, the term Messenger of the Covenant means the Holy Spirit (the invisible Christ) in Heaven’s visible representative–be it Moses, John, Christ, Elijah, or some other“. See 1 Answerer, 77-78. Parentheses belong to Quotation.

Notice carefully: Moses, John, and Christ were all the ‘Messenger of the Covenant’. How could this be? Inspiration shows that the term “Messenger of the Covenant’ was a ‘title’ (or label) for the Holy Spirit. He further illustrates that just as Christ “preached to the antediluvians by the same “Spirit”, so it is that that same Spirit which in the above instance is labeled “the “Messenger of the Covenant”, is in all of Heaven’s visible representatives — Moses, CHRIST, John, Elijah etc.

One must also notice that this “Messenger of the Covenant” is also called the “Invisible Christ”. What is of supreme significance in all of this is that this “Invisible Christ” was also in CHRIST (the human being)! What! Christ was in Christ? Ponder this carefully, for it has great bearing on understanding the statement “David the visible King, and Christ the invisible King of kings” (See 8 Tract 47). Y’shua (Jesus) the visible, and the “Invisible Christ” being the same Person. Christ is the only one who can make that which is “invisible”, VISIBLE. He is the only One Who can blend both, and be God and man at the same time. All other human beings who are his representatives, are only a shadow of the Real. The great hope of the Kingdom is to have the “Invisible” united with the VISIBLE as One. This is the mystery of God par excellence, and the Hope of the Ages.

2) Who is Jezreel?

That which obtains for the ‘Messenger of the Covenant’, also obtains for ‘Jezreel’. Many limit the name “Jezreel’ to the singular person of V.T. Houteff. This is a perversion of the Scriptures even when viewed from V.T.Houteff’s own interpretation of the meaning of ‘Jezreel’. He says:

“Jezreel’s name, though, remains the same, and…he represents the prophets of God in all times…” (2 T.G. 6:26).

Now if ‘Jezreel’ represents the ‘prophets of God in all times” then that means that ‘Jezreel’ predates the birth of the prophetic child himself! It also means that ‘Jezreel’ was in Enoch, Methuselah, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel etc. And as Christ Himself was a Prophet while he was on this earth, He too was “Jezreel”! Even the picture Illustration in 2 T.G.6 and on the Rod Chart of Hosea’s Prophecy highlight this fact. Indeed, the very name ‘Jezreel’ in the Hebrew means “God will sow” (See Strong’s Entry #3 157). Thus when Christ gave the parable of the “SOWER”, no doubt He was highlighting the fact that He was in the truest sense that He was not only God the One Who “shall sow” (Jezreel), but the One Who the whole earth shall hear. The prophecy says: “And the earth shall hear…Jezreel. And I will sow her unto Me in the earth...” (See Hosea 2:22, 23).

The way how many Rod believers reason, they would have V.T. Houteff as the one who the earth shall hear, since to them, V.T. Houteff is the Jezreel of all Jezreels! However, Inspiration plainly shows that ‘Jezreel’ was in all prophets. This means that the same principle that operated with the “messenger of the covenant” is seen to operate with ‘Jezreel’ also. ‘Jezreel’ represents the “Spirit of Christ” that was in all his Prophets to “sow” seeds of Truth “in all times”.

The ultimate “Sower” though, is not, and cannot be V.T. Houteff, but Christ Himself Who Hosea sees in the ultimate fulfillment of the Prophecy as “God [Who] will sow”, and thus multiply the “144,000” in the harvest of a “Great Multitude” (See 4 Tract 49-50). Any attempt to elevate any human being to this status when this prophecy reaches it consummate fulfillment, is to put such an one in the place of God.

This may not be the intention of the proponents of this idea of a human king in the Kingdom, but such will be the result if proper hermeneutical principles are not adhered to, in which Christ is given His proper place as the ultimate ‘JEZREEL’, and in fact the ultimate, and antitypical all the prophets! Those who fail to see this, do so because they do not carefully differentiate what takes place before the Kingdom and what takes place in the Kingdom.

Our analysis in this Chapter has been confined to the manifestation of the “Spirit of Prophecy” before the Kingdom. But a fact often overlooked by many is that there is a fulfillment of “David” before the Kingdom and a fulfillment of “David” in the Kingdom. No one should have difficulty in seeing from the analysis just given, that the fulfillment of “David” in V.T. Houteff, (and in all the prophets for that matter) is before the Kingdom, for the simple reason that Houteff is now dead, and the Kingdom is yet to be established. In other words, Christ, through V.T. Houteff, spoke to His People regarding some things concerning the coming Kingdom while Houteff was alive. But as “David” is the King of the Kingdom the question one must ask is: Will this “David” be Christ again through someone else or will it be Christ Himself? This is the next vital question to be answered.

