From: Victor Hafichuk
To: Yvon Goulet
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000
Peace and goodwill to you, Yvon, in the Name of our glorious Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ Who laid His life down for us and took it up again so that we could live with Him!
Let me assure you that I am by no means offended by your letter. In fact, I was very thankful, not only for receiving a response, howbeit disagreeing with me, but a rational one at that. I’m thankful that you were willing to express yourself openly, in kindness and continence. Get set for a lengthy response.
I will reply to your letter, line by line, phrase by phrase, word by word if necessary, and add as I’m given.
As to my not being a “standing member in that organization,” that I am “an outsider and not as one of the family,” very true. But neither was Elijah a member of the Baal worship organization when he came speaking the truth; neither was John the Baptist a member of the Pharisees nor Sadducees nor any other “family” he addressed in their sins and hypocrisies; neither was Paul a member of the worshippers of Diana nor a citizen of Athens when he addressed them on their idolatries.
The list goes on and on, because of the principles by which God operates. Who can say that God can’t or wouldn’t approve of sending an outsider to speak to a group of people, be they His people or another? Can we dictate to God or presume that He would not do such a thing? What about Jonah going to Nineveh? In that case he was not a gentile nor was he a Ninevite. But God sent him, and as he sent Jonah to speak for deliverance and not condemnation sake, so He has sent me to speak to those of your organization. The letter was a gift from God, out of mercy and love, to rebuke, to warn, to deliver such as would be for deliverance.
Why does your family become so incensed at the words spoken? Three of your women vehemently attacked and condemned me, for example. What was so evil about those words? But they are guilty and choose their own ways. Light has come to expose the works of darkness.
As Jesus said, “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness more than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone that does evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that does truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God” (John 3:19-21).
As for the “strife and dissatisfaction,” the above already addresses that. However, to be added are the Lord’s words when He said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword…and a man’s foes shall be they of his own household (family)” (Mt. 10:34-36).
Again as to this strife and dissatisfaction, I would like to ask you what you were thinking and what you meant when you said, “This did happen for awhile, but not in the way you would have liked it to be.” Are you presuming to know what I would have liked? Are you suggesting that I hoped for strife and dissatisfaction? It is true that even as Jesus knew that the truth He spoke would bring division, though such was not His purpose, so I knew, and it was not my purpose but an expected outcome which is automatic when the truth is spoken and men are confronted in their sins.
As for fears of those who thought I was there to steal members, I can’t be held responsible for the fears and speculations of others. Neither was I there to steal members as suspected. Nevertheless, if I speak the truth, and in believing, people come out of the works of men (Ps. 17:4) and from among the religious and organized hypocrisies of men and thus be saved, should I not rejoice at such? If they want to walk with God “without the camp” (Hebrews 13:13) by faith in God rather than men (John 5:44), and seek that I should teach them, even as some left the synagogues and their comfortable pews and “families” to follow the Lord, should I not rejoice at those whom the Father brings out and gives me?
If I should witness the opening of eyes, ears and hearts resulting in turning away from idolatry and carnal works to worship the Father in spirit and truth, should it be considered wrong for me to desire such? Now if I were coming simply to gather a following, then one could perhaps be justified in criticizing or faulting me. But this is a matter of motive. Are you or any others there capable to judge me in motive in this matter? Or are you judging after the appearance (John 7:24)?
I’m encouraged that you don’t agree with Adventists that they are THE remnant church. Of course, I’m not encouraged because I’m not an Adventist and therefore left out; I’m encouraged for your sake. This I say, that if there is a genuine believer in that organization (or any other for that matter) who truly desires to be apprehended by the Lord and is willing to obey at all costs, forsaking all, that one must and will come out and be separate.
As it’s written, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be separate, says the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty” (II Cor. 6:17,18).
That same truth is expressed in same basic words in Isaiah 52:11 and Rev. 18:4.
