Horizontal Menu Bar

Commentary: The Ministry of David Gates

The Ministry of David Gates and His "Lazarus Experience"[1] 

Blog Post Sections
David Gates’ Lazarus Experience
- The Spiritual Implication/Application of Gates’ Lazarus Experience
- Conclusion
Epilogue - Laodicean Dilemma
Epilogue II - (June 2010+)
- Gates’ Second Prophetic Campaign
Epilogue IIB - “Lazarus Is Dead”
- GMI Statement to General Conference {Feb. 28, 2013}

GC vs. GMI Decision {May 26, 2013}
Epilogue III - Gates’ 9/11/2010 Crisis!??
Epilogue IIIB - (November 2010+)

New re-Beginnings!!? - (Faith Camp Series Jun-July 2011)

September 2011+ Regretting Relapsing!??

April 2012+ The Rekindled Torch of False “Prophetic” Revivings

November 2013 - Australia Series

September 2015 - Pope's U.S. Visit & ‘Seasons-Setting’

Nov/December 2015 - Australia Series

[To download a PDF copy of (part of) this post see here (PDF link)]


David Gates’ Lazarus Experience
            If one has a serious interest in seeking to finish the Gospel work, chances are that they’ve come across the ministry of David Gates, and heard his exciting testimony. If not, one can find all this information on his website at Gospel Ministry International. To say the least, David Gates conducts Gospel Missions at the Extreme. This is indeed his motivation. Self-admittedly, he has grown tired of the institutionalized way in which the Seventh-day Adventist Church has endeavoured to finish the work, and he instead preaches and encourages much bolder, and more rapid, efforts, all based upon an implicit and explicit faith on the promises of God, and what God can do. Theoretically speaking, in a Church that quasi-mantra-like professes to believe that ‘Jesus’s coming is imminent... “Even at the Door”’ (as if mere professions fulfill the concrete Mission), combined with the communication technology which is currently available in the Church, it is surprising, even shocking, that David Gates has even had to preach his messages on this topic more than once. Such a faith and action rousing message, which is quite feasible when the numbers are crunched, should have caused the worldwide Church to spring into concrete, unprecedented action. However it still has not.
            Furthermore, the early bold work of David Gates was accompanied by clear and wonderful signs of God’s approval and assistance. The most notable being his providential receiving, in late December 2003, in back-to-back gifts (within 2 hours) for $1.5 million and then $100,000, from two different, but actually related, donor sources (with one of the second $100,000 donors, (-a marital couple), having been standing right next to Gates at the airport when he received the call from the first donor, and so was influenced/inspired by this development (see here (2004) [at (mp3) 01:02:35ff]); -though he apparently was not aware that it was $100,000 that was still needed), for exactly the $1.6 million dollars needed, to close the deal on a television network and its uplink Satellite system in Bolivia, and that, on the last day of the payment deadline. (A similar Spirit-led gift of $100,000 had entirely paid for the down payment loan previously made when formally agreeing to purchase it back in late January 2002. (See in his book Mission Miracles [PDF], p.45+46). And so moved by this striking, timely funding for the network, the Catholic selling owners declined taking in the additional $100,000 payment, which was accrued interest over the unpaid balance time).[2] Indeed, as Gates himself puts it, probably the largest single-instance ‘financial miracle’ in SDA history.[3] Such a striking testimony of God’s intervention, through the promptings of His Spirit, should have served to clear any lingering skepticism/doubt that, especially SDA leaders, could have had up to then whether or not God was in such bold work. The whole thing worked out in such a way that it could clearly, spiritually be seen that God indeed had acted. Several other various experiences of David Gates served as concrete evidence that though this work would still require sacrifice, extra ordinary effort and trials, God would be faithful. This is all quite typical of those who do bold, counter-norm things for God as repeatedly seen in the Bible. Yet, still Gates has had to continue his work virtually on his own, i.e., without the enjoining participation, endorsement, or support of, the Church. (Apart from offers to give him a salary). Seems to me that such a God ordained ministry should have been given great promotion by the worldwide Church.
            Following this miraculous experience with the $1.6 million dollar network, though marked with an extreme test of faith, David Gates claims to soon have heard the clear command of God again to make similar bold moves and take a present opportunity to purchase other television networks that had become available. Sure enough, though feeling a little dreadful at the level of faith that these similar actions  would surely again require, Gates moved ahead in faith and signed an “intent of purchase” agreement with 3 networks costing over $35 million dollars. Surprisingly, if not, tellingly enough, David soon met with a funds manager who was willing to invest most of the $45 million dollars that had come his way in David’s projects. However, shortly after that joyous agreement, David and his wife Becky were warned by God that the deal would fall through and that this would be similar to a Lazarus Experience.’ Sure enough a little while later, David was told by this funds manager that some situations had changed in regards to some governmental restrictions and this prevented him from keeping his promised financial assistance. The man was surprised to hear from David that he already knew that this would occur, based on the warnings he had been given. As a consequence to this non-fulfilment, the 3 networks that David had signed up for had to be shut down and they were eventually sold to other buyers “waiting in line.” (Feb. 18, 2015: See David Gates tell (during Faith Camp 2014) of a later (really Divinely honoringly, salvaging) denouement and development for that second network endeavor here[01:03:54-01:09:47]. To me, due to the unfaithfulness of those who should have readily helped Gates from the start, it however likewise has not resulted in “what might have been”... (cf. 8T 104.1-106.1))
 