-4-

To many, this statement is so plain that it settles all doubt that Christ is not anti-typical David. But it must always be remembered (and this is something that many fail to realize), that: “Like all heaven-sent Messages preceding It, the Rod Message is set “for the fall and rising again of many in Israel (Luke 2:3 4); it is exactly calculated to bring about a sifting…” (See 1 Answerer, Page 77).

Inspiration Never Calls Christ “David”?

So one had better be careful with any statement that is “exactly calculated” to see those who will make “Inspiration” harmonize instead of clashing head-on. The statement does say “Inspiration never calls Christ David”. But the question is: What is the context of the “never”? For if we find that “Inspiration” ever calls Him “David”, then we have a situation in which “Inspiration-never” clashes with “Inspiration-ever “. No Rod Believer will deny that Isaiah the prophet was inspired. Neither will any deny that E.G. White’s comments on Isaiah’s prophecies are also the work of “Inspiration”. Indeed, E.G. White had a “heaven-sent message preceding… the Rod Message “, so her comments should be regarded as “inspired” just as much as those of the Rod Message Itself.

Isaiah says: “Incline your ear, and come unto Me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. Behold I have given Him for a witness to the people, a Leader and Commander to the people” (Isaiah 55:3, 4). Certainly, this is a messianic prophecy regarding Christ, identified as “David” Who is “Witness”, “Leader”, and “Commander” to the people; for David was dead long before this prophecy was given. However, we have another witness regarding Isaiah’s prophecy.

In commenting on “David” in Isaiah 55 “Inspiration” through E.G. White cites a series of prophecies concerning Christ in the Old Testament. In that series, she references Genesis 3:15 (Christ as the “Seed” of the woman); Deuteronomy 18:15, 18 (Christ as “Prophet”); Genesis 49:10 (Christ as “Shiloh”), and Isaiah 55:3, 4 (Christ as “David”).

‘Inspiration’ and E. G. White

“To ADAM was given an assurance of the coming of the Redeemer. The sentence pronounced on Satan, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:15), was to our first parents a promise of the redemption to be wrought out through Christ.

“To ABRAHAM was given the promise that of his line of Saviour of the world should come: “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” “He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” Genesis 22:18; Galatians 3:16.

“MOSES, near the close of his work as a leader and teacher of Israel, plainly prophesied of the Messiah to come. “The Lord thy God,” he declared to the assembled hosts of Israel, “will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto Him ye shall hearken.” And Moses assured the Israelites that God Himself had revealed this to him while in Mount Horeb, saying, “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put My words in His mouth; and He shall speak unto them all that I shall command Him.” Deuteronomy 18:15, 18.

“The Messiah was to be of the royal line, for in the prophecy uttered by JACOB the Lord said, “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto Him shall the gathering of the people be.” Genesis 49:10.

“ISAIAH prophesied: “There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots.” “Incline your ear, and come unto Me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David Behold, I have given Him for a witness to the people, a leader and commander to the people. Behold, thou shalt call a nation that thou knowest not, and nations that knew not thee shall run unto thee because of the Lord thy God, and for the Holy One of Israel; for He hath glorified thee.” Isaiah 11:1; 55:3-5″. –Acts of the Apostles, Page 222-23.

Note: These are “plain and specific prophecies” of Christ, (of which Isaiah 55:3, 4 is one). This is clearly “Inspiration” too. Some wish to accept Christ as the “Seed”, “Prophet”, “Shiloh” and all the other titles as “Inspiration” but refuse to accept Him as also “David”, which appears as one of His designations with the others by the same “inspired” author (E.G. White)! Certainly, one cannot have his cake and eat it too. As all the other references by “Inspiration” refer to Christ, so too must we accept that “David” in Isaiah 55 refers to Christ.

‘Never’ When?

The statement, “Inspiration never calls Christ David” must mean what it says in a specific context, or else it will be clear that the “Inspiration” of E.G. White clashes with the “Inspiration” of V.T. Houteff. What then, is the context of the statement? The context is found in the pre-resurrection Christ, and the post-resurrection Christ. In his precrucifixion, pre-resurrection state, he was called the “son of David”, “the son of man” etc. At that time “Inspiration never called Christ David”. However after the resurrection, He was called the “son of God”, and reversed His relationship to “His father David” (See Luke 1:32-33). Paul clearly shows this dichotomy:

“Concerning Y’shua (Jesus) Christ, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, anddeclared to be the son of God according to the Spirit. . .by the power of the resurrection” (See Romans 1:3 & 4).