In fact, the word, “church” in the Greek is “ecclesia” which means, “called out.” Called out from what? From the world, from organized religion which in spirit and doctrine is opposed to God though thinking to serve Him.
As to your comment about the remnant church coming out in the last days in time of persecution, these are the last days (many are the Scriptures that bear out that fact) but God has always and ever wanted those who would be His sons and daughters to come out. If you are drawn of the Father, and begin to speak contrary to your organization, you will be persecuted and hated for His sake.
But while many are called, few are chosen. As it is written, “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on Him; but because of the Pharisees they didn’t confess Him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (John 12:42.43). These are some that believed, notice. And, Jesus said to others, “How can you believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that comes from God only” (John 5:44)?
But must we wait for persecution to obey? Does not persecution FOLLOW obedience and believing? As it says, “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution” (II Tim. 3:12).
As for your 4th paragraph in general (please refer to it), while it is true that all men have infirmities and weaknesses even as did all patriarchs, prophets, apostles and saints, God calls us out from all evil and admonishes us to not so much as “touch not the unclean thing.”
You mention the images. The issue isn’t so much that they worship the images themselves but that, as Ellen G. White declared as quoted in my letter, “The Second Commandment forbids the worship OF THE TRUE GOD by images or similitudes …” (read carefully each and every word and phrase of that quote).
You say that God would overlook images as He would divorce, but while there is no commandment that says, “Thou shalt not divorce thy wife,” there IS a commandment forbidding the making of images, likenesses, similitudes in the context of worship. If your church building doesn’t establish a worship context, what does? It is called a “church,” not an auditorium or banquet hall or office or house or barn or art museum or store. And people gather there to what? Worship…presumably the One True God…presumably as He would have them to do so.
Doesn’t James say, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all?” While Moses permitted to write a bill of divorcement, howbeit because of the hardness of their hearts, do you for a moment suppose that he would permit the breaking of one of the commandments? I don’t think so. In fact, both you and I know otherwise, without doubt. On record, he slew 3000 brethren because of the transgression of that very same commandment (Ex. 32:19-28)!
Therefore the Lord does hold accountable those who break any of His commandments. As it’s written, “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven” (Mt. 5:19).
Let me ask you: With whom do you think God would find greater fault? The outsider who comes into the midst of lawbreakers to rebuke them for their sins and for their sakes, or those who “in family” insist on their own law-breaking ways and condemn the outsider for speaking against that lawlessness?
You say, “…it would not hurt them to not have them” and I say and God says that it does indeed hurt them to have them, and so I speak. Yes, we can be thankful that we serve a just and loving God and He manifests His love and justice you mentioned by the fact that He sends me to warn and to rebuke for your sakes. Why does He warn? So that one can in any case do as he or she pleases and escape judgment? Wherein would there then be justice, for then we could all do as we please and be guiltless.
No, there are stripes for those who know better, and even for those who don’t know better. “And that servant, which knew lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes, but he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes” (Luke 12:47,48). I believe you are one who has been given to know better.
Have I anywhere suggested I approve of or endorse divorce? Not by any means. God forbid. Let’s discuss your next paragraph on women and marriage. First of all, you said, “The fact is that in this world of sin, some women are better fitted to do this (run the home).” I agree. But people are called out from sin, out of the world and therefore, by the grace of God, are saved from the world and out of its works and ways. If one doesn’t come out of such, neither will he escape the judgments due to sin. “They that live by the sword die by the sword.” So too do all those who live by any of the world’s ways.
And where do you get the notion “that marriages are to be a balance of ones’ strengths and weaknesses?” One doesn’t find that idea anywhere in the Scriptures. If you can, quote to me. When the Lord calls men out to follow Him and to forsake their wives (otherwise the called are not worthy of Him, He says), is He calling them to imbalance? Is He somehow shortchanging them on anything necessary or good? No, not at all. Paul says it’s better not to marry because that in marriage, a man can’t be fully devoted to God whereas if he’s not married, he’ll not have that trouble in the flesh (I Cor. 7:5-7; 27-33). He encourages being single, if possible. I think that these Scriptures alone defeat this commonly taught notion you’ve expressed.