            Unfortunately, quite often it is at such times of testing and even failure that a worker in God’s work can veer slightly off-course/message with the mission that God had given them. Such a diversion either occurs at the beginning of a ministry where one literally runs off on a non-Biblical course by not waiting upon God following a calling to ministry. (E.g., Moses with the Egyptian (Exod 2:11-14)). The other is when failure or disappointment occurs, as it became the case here, and in an attempt to redress this, this worker, presumably, inadvertently, seeks to ‘take the reigns into his own hands’ and either partly, or entirely, ignores Biblical principles and teachings and actually seeks to accomplish God’s promise by various non-Biblical/human means. (E.g., King Saul and the Amalekites vs. the prophet Samuel (1 Sam 15))
            Sure enough, sometime in 2007, David’s administrative assistant, a Romanian young man, shared with him his “insights” on this “Lazarus Experience.” According to him, just like Lazarus was in the tomb for 4 days, David’s experience would last 4 years, based on an application of the prophetic year-day principle. Gates at first neutrally received this new insight, but later that day, as he told this to his wife and she told him that she also been impressed with this understanding, he then, with what he considered to be Biblical confirmation (2 people?), readily subscribed to, and ran with, this new revelation, and that, apparently without obtaining concrete confirmation from God. Previously, even when in visibly desperate need for financial assistance, as in the case with the first network, David speaks of how he would not even be quickly taken by the appearance of alluring offers of significant donations such as when he was called by a rich friend, or approached by a rich couple at an ASI meeting. Either one of these potential donors could have fully paid for the network's cost of $1.6 million, but David rightly stood back and let the Spirit of God do its work. Tellingly enough, like the rich young ruler, God's Spirit was not able to influence these people to, with godly motives, offer up their riches for His work. Suspectedly some pride came in the way. However here, David Gates jumped on this “4-day|year revelation” and then even customized it to come to include partial years as full years (i.e., inclusive reckoning). Thus, according to him, the part of the year when it supposedly had started, late 2005, was to be considered as the first full year, and thus the accomplishment of this Lazarus Experience, would be by the end of 2008; later specified by this same friend to be in November of that year. Also by the way that Lazarus was fully restored to life and health, David thus believed that God would cause him to regain the losses he had suffered at the beginning of this experience and more (i.e., the $35+ million dollars worth of media networks). Thus early in the last quarter of 2008 (Aug-Sep) David Gates, in his sermons, began to, effectively, “prophetically” speak that he was beginning to see signs of this promised grand resurrection. However by late 2008 (Nov 21), by his own detailing, such promises had not yet materialized as hoped/promised. (His, then recent gain of ~$300,000 gain was not the previously lost $35,000,000+ (= 0.1%), let alone his then prophesied surpassing $3 billion dollar plans, and thus not a “resurrection”.)[4] In now late 2009, it verifiably has yet to occur as “prophesied.”
            So is this article here written to unjustly criticize David Gates or, as the expression says, “kick someone when they are down.” Far from it. (See also this similar blog post | This forum discussion, as well as this one (Spectrum Magazine). See also this interesting, recently (09/2010) started discussion, (by me), on Adventist Online which includes comments on this blog post.) I agree with many of the Biblical principles that David Gates points out in his sermons, particularly in regards to Faith, Service, Missions, Sacrifice and Giving, even also in regards to, as personally, repeatedly experienced: discernly, clearly hearing the quite forceful, instantaneous/“real-time”, and also pointedly candid, (even) conversationally responding, “Voice of God” [see e.g., here and here] (which as he rightly says, is an experiential Spiritual reality that should duly be had by all believers). The message here is instead an attempt to help him to realize the "veered-off" error in some of his ways. There is always the danger that when someone has substantially previously experienced the presence and assistance of God, that they come to believe that they now can do no wrong, and that they are beyond reproach. But, as many stories in the Bible clearly show, especially with his namesake, King David, as long as we are fallen human beings, we are always in danger of going off-course in our spiritual journey. Our only safeguard is to continually submit our opinions and ideas to the test of God and to be diligent in the study of His Word.
            (Also, the sanctimonious thing for some people in such a situation is to, even, remain neutral here by, actually, indifferently, not saying anything critical here, however that really is the attitude of one who really is solely looking out for him/herself and does not care for either the one stating these things (a step which was originally done with private email messages to Gates which were not responded to), the “audience” (i.e., the people of God) who may be misled by such persisted statements, nor the work of God which is detrimentally greatly affected by such blatant, public waywardness.)
            Based on Biblical and Spirit of Prophecy (SOP) principles and statements, where David Gates inceptively began to go off-course was when he neglected the inspired testimony that is unequivocally, and repeatedly, made, particularly in the SOP, along the lines that:

‘the Lord has been pleased to show that there would be no definite time in the message given of God since 1844.’ (E.g., 2SM 73 (1885), 10MR 270 (1888); 272 (1891); 7BC 971 (1900); cf. LDE 35-36).

“The Lord showed me that Time had not been a test since 1844, and that time will never again be a test.” (RH, November 1, 1850 par. 12; cf. RH, Nov. 22, 1892 par. 7)

            Of course one could easily, but actually defensively, claim that this only refers to Bible Prophecies, however the many SOP testimony on this point clearly show that it does have in mind any endtime message that someone claims to be “of God.” (cf. LDE 32-35). Such would apply to David Gates and his “Lazarus Experience”/set-time message, which he publicly, widely proclaimed during his speaking appointments. Unfortunately, but tellingly enough, starting in ca. 2005, Gates now went on to engage in a sort of “no-fault/Teflon” time-setting where he would say e.g., that ‘we have but a few months left before the end arrives, at the most 24 months’ or ‘we have 36 months left, and if God is willing, no more than 48.’ Apparently this was all based upon his ascribing fully to a ‘timed Lazarus Experience.’

            Interestingly enough, Ellen White had clear comments on this issue of ‘eschatological prophetic time.’ First of all, as a guiding principle of her inspired understanding in this regards she says in regards to the “time” mentioned in Rev 10:6 that:

This time which the angel declares with a solemn oath, is not the end of this world’s history, neither of probationary time, but of prophetic time, which should precede the advent of our Lord. [=Dan 12:7 vs. Rev 10:6, 7] That is, the people will not have another message upon definite time. After this period of time, reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844. [Emphasis supplied] (1MR 100.1; cf. 7BC 971.7)[5]


            She therefore had pointed comments in regards to those who engaged/persisted in such time setting messages. E.g., she says:

I understand that Brother [E. P.] Daniels has, as it were, set time, stating that the Lord will come within five years. Now I hope the impression will not go abroad that we are time-setters. Let no such remarks be made. They do no good. Seek not to obtain a revival upon any such grounds, but let due caution be used in every word uttered, that fanatical ones will not seize anything they can get to create an excitement and the Spirit of the Lord be grieved. We want not to move the people's passions to get up a stir, where feelings are moved and principle does not control. I feel that we need to be guarded on every side, because Satan is at work to do his uttermost to insinuate his arts and devices that shall be a power to do harm. Anything that will make a stir, create an excitement on a wrong basis, is to be dreaded, for the reaction will surely come.--Letter 34, 1887 (cf. LDE 34, 35). [Underlining emphasis supplied]

Also:

The Lord has shown me that the message of the third angel must go, and be proclaimed to the scattered children of the Lord, but it must not be hung on time. I saw that some were getting a false excitement, arising from preaching time; but the third angel's message is stronger than time can be. I saw that this message can stand on its own foundation and needs not time to strengthen it; and that it will go in mighty power, and do its work, and will be cut short in righteousness. (EW 75.1 (1882))

            Such inspired counsels pointedly speak for themselves.

            Evidently David Gates is indeed fully aware of these statements in the SOP on timed messages as he makes explicitly reference to them, however, his (mis-)understanding of using time with his messages is apparently all based upon, and/or now, defended by, his (confused) rationalization that there is ‘evidence in the Bible of literal vs. prophetic fulfillment of Bible prophecies.’ He states that this is seen in ‘types vs. anti-type fulfillments such as the OT sacrificial system, “Elijah” prophecies, the 7 Churches of Revelation, etc.’ According to him, there here is support ‘for seeing the time elements in Bible prophecies as also having a similar literal and prophetic fulfillment,’ and to supposedly concretely affirm this he (gleefully) cites, as an “exception to this [Bible|SOP] rule”, the 1000-year Millennium period which he emphasizes is ‘both in the future and a literal time period.’ He therefore concludes from this that ‘while there may not be any prophetic time periods after 1844 with the fulfillment of the 2300 day prophecy, if there are any time periods in prophecies, that are to be fulfilled after 1844, they are going to be literal time periods.’ See the full exposition of this view of his in the following video [27:10ff]:


            Providing the due, proper, thorough response to Gates’ effectively “mishmashed” view here will require much more time, Biblical study and scholarly work as it comes to involve, among other things, the actual fulfillement of historical prophetic time periods, the structure of the prophetic layout in Revelation (see DARCOM 6:48, 49; cf. my editing version of this chart in this blog post) in which the prophecy of the 1000-year Millennium is not part of the seven-period, literal/historical prophecies. This Millennium prophecy instead falls within the part of Revelation (19:11-20:15) that deals with the Consummation of the Great Controversy and not its Historical Development. Case in point, all of the time element found in these historical prophecies have already had a literal, historical fulfillment, whereas the Millennium and its 1000 years have not.[6] So what Gates would be saying here is that these already fulfilled historical, and thus literal, time periods should have another literal fulfillment in the post-1844, eschatological period, in then, the overarching context of, and in contribution to, the fulfillment of, the Three Angels Message. This would prove to be indeed irreconcilable with Biblical and Inspired Counsel in this regard. To the contrary, the Biblical view of time periods in applicable, post-1844 prophecies is that these fulfilled time elements serve as a guiding indication of the thematic nature of these now eschatological fulfillments of these priorly, literally/historically prophecies, and not to literal time periods. (Indeed this hermeneutical principle was applied in this eschatological prophetic message.) Furthermore, as quoted above, the SOP does specifically state that: “the people will not have another message upon definite time”, which also includes David Gates’ assumed ‘definite literal time periods.’ 
            Still, even the surfacedly excusable, understanding of David Gates did not stop him from “creating” his own timed message/prophecies, based, no less, on the literal time in a literal episode in the Gospels, (i.e., not even a prophecy), and from this preaching a definite/set time when final events involving the Three Angels Message will be, and/or, as he later amended, start to be, fulfilled. He now may defensively claims that he never spoke of setting a “day and hour” for the Lord’s return, I suppose in the: ‘September 26, at 03:44 A.M.’ way, however he cannot claim that he has not, “as it were” sought to set a year, even if given in a “range of years,” or using his preferred view, “months”. One simply has to replay many of his early (i.e, pre-2009) sermons. Indeed in this March 8, 2008 sermon [20:41-25:51] (video), while on one (slight of) hand sustaining that ‘we cannot know the day or the hour’, Gates went on to strongly imply/suggest that ‘we can “set” (???) the year of Christ’s return’, wrongly citing Matt 16:1-3 in supposed support. As he went on to present his “final economic collapse of North America” scenario in support of this “year setting” belief [see at 22:11ff], it is, interestingly enough, David Gates who needed this, actually, Biblically-spurious, ‘evil and adulterous generation’s concrete sign’ (Matt 16:4) in order to sustain his belief in, and proclamation of, an imminent end. (See more on this “sign” issue below in Epilogue III in regards to now Gates ‘September 11 signs’ prediction.)
            This is all along the lines of what E.P. Daniels was doing in the days of E.G. White and he was divinely, deservingly, rebuked for it. Indeed, with the many attempts of David Gates to set, and the re-set others when these previous ones were not fulfilled, he actually became what EGW spoke about when she said:

“We are not of that class who define the exact period of time that shall elapse before the coming of Jesus the second time with power and great glory. Some have set a time, and when that has passed, their presumptuous spirits have not accepted rebuke, but they have set another and another time. But many successive failures have stamped them as false prophets.--FE 335 (1895). {LDE 34.1}

            In this June 2010 sermon (video) (mp4) [02:08:07-02:15:45], David Gates goes on an exhortational appeal in regards to ‘the “special light” given to the "very elect" [Matt 24:14 -literally, simply: "the choice ones"] to protect against the deceptions of the enemy’, and rightly admonishes: ‘against not trusting and casting doubt upon the SOP’; ‘that the most deceitful lies are 99% truth’; ‘against not making decisions based on feeling rather than on faith in all what God has said, including the SOP’; ‘that new light will never negate already given light’; and ‘against the danger of rejecting the “Testimonies”, leading to the slippery slope of becoming increasingly unbiblical’. Well this is all exactly what occurred with him, and that’s all due to his simple persistent refusal to accept the strict counsel of the SOP as stated above in regards to any, and even any type of, prophetic/predictive time-setting. (In saying this David Gates is either completely oblivious to this very fact, thus indicating his utter deception in this area, and/or he is (pridefully) quite indifferent about this, thus further indicating the effectuation of the desired effect of such carefully-crafted deception.) Self-evidently Gates “felt” that the end was so near that: (1) he was no longer bound by such supposedly “pre-end times” counsels; (2) could make specifically-dated predictions of the end; and (3) also seek to get a revival based upon such definite, imminent doom, messages.
            Thus, speaking of a “slippery slope”, David Gates typically, naturally and inevitably went on to add other extreme and fantastical, speculative, hear-saying statements to his spurious set-time messages to seek to self-corroborate its supposed soon fulfillment. He therefore would repeat/insinuate anything he could hear that in any way supported his imminent doomsday claims. These are sensational statements, most of them deliberately rendered using his now perfectly crafted and patented, therewith, worked up, guilefully insinuative, urging staccato, no fault/Teflon, “but-I-have-no-notes”, sound bite, delivery, as:

            -a soon complete collapse of the world economy by December 2009 - caused by the U.S. printing of money to manage its debt;[7]

            -that the U.S. Gross National Debt was, in 2008, $57 Trillion; and that since 2006, and thus the United States is no longer able to pay the interest on its debt, and therefore must print ca. $2 Billion per day (later, circularly speculated to be $3.6 B) to help meet these payments;[8]

            -the wealth of the rich people/“sinners” of the world (E.g., Bill Gates) would soon suddenly be turned over to God’s people as simply as it being handed to them;[9]

            -the illegal immigration of Mexicans is the result of an agreed upon development based upon a conversion, actually “baptism”, of George W. Bush to the Catholic Faith in order to promote Catholicism in the U.S., all as part of a larger “Catholic Takeover Plan,”[10] (So what exactly would Bush gain in this supposed “deal” - absolution?!?)[11] - [It is actually Jeb Bush, George’s brother, and former Governor of Florida, who has converted to Catholicism back in 1995];[12]

            -the then (and still) presence of (at least) five (= majority) Catholic U.S. Supreme Court Judges is directly due to a granted request of the Roman Catholic Church by George W. Bush, and thus any SDA case that is, or will be, appealed to the Supreme Court is/will automatically and outrightly be dismissed because “everybody knows they [the Catholic Judges] won’t hear it”;[13] [14]

            -that in a April 4, 2006 meeting with SDA GC leaders with President George Bush accompanied by his Catholic Religious adviser, they were “ordered to toe line, or else” and pressure was put on them to ‘back off, control their pastors, reduce their work.’[15]

            -that, ‘from information he has been able to get from military commanders and others on the ground in Iraq,’ [whatever that is actually suppose to mean(?!?) in the light of the content of what will be claimed], the U.S. has a ‘lose-on-purpose-in-order-to-remain-at-war’ policy in full effect in Iraq, and that for the sole purpose of maintaining Emergency War Powers domestically which allows for certain losses of liberty, and thus serves to fulfill the current plans that the U.S. and Rome jointly have, and want to execute;[16]

            -Sunday laws around the world were on course to be passed in January of 2009; and in the United States on January 22, 2009; -not coincidentally, around the time of the inauguration of Barack Obama on the 20th[17]

            -a crisis leading to the fulfillment of end time events would be caused by the lawsuits challenging Obama’s citizenship legitimacy;

            -or now, that the latest the Second Coming will occur is 2031, as this is exactly 2000 years from the year of the crucifixion;[18]

            among other such statements - all, at the very least, textbook (prophetic) “presumption” (Deut. 18:19-22).

             David Gates himself has repeatedly stated that the sin of presumption is ‘acting in disobedience to God’s word/command,’ and this in itself is Biblically true. However, in going off on this unbiblical time-setting tangent, he himself is guilty of this sin of presumption by evidently, quite awarely ignoring and/or going against inspired SOP cautions and testimony against such time-setting and speculations.[19] Indeed with every passing of his set times, people naturally and justifiably become more skeptical and slower to believe any of his subsequent calls for urgent “extreme action.” 

            Most applicable here, the SOP gives a most pointed definition of faith vs. presumption in the context of the wilderness temptation of Christ:

“But faith is in no sense allied to presumption. Only he who has true faith is secure against presumption. For presumption is Satan's counterfeit of faith. Faith claims God's promises, and brings forth fruit in obedience. Presumption also claims the promises, but uses them as Satan did, to excuse transgression. Faith would have led our first parents to trust the love of God, and to obey His commands. Presumption led them to transgress His law, believing that His great love would save them from the consequence of their sin. It is not faith that claims the favor of Heaven without complying with the conditions on which mercy is to be granted. Genuine faith has its foundation in the promises and provisions of the Scriptures.” (DA 126.1)

            And so, in David Gates’s case, true faith vs. presumption, which indeed applies after the fact, i.e., even an initiating act of faith, would not, as sampled above, e.g., ignore Bible and SOP counsel against date-setting, engage in making guileful and indifferently false statements, seek to obtain a revival on base/wrong motives and nor seek, (really until this was held up against him), to excuse such actions by claiming an assumed, (actually, all things considered, a similarly “presumed”) “soon end”. Such, even “after the fact” actions are significantly sufficient enough to obstruct/annul the fulfilment of a previous/initial genuine act of faith.