The fleshly relationship with His father David, was cut after the resurrection occurred and He was given a glorified Body. This is why every time he was glorified (at His Baptism, and also at the Transfiguration), a Voice was heard from heaven saying, “This is My Beloved Son” (See Matthew 3:17; 17:5). Christ is no longer David’s son, because David could never biologically produce a glorified body “according to the Spirit” (See Romans 1:4). Indeed He Who was son, is now become Father: “He shall be the Father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the key of the House of David will I lay upon His Shoulder; so he shall open and none shall shut; and He shall shut and none shall open” (See Isaiah 22:22. Thus David in spirit called Him Lord. See Matthew 22:43

The ‘Good Shepherd’

When it is recognized that “David’ means “the Beloved” it is easy to see that it the glorified Christ who is the Anti-typical “David”, for this is what is signaled by the term “My Beloved Son” (Matt.17:5). He will be “Leader” and “Commander” indeed, because He will, in the Kingdom, fight our battles, as verily David of old did for Israel, when he slew Goliath, and defeated the Philistines. For the type shows that the ancient shepherd boy, David, took one of the five stones from his shepherd’s bag and brought down Goliath with one blow to the head.

And as where there is no type there is no Truth, the antitype is the Prophecy of Daniel 2 in which antitypical Good Shepherd, “David”, will reach into His “Shepherd’s Bag” (the “mountain”) and take the “stone” (the 144,000), striking the Image at its feet, and bring down the Babylonian System (the “Goliath” of today) that will also be defying God’s people in the last days.

To suggest that V.T. Houteff is “David” in the Kingdom, is also to suggest that he is the one who cuts out the “stone” without hands from the “mountain” to strike the Image (“Goliath’), since the type shows that it is David who hurled the stone at Goliath anciently. A parallel prophecy is also found in Zechariah 12:3 in which Jerusalem becomes a “burdensome stone”.

‘David’, the Same as ‘Michael’

No one will challenge the fact that Christ is the one who takes the “stone” from the “mountain” and uses it to destroy the Image, just as ancient David did to Goliath with his stone. Indeed, Inspiration declares:

“In the foregoing exposition, we see that those who respond to the Good Shepherd’s voice, are typified by David’s followers… David’s victory over the giant against whom no one was able to make war, typifies the victory of the church (the house of David — Zech. 12:8), in the “time of trouble such as never was,” over the beast and his image (antitypical Goliath), concerning whose formidableness the Revelator asks: “Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?”

“The giant, Goliath, accordingly, represents those who now defy the servants of God, and who shall comprise the Image of the Beast, that religio-politico system which shall defy the armies of the Lord, and issue a decree “that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” Rev. 13:17, 15.

“But “in that day,” saith the Lord, “will I make Jerusalem a burdensomestone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it. In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.” Zech. 12:3, 8. (See 8 Tract 57-58).

The above “time of trouble” when the “Beast” is defying God’s people is the same time in which “Michael” will “stand up” to confront the “Beast”. In the above statement, He is called the “Good Shepherd”. Certainly, if those who follow the “Good Shepherd” are typified by “David’s followers”, as the above statement says, then this is another way of saying that the “Good Shepherd” is the Antitype of ancient shepherd boy, David, and His (the Good Shepherd’s) followers today are the ones who “follow the Lamb withersoever He goeth” (See Revelation 14:4). This then, again clinches the fact that antitypical “David” must be Christ — the “Good Shepherd”. See John 10.

WhyThe ‘King’ Cannot Be V.T. Houteff

That the sense in which V.T. Houteff fulfilled the role of “David” through the “Spirit of Prophecy” before the kingdom, should be clear to the reader. No one should have any problems understanding the analysis regarding this. “If that is so then” one may ask, “Why can he not be the “David” in the Kingdom when he comes up in the “partial resurrection” of Daniel 12 and as typed in Matthew 27:52?

The answer to this question is this: Even if one were to assume that the King of the Kingdom will be a redeemed human, it certainly cannot be V.T. Houteff because we are clearly told by Houteff himself “As ancient David is in his grave, the king here promised must be an antitypical David… otherwise in order to fulfill the Prophecies, Ancient David must necessarily rise from the grave…” (9 Tract 43).

Houteff Equally Disqualified

Why would He resurrect him and deprive him of his kingship or throne by giving it to V.T. Houteff? Was V.T. Houteff on a level that was greater than Ancient David who God described as the “man after mine own heart?” (Acts 13:22). All should really stop and think soberly and seriously about this matter! Again, by Houteff’s own logic and reasoning, the idea that he will be the ‘David’ in the Kingdom is ruled out. The idea that he will be the king, cannot even stand the test of elementary logic. It is therefore not only illogical but it also cannot be supported by the Bible or the ‘Rod’ Itself.

Deifying V. T. Houteff