You go on to say, “Yes in general, men are to make the big decisions…” I agree, but what are big and what are small? When wives have forbidden their husbands to speak with me as happened in your church, was that a big or a small decision? I say, very big and not getting any bigger. And that happened with at least three different couples there! Yet to them such a decision is as nothing to be considered.
And you say “men are not to rule over their wives but to work with them.” Where does one find substantiation for that in Scripture? In my Bible, and I have several dozens, in many versions, I read: “Husbands, submit to your wives,” do I? No, I think I red it the other way around, not because I am prejudiced as a husband but because the same man who said there is “…neither male nor female in Christ…” also said, “Wives, submit to your husbands…” and “obey your husbands” (Eph. 5:22-24; Titus 2:5; Col. 3:18).
Peter encouraged women to follow the example of Sarah who called her husband “lord” (I Peter 3:1-6). And again, Paul taught what? That “I suffer not a man to teach nor to usurp authority over the woman but to be in subjection or at least on an equality basis?” I don’t think so (I Tim. 2:11-15).
Yvon, read the Scripture references I’ve given you. You seem to be quite unaware of them, replacing them with the vain philosophies, doctrines and precepts of men (and women).
I agree we should listen to their counsel, if they have counsel to give, and often they do, IF living in harmony with their husbands, which is far less often than is thought or perceived. I have often benefited from my wife’s counsel.
You say, “By no way are we to treat them as our slaves.” Now why would you even think to make such a statement? Doesn’t that go without saying? Are children to be thought of as slaves because they are to obey their parents? And what of slaves? Are they to be treated unkindly, without respect, without justice or compassion? Even animals are to be treated kindly: “The righteous man regards the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel” says Solomon (Pr. 12:10).
Why would such an ungodly notion even be thought of by you? Where do you get it? Certainly not from anything I have written or advocated, not remotely.
Jean Claude remarked (when hearing Mike Schaber and Mike Lemon declare these same notions to me, as you have), “Why is it that when you quote the simple Scriptures of wives submitting to husbands that right away, automatically, people think you talk about ‘domineering’? Why do they go right into something so negative? There’s something wrong there!” And he’s so right.
You say there is a danger of husbands being too domineering. True. But the Lord has revealed that the greater folly is that women are ruling and domineering, far more than men. Consider that while Paul didn’t warn men specifically against “domineering,” he did warn against women usurping authority over the man (I Tim. 2:11-15).
Look at any marriage, past or present, and look very closely. Objectively, you will see what I mean. Whether blatantly and openly or sweetly and subtly behind the scenes, women rule…and they ought not to do so in ANY WAY, at least according to the counsel of the Scriptures. And why should I go by any other counsel, seeing the Lord has proven Himself to me as my Lord and Saviour, the only and all-wise God?
As for your opinion that men are not taking their “proper role as head of the home due to feeling of inadequacy,” yes and no. Men have indeed abdicated their responsibility as leaders in the home and are therefore as guilty as the wives are for usurping the lead. As well, they would\could surely have feelings of inadequacy when walking in sin. Sin distorts everything and throws all into disorder. As it’s written, “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat” (Gen. 3:6). She sinned, being deceived, drew her husband (who took her counsel) into it who sinned willingly, knowing better, and the consequences in all their forms began from there.
But in Christ, all is made new, and now is the day when the Lord restores all things and places each in their proper places, both husbands and wives, and children and all authorities and roles, to His glory and honour.
Your observations of my wife evidently not being happy are surely accurate but your conclusion as to why is speculation, isn’t it so? Are you not reading into what I say about a proper marriage relationship and then, seeing my wife as you did that day, jumping to conclusions? I can understand how you could make such an assumption given the coincidences, but are you judging righteous judgment or are you going by the appearance?