            So was this entire “Lazarus Experience” message (i.e., without the time setting) actually not from God. I personally initially accepted it as being from God however as soon as a definite time element was tacked on to it, I immediately doubted the validity of this addition based on these known testimonies on this topic from the SOP. So what was it all about? Well this is just like the people of the Second Advent Movement in 1844. They could have avoided their bitter disappointment had they done a more in depth study of the scriptures in regards to the meaning of the “cleansing of the sanctuary”, which eventually they rewardingly did, instead of the, though relatively innocent, surface/knee-jerk conclusion that the ‘sanctuary must be the earth.’ Still this was all in God’s plan as he sought to further purge even this group of professedly eager Advent believers, of people who really did not have a genuine faith in the Word and Work of God. Those who had simply joined the movement by mere fear of the end in the light of such a detailed and gloriously fulfilled time prophecy indeed quickly jumped ship. Those who remained and engaged in more diligent Bible study eventually found out the truth, and their disappointment was fully explained. Similarly, after having studied more deeply the story of Lazarus in the Bible (John 10:40-11:44; Luke 10:38-42; 16:19-31) and in the Spirit of Prophecy (DA 524-536) it becomes clear that a “Lazarus Experience” can also have a deeper spiritual application/implication. However, evidently by God’s purpose and/or by a lack of deeper study, just as in the Second Advent Movement, Gates was only permitted to see the surface application of “dying and being raised from the dead.”     

The Spiritual Implication/Application of Gates’ Lazarus Experience
            [For the sake of brevity and time here, a detailed, background exegetical account is not given here on this study, but the following succinct explanation should suffice. It is strongly recommended to first read the above cited references from the Bible and the SOP on this story. Specific references to these passages are also not always included here. (Any unanswered, pertinent questions are welcomed)]
            It doesn’t take much deep thought from even a casual reading of the Bible and the SOP on the story of Lazarus to perceptively notice that the entire incident was providentially orchestrated by God Himself (ala with Job in the OT). It can be seen that Jesus quite clearly knew, (i.e., He was Divinely made aware of) the, on purpose, behind-the-scenes, developments taking place here. Right from the time that He received the announcement that His close friend Lazarus was quite sick, and He chose to not immediately react to this news, but seemed to take it all indifferently, even coldly, it was evident that He had already been prepared in advanced for this event. In fact, the SOP reveals that Lazarus’s sickness was also not at all natural, for it was a ‘sudden and violent sickness (DA 525-526).’ Right from the start, Jesus declared that ‘the sickness would not be unto (permanent) death.’ He even waited two extra days before beginning his ca. 60-mile (ca. 2-3 days) journey from ‘Bethany beyond the Jordan,’ (a.k.a. Bethabara), located ca. 14 miles south of the Sea of Galilee (where John the Baptist had baptized), where He had temporarily retreated to. Lazarus lived in another Bethany, within 2 miles of Jerusalem. A chronological analysis from the various data available in these pertinent passages along with the fact that Lazarus was still alive when the messenger returned with the message from Jesus (DA 526) after making the ca. 60-mile = 2-3 day journey, shows that for Jesus to make this same trip after a 2-day delay, and arrive in Bethany when Lazarus had already been 4 days in the tomb, he would have had to leave at the very time, or early the next morning, after Lazarus had breathed his last. The SOP is quite clear that Jesus could not hasten to be at the side of the sick Lazarus’s as His sole presence would have prevented him from dying. (Cf. John 11:15). In fact Ellen White states that:

“Apparently Mary and Martha and the dying Lazarus were left alone. But they were not alone. Christ beheld the whole scene, and after the death of Lazarus the bereaved sisters were upheld by His grace. Jesus witnessed the sorrow of their rent hearts, as their brother wrestled with his strong foe, death. He felt every pang of anguish, as He said to His disciples, "Lazarus is dead." DA 528. [Underlining Emphasis supplied]