Obviously, you have no idea what is going on with her. You say that her state “should not be if she is in a house of love and respect for who she is.” Are you saying that because one is loved and respected that therefore that one will never be in a state of mourning or sorrow or rebellion or some other negative state? Or that because one is unhappy it is always because they are unloved or disrespected? You and we all know otherwise.
Now the question as to addressing specific individuals privately first, or only privately: You are right in saying that such a procedure did not apply as the Lord had advised because indeed, I am an outsider and am not only addressing a common brother but elders and pastors and even the whole organization which in fact, I do not recognize as the church or my spiritual leaders. Therefore it is not only hard for me to do it as in the New Testament as you’ve mentioned, but impossible.
Furthermore, the passage you refer to is as follows: “Moreover if your brother shall trespass against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone: if he shall hear you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear you, then take with you one or two more, then in the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto you as a heathen man and a publican” (Mt. 18:15-17).
This situation was not a private matter of wrongs done toward me at all. Nobody there personally offended or sinned against me. But I first spoke because of sins against God which you have committed and do commit publicly and cumulatively. As for addressing private individuals, there is really little mention in my letter of private specific sins if any at all.
I marvel that people should react so violently to words that in effect, were good words, encouraging words, compassionate and gentle, yet firm and direct. But the Lord by me has put His finger on your self-righteousnesses and shortfalls, and you therefore resist, even rebel. That is precisely what is said in my letter on the first page, even before the reaction came, because of the letter.
You people haven’t offended me but you have and are greatly offending God, and not even knowing it. So you are warned, informed, rebuked, so that repentance might come and salvation for your sakes. The righteous will accept and obey but the wicked and the foolish (who are wise in their own eyes and proud) will retaliate and kill the messenger.
I was before the Lord as to whether I should address individuals privately or not, and received that they each encourage the rest in their ways, are public in their ways, and even proud of them, and therefore should be addressed so.
Did not Jesus say all things would be brought to light, that there is nothing hid that won’t be made manifest? Indeed, He did. Do you think this happens in some “wild blue yonder,” in the hereafter? No, all things are here, now.
But the Adventists tend to put all things in the past (as you in your letter have remarked) or in the future, as do others, and thereby conveniently continue in their sins as though there is no God or judgment at all in the present. As it is written, “He is the Lord our God; His judgments are (not will be) in all the earth” (I Chron. 16:14).
In reply to your judgment that the advice of my letter is good for all and not just for one individual, I completely agree and therefore I judged it beneficial and expedient to share advice to individuals with all. I don’t argue that much of what I said was not as you put it, “common sense advice.” But I recall your talking about your wife and it didn’t witness with me that you forgave her. You may think you did, and I do not suspect you would deliberately lie to me on that matter but consider that the forgiveness may need to go deeper than you realize.
You say, “Lise does let her husband do his job.” But his present job is not what I’m talking about. If he is apprehended of God and obeys, he will no longer do what he is doing and at such time there will be conflict with his wife, and you’ll see it. Mike Lemon is doing the works of men as required of men and when he is converted, he will do the work of God, that is, believe on Him and obey, shunning the works of men, no longer a hireling (paid minister ordained of men).
As for what I said to J.C., yes, good advice for all but particularly for him in his present spiritual place. God has said things to others specifically as when through Samuel to Saul, saying that obedience was better than sacrifice – good advice for all but particularly for Saul in his present spiritual place. Jesus told the woman to “Go and sin no more.” Good advice for you, me and for every believer in such cases, but meant for her at that time. Would you discount His authority or right to speak what He spoke because it was “good common sense advice?” Would you say He was not a prophet simply because He gave “good advice in general” as you put it?
“What does short hair have to do with the Bible?” you ask. As it is written, in the Bible: “Does not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?” (I Cor. 11:14 – read also verses 3 to 16).
Therefore it IS in the Bible and the issue of hair length is not merely a cultural thing. Yvon, you’re very ignorant of the Bible. This is not a condemnation but a statement of fact for your sake. As Jesus said to the Jews, “You do err, not knowing the Scriptures….”
I didn’t say that all those Darrell brings to the Lord will be lost. What I was saying was that his work produces not genuine converts to Christ but proselytes, who are converts to Christ or God in name only. They are as those whom the Pharisees converted, proselytes who had a change of life, who became very religious and devout in religious exercise, but who also became “twice the children of Gehenna” that their sponsors or converters, the Pharisees were (Mt. 23:15). Such converts were deceived into thinking they were God’s children, chosen people, yet Jesus said otherwise and He said that one day they would come to Him, expecting to be received and rewarded of Him, only to be rebuked and rejected (Mt.7:22,23).
Proselytes are children not of God but of doctrine. The Pharisees were great at professing God as their father (John 8:41) but their doctrines were all important to them, even as your doctrine of the unconscious dead, and such others, are so important to you (More on this later).
We don’t know if Darrell’s converts will not one day in this life see the light and be saved, in spite of his works, but we do know that one day all men will be saved, a doctrine which you don’t believe and which is often considered even diabolical by those who better hope differently, for if it isn’t true, they are lost and not saved as they presume. As it’s written:
“That in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us through Christ Jesus” (Eph. 2:7).
“For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience by one shall many be made righteous” (Ro. 5:19, but see context verses 15-21 or more).
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (I Cor. 15:22).
“That in the dispensation of the fulness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in Heaven, and which are in earth; even in Him…” (Eph. 1:10).
5) All reconciled unto God (Col. 1:20)
6) All to be saved (I Tim. 2:4)
7) A ransom for all (I Tim. 2:6)
8) Every knee shall bow (Philippians 2:9-11)
9) And none by force, for they cannot confess except by the Holy Spirit (this notion of confessing Jesus Christ as Lord against one’s will is diabolical and wicked) (I Cor. 12:3)
10) Restitution of ALL things (Acts 3:20,21).
Recall the study we did on Jonah. Consider that every one of the 120,000 people of Nineveh was saved. What are the chances of that? In fact, it was not a matter of chance at all but a sovereign act of God Who at that time determined to save the entire city. If God can save anyone and as many as He chooses, and He is not willing that any should perish (II Peter 3:9), will He not save the entire world as the verses above declare?
Look these Scriptures up – I can give you many, many more that testify to this wonderful truth that Christ’s blood is perfectly powerful to accomplish perfect results as He willed and does will. He, being the Lion of the tribe of Judah, does indeed walk away with the lion’s share of the spoils and not the hyenas’ or the vultures’, as your heretical doctrines declare.
Many would come in an age (this one in particular because it is our age), claiming to be the Lord’s and be rebuked and rejected by Him (Mt.7:22). Thus has it happened now. You say that one would have to be God to speak such things. Or, I say to you, one would have to be sent of God speaking His words. In the Lord I have said that all the works there in your midst are rejected of the Lord.
You say “if people know that Jesus died on the cross for them so that they can be saved and they accept Him as Saviour…” The problem is that while many know He died for them, and even profess so, they aren’t saved. As already pointed out, Jesus said that many would come saying, “Lord, Lord…” and be rejected in spite of great works in His Name.
You’ve set yourself up as judge by accusing me of the same in that you think I can’t be a prophet because:
1) you don’t and aren’t able to see the value in the things I say –
Neither did many people see the value in the things Jesus, John the Baptist, the other apostles and prophets spoke. They were persecuted, stoned, and killed, not by unbelievers as you see them, but by believers as you see them, by all the religious such as yourself.
2) I don’t believe your doctrine on the unconsciousness of the dead –
There are many prophets of old who didn’t have full knowledge of doctrines. In fact, none of the prophets had “all doctrines.” Consider Daniel from whom much was hidden, yet he was known as greatly beloved in Heaven (Dan. 10:19; 12:8, 9).