            Clearly Jesus was made aware of the precise time when Lazarus died, and then He began His journey. All this to say that this entire episode was clearly orchestrated by God. But why? The clear, and commonly seen reason is that this was to serve as the clearest testimony to any unbelievers in Israel that Jesus was indeed doing the works of God. Interestingly enough, Jesus had already shown that he could raise someone from the dead, as seen in the story of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:35-43) and the widows son in Nain (Luke 7:11-15). However those resurrection miracles were doubted and discounted on account that the dead people had not really been dead (long enough)?!? [Jesus apparently knew how to discern comatosed people.] So here Lazarus was to be allowed to remain dead for 4 days, the then commonly accepted confirmation of death. 
            While it may be here hastily concluded that David Gate’s Lazarus Experience needed this prolonged time of death to show that it was from God when resurrected, this would really make no Biblically logical sense. The goal logically was to end the “death”, and up to now, “lasting death,” of these previous grand projects, especially in the light that once these media business opportunities do pass by, it is almost impossible to "revive them," as it were, as they are bought up by other competing investors. Arguably, and Gates would probably agree with this, the evidence that his Extreme Endeavours were from God was that he was making, and acting, by faith, upon large and costly plans, and God indeed was answering him; even if at the very last minute as in the answering of the first network for $1.6 million dollars. These first grouped miracles thus can symbolically be seen as comparable to Christ's earlier resurrections. Then the following, even larger $35+ million dollar network plans, could thus be seen as being as greater, as was Christ’s resurrection of Lazarus. However, in David Gate’s case, this did not come to pass. A Biblical reason as to why can be seen in the chronological, thematic and spiritual link that actually exists between the parable of the ‘Rich Man and Lazarus’ and the event in the life of the real life Lazarus. 
            As most chronological harmonizations of the 4 Gospels show, in the parable of the “(unnamed) rich man and the beggar (interestingly enough) named “Lazarus” (the only named personage in Christ’s parables), Luke “orderly account” shows that this parable was more than likely given just before the occurrence of the sickness, death and resurrection of the real life Lazarus. It therefore can be safely assumed that the parable was made a few days before Lazarus became ill, and also that Jesus was by then made aware that this would occur. The thematic link is seen in the specific and unequivocal point that Jesus sought to make through the use of this unique parable. In Luke 16:31, He clearly summarizes and applies it by saying:

"'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.'"

            In other words, the spiritual lesson/application that is to be drawn here is that if the Jewish nation was not already convicted of the Truth by the words from the Law and the Prophets, which they claimed to devotedly believe in, then even the raising of a (confirmed) dead person (i.e. Lazarus) would not persuade them. As Gates himself rightly understands and enounces the Biblical/Spiritual principle: ‘If the Church is not obeying what it already knows, then God will not reveal further instruction to it.’[20] Similarly, if David Gates’s previous miraculous experience with the obtainment of the first major network did not, and has not, persuaded those who profess to believe in the Bible, its Prophecies, and the SOP, along with the supposedly rapidly fulfilling “signs of the end”, then such an additional, greater miracle, as the obtainment of the $35+ million dollar networks would not, and nor, should not, be used to, motivate or compel them into such gospel missionary type actions. This would in fact only make them undesired “loaves and fishes” believers. (John 6:26, 27 - Not coincidentally enough, this miracle episode (John 6:2ff) was used by God to sustain Gates’ faith when buying the first network - See e.g., Mission Miracles p.44). To be acceptable and properly “workable” such a motivation must be based on True Faith, and adherence to Biblical principles in this regard. In fact, the disappointing withdrawal of that early manifested funds manager in Gates’s Lazarus Experience should, at the very least, have spurred the righteous jealousy of, aware of, and/or capable, people in the SDA Church and cause them to wholeheartedly step in in order to not allow this nearly fulfilled promise to fail because of this, an earthly-minded/controlled reason. Even in the miracle of raising Lazarus, Jesus deliberately allowed those present to participate and “co-operate” in its accomplishment, and so tangibly exercise whatever little faith they manifestly had in what He could do. As stated in the SOP:
          
“Christ could have commanded the stone to remove, and it would have obeyed His voice. He could have bidden the angels who were close by His side to do this. At His bidding, invisible hands would have removed the stone. But it was to be taken away by human hands. Thus Christ would show that humanity is to co-operate with divinity. What human power can do divine power is not summoned to do. God does not dispense with man’s aid. He strengthens him, co-operating with him as he uses the powers and capabilities given him.” DA 535.