Consider John the Baptist who, according to Jesus was the greatest of all men born of women, and more than a prophet, to whom was shown that Jesus was the Christ, yet doubted that very fact when in prison (Mt. 11:9-11; 11:3).
Because one doesn’t have certain knowledge does not presuppose he is not a prophet; neither is he necessarily a prophet because he has all the right doctrines. Even the Pharisees, who bitterly opposed Jesus, had much right doctrine as that of the resurrection and of angels, and had confidence in the Law of Moses, prayed, tithed, fasted, attended the synagogue or the Temple regularly, kept the Sabbath and gave alms, etc. yet were in utter darkness.
I’ve heard Cox and Darrell quote Jesus saying, “Search the Scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me” (John 5:39). They used that Scripture passage to promote reading the Bible to have life, yet what Jesus was saying was that the life was in Him and not reading the Bible. He was rebuking them for their contradiction and hypocrisy, having that confidence in head knowledge of the Scriptures and of doctrine while they stood there hating the One of Whom the Scriptures are all about.
So have you people done in your church, both locally and universally. You question my validity in the Lord as His messenger based on your carnal knowledge, not knowing the One Whom you profess to know.
In any case, if I said I was a prophet, it wasn’t until I was asked. And why was I asked? And shall I lie by denying I am a prophet if in fact I am? And do you know the meaning and essence of a true prophet? No.
As for your doctrine of the dead, it is a diabolical one. Why then should the Lord reveal a lie to me? Nevertheless, when Darrell first brought it to me, I enquired of the Lord; I wanted to know the truth of it. Paul and I both sought out the matter and the Lord showed him, long before your present letter with the same notion, that devils have inspired this doctrine (which they say is necessary to prevent deception from devils), to disqualify a true man of God from coming to the believers of that doctrine, telling them their sins and leading them in right paths to God.
Paul actually said, “They won’t believe who you are because you don’t believe that doctrine, thus justifying themselves and continuing in their evils and darkness.” Yvon, this is the truth and no lie, God being my witness. Paul said those very things and here you are confirming, or fulfilling rather, what he said! Not that I have only heard this from you; I have heard it from one of Darrell’s proselytes, his wife no less. In essence, she said “Because I don’t believe that doctrine, I am in darkness and not of God.”
What the Lord did tell me concerning that doctrine was that in believing that lie, people deny the Lord Who says He is the Resurrection and the Life. Not “will be.” The Resurrection Is, but you people deny Him, that is, Jesus, by your doctrine.
Tell me, why would the Resurrection leave me, that is, disconnect Himself from me for a time, allowing me to go into death, sleep, unconsciousness (call it what you will) apart from Him for any amount of time if I have been truly born again of Him, with Him dwelling in me wherein I have eternal life now?
He said, “I will never leave you nor forsake you” (Heb. 13:5). Are you not calling Him a liar by that doctrine? Or do you not understand what a new birth involving eternal, unstoppable, imperishable life is all about? If the apostle Paul said that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord (and I know you people have your carnal reasonings for that one too…everything in the Bible must be fitted to your doctrine rather than your carnal doctrines scrapped and new ones formed by the Lord and the Bible), then his words indicate that one can be present with the Lord without this outer body which will indeed lay in “sleep” until it is resurrected in due time.
And what else does Paul say which is contrary to your doctrine? As he writes, “For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Ro. 8:35-39). And seeing how that God is love (I John 4:8), we can’t be separated from the love of God.
And what furthermore did the Resurrection say? “I am the Resurrection and the Life: he that believes in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (John 11:25, 26). Good Question, Yvon…do you? I don’t think so.
And what of your doctrine of annihilation of the dead that runs contrary to these truths? If there is annihilation of the wicked, how is it Jesus said, “Truly I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorra in the day of judgment, than for that city” (Mt. 10:15)?
If any people deserve annihilation for wickedness shouldn’t it be the infamous Sodomites after which vile sins are named? And is there such a thing as degrees of tolerance with annihilation? Is not annihilation, annihilation? But “you do greatly err, not knowing the Scriptures or the power thereof.”
Shall we establish a thing by 2 witnesses as the Scriptures counsel? Then see this verse: “When your sisters, Sodom and her daughters, shall return to their former estate…” (Ezekiel 16:46-63). Their former estate is to be the result of judgment (correction, not ultimate destruction). Having been destroyed, the Lord Who is the Resurrection, brings back from the dead and restores!
Praise be to God for both His justice and mercy! We can be very thankful and relieved that He is not as men who self-righteously, bloodthirstily and vengefully would have destroyed those not in agreement with their way of seeing things.
As for your recommendation that I get (I believe you meant) the Strong’s Concordance “and study the topic out with the help of the Holy Spirit,” I have this to say:
1) Again, while one needs to study the Scriptures which are the Holy Word of God, it is a matter not of intellectual deduction but of revelation, and of a personal relationship not with the Bible but with the Author of the Bible that makes all the difference.
2) As I’ve indicated, I enquired of the Holy Spirit and He answered.
3) As quoted earlier, the Pharisees too searched the Scriptures thinking that in them they had eternal life but those Scriptures testified of the very One they were rejecting in spite of all their doctrines, right or wrong in themselves.
By your doctrine of the state of the dead, you deny the Lord Jesus Christ. And what did John have to say about that? We tried to share with you at the farm the meaning of the following words which you didn’t receive:
“Hereby know you the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antiChrist, whereof you have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world” (I John 4:2, 3).
Jesus Christ came in the flesh to you in us, in our flesh, because He dwells in us and has spoken by us, and you haven’t received us or our words, thereby not confessing that Jesus Christ comes in the flesh, in His body, His body being His saints, which you are not if you can’t believe or receive or discern Him in us. The word, “confesses” is “homologeo,” which means, “receiving the witness or the essence,” that is, consenting, acknowledging not only by lips but embracing by heart and soul in the present that Christ is (not was, in history), present in the present, yes, in the flesh.
As for those Scriptures you believe to support your doctrine of the state of the dead, Darrell supplied me with 44, and I can see others as well that one could possibly use to defend that doctrine. However, your denomination’s interpretation of those passages are the issue here. I went through all those verses and made notes as to my understanding of them and from all I can tell, my understanding is consistent and agrees with all those other passages which you people ignore or wrest to suit yourselves and your doctrine. I would be willing to go through all those with you if you so desire.
But how will you understand what I say, not having His Spirit? I don’t condemn you in this but say this for your sake, for your good, for your salvation. And saved you will be. (You need to be baptized in the Holy Spirit to be able to understand the things of the Spirit.)
Nobody can have received the Spirit of God in your organization and not be vexed with the goings on there unless there was something very wrong with him or her.
Now concerning organized churches, and the “organization with the most truth,” as you referred to the Adventists, in Jesus’ day you would have, on that basis, joined the Pharisees (who sat in Moses’ seat – as ordained of God, by the way – Mt. 23:2). I take it that you are talking not of the Spirit of Truth but of doctrine which you believe to be true or reasonable. I conclude that by many things such as your mentioning their shortfall on Bible prophecy fulfillment. But what good is it to be a Pharisee? It only causes you to crucify the Christ when He comes as a thief into your midst incognito because you have your confidence in doctrine and not in God as you profess or may believe. Organized churches or religious organizations are such by nature simply BECAUSE they have rejected the Spirit of God.
Your people are in horrible darkness, with such great lack of understanding, thinking you know so much. I must write you a 12-page letter to cover bare essentials and simple matters, even earthly ones, such as the length of a man’s hair.
By the way, Lise criticized me for that comment about long hair toward Mike Bowes, but I didn’t make it as a criticism; it was made as a promise of seeing the light. The Lord has sent me into that darkness in which you all dwell for the sake of any and all who, in their present death state or sleep, in their graves, would “hear the voice of the Son of God” and be raised to life. I speak of those who have been religious for their own sakes, professing the Lord in vain and brought to judgment (the KJV says “damnation” but the Greek word is “krisis,” meaning “correction in judgment”) and those earnestly seeking to worship the Lord in spirit and in truth, to life in Christ, here and now.
Note that the Lord said in those passages I’m quoting (John 5:25-29) and which you people interpret carnally and ignorantly relegate to the future, thus washing your hands of any present responsibility, that the hour is not only coming, but now is. It was so in His day and in every day thereafter whenever He sent His servants to speak the truth to “the unconscious dead.” This is such a time.
“Truly, truly, I say to you, The hour is coming and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they who hear shall live” (John 5:25 MKJV).
Let the dead bury the dead, Yvon, and you come and follow us even as we follow the Lord (I Cor. 4:16; 11:1; Ph. 3:17) and worship Him, neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem (that includes denominations and religious organizations which are mountains or hills in their own right…John 4:21-24), but in spirit and in truth. That is the only way you are going to please God, walking in faith and not in men’s works, in reality and not religion, in truth and not hypocrisy even as did the Pharisees who had “right doctrine.”
Jesus suffered without the camp and if you would be His, you too must follow Him without the camp.
I have been and expect to be reading more of Ellen G. White and I ask you what you specifically mean by saying, “you will receive a blessing” from reading her material.
I had a vision of you, believe it or not. It spoke of a future time and state for you. I saw your countenance and person. You were walking in maturity in Christ, a kind of fatherhood, in loving tenderness and compassion for the hurting and for all. You understood suffering, having suffered yourself. You were a comfort wherever you went, ministering in what God had made of you in your sufferings. It was God’s glory. I saw traces of that calling on your life and future in your letter, and I do believe your sign-off, “with love and concern,” as much as you are able to mean it at present. Those were not loose words as some would use them and claim to be sincere.
None of us had any problem with your letter. To us it seemed positive, sincere and honest, though to us, obviously, misinformed and in error, but we welcomed your willingness to communicate with us, and the opportunity to reply, with the hope that you will be earnest in receiving these things and that we have not laboured in vain.
Concerning the vision, it seems it is a foretelling of the future and not just a conditional promise.
We perceive that we’ve done our duty at your church at present but by His grace stand ready and willing to obey in anything further the Lord may require of us.
Well, “Searcher,” will you recognize that you’ve chanced upon a field in which you’ve stumbled upon “the pearl of great price?” Will you appreciate it as such and be prepared to sell all you have to possess it? The Lord bless you and keep you and give you to know the truth of all things. We hope to hear from you again.
Victor
From the Letter to the SDA Church in Lethbridge, September 20, 2000
Yvon Goulet: The same words of Scripture apply to you as to Roy. In fires and only so are we made strong. We are all unworthy, everyone of us. Forgive your wife. Impossible? Yes, with us, but not with God. Thank Him for what has happened, not so that He will bring her back but because of what He is doing in having hardened her heart toward you and removing her. The Lord is over all (Isaiah 45:5-7).
Roy Wooliscroft: “The time is short: it remains, that both they that have wives be as though they had none; and they that weep, as though they wept not; and they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not” (1 Corinthians 7:29-30). If you seek the Lord with all your heart, He shall be found of you. Be thankful and know that He knows and that upon men are visited blessings in disguise, to be unveiled at the appointed time. Consider that all things from the hand of God come because we either deserve them or need them. There is no righteousness with man, only “wrongness.” We are not condemned in that wrongness, only when we refuse to acknowledge it, grieving Him, and, even then, we condemn ourselves; God does not do so.