            Indeed, if various SDA believers, hearing of this setback of David Gates, in the ca. following 4 years when he kept testifying of these (related) experiences, and also with these people knowing in detail of the way in which the first miracle was accomplished, if they had allowed themselves to be moved into giving whatever they personally could to help out here, then those $35 million could easily also have been raised through them. But this did not even begin to be the case.
            Tellingly enough, this parable pointedly, entirely focuses on the duty that rich people (characterized by the Rich Man) have towards the poor, suffering and needy (characterized by the beggar Lazarus). This indeed was the vital crux of Christ’s Earthly ministry of reform in Israel (cf. WM 172; 2SM 127). In the “after life” Jesus depicts that these conditions, depending on personal faith (2T 197), are reversed and also implies that it is the beggar who is truly a ‘child of Abraham, i.e., a true Israelite (cf. John 8:39, 40).  Seeing this, the Rich Man begs for Lazarus to minister to him who is now in punishing torment, but when this is denied as a remedy, he then (conscientiously?) asks that Lazarus be “returned from the dead” and warn his five brother who are alive and likely to make this same “capital sin of indifference” (They probably inherited his wealth). This is when Abraham says that “they have Moses and the Prophets. Let them hear them.” Indeed in the Law of Moses given by God, and in the ministry of the later prophets raised up and led by God, the message of caring for the poor suffering and needy is always brought up (when needed) as a key issue in reformation. To this the Rich Man, still thinking as the base, natural man that he has been, thinks to suggest better, by saying that Lazarus's return from the dead to warn these 5 brothers would be more persuasive/convicting to them. It is then that the character representing Abraham makes the final statement mentioned above.[21]

            So based on this Biblical|exegetical background/precedence, this is why I believe that this Lazarus Experience transpired in the ministry of David Gates. In fact, I believe that, like in the case of the unbelieving Jewish Nation in the Lazarus story, the whole thing was meant as a concrete and most objective test of God’s people in general. Gates himself, and in his own words, admits that he has felt that he has been used as a “guinea pig”[22] by God. Therefore, in the similar way that the faithfulness and closeness of Lazarus to Jesus allowed him to be used by God as an instrument of testing His people, Gates was also thus convincingly utilized in order to ascertain the actual faith of members of the Remnant Church and their professed belief in a soon and imminent Second Coming. Also, like in the Lazarus story where Jesus gracefully and thoughtfully sent a hopeful word with the returning messenger that ‘the sickness was not unto death’ which help to sustained the faith of Mary and Martha until He would come (DA 526), David Gates’s faith, as he relates in his “Thanks from Jesus” experience, similarly, providentially, also strengthen him when he first tentatively agreed to embark on this new major faith task for this $35 million project. (According to him this was the third (last?) of three times when he so tangibly felt the presence of God.)[23] Thus, like Lazarus, and especially Mary and Martha, God was preparing him to go through this anticipated/testing disappointment. (DA 526).
            I subscribe to the belief that decided effort for more concrete, significant, (and relatively “extreme”) action is presently needed in the work of God. However, unlike David Gates predominant objective of mainly telling people that Jesus is coming soon, I believe the Bible, the Spirit of Prophecy and God’s blessings of His Remnant Church all point to actions that are, for reasons of effectiveness, to be made to be structured, organized and systematically cooperative, and, respectively, not in a dysfunctional, worldy "institutionalized" or individualistic way. I think that the pointed and purposeful object lessons that God wanted to teach the corporate Church in regards to not advancing His, even injunctive work through various valid ministry initiatives out of purely “bad faith” reasons, by raising up, and then sustaining these initiatives which had been  subsequently left with no other option but to function independently when the Church chose to refuse to advance in their Biblical light, should all have been fully and contritely learned by now. (Cf. this post). And as the Personal Example of Jesus and His unequivocally stated Final Test” (Matt 25:31-46, cf. Isa 58), it will primarily and simultaneously focus on seeking to resolve the vital humanitarian needs that exist in the world today. Indeed effectively doing such a work using the God-provided resources available in Church will however still require a spiritual revival by God’s people to develop a more Christ-like character (COL 62-69), which manifestly they not only, currently, predominantly do not have, but are evidently also quite blatantly ignorant and/or oblivious of this Biblical mandate. Still, just like Ancient Israel, especially in the time of Christ, they think that, and act as if, since they supposedly understand and have figured out the “times” and issues spoken of in Bible Prophecy, they are thus prepared to receive the Promise. However, they likewise shun and ignore the clear stipulations that were, and are still, required by Jesus Christ in order to be found acceptable to have this granted.[24] 

Conclusion
            Interestingly, tellingly and typically enough, a worshipful view and use of the various riches that God has bestowed upon this Remnant Church, along with an idolizing, obstinate adherence to the practices and principles of the world particularly when it comes to economic matters, proves to be the “Waterloo” of any such “Extreme Action” attempts. In the end, these movements thus inevitably settle for/back into the status quo of: as-the-(capitalist)-economy-goes-and-allows actions and “business-like incremental growth.” This thus makes them susceptible to the typical roller coaster motions of this world’s flawed and spurious economic system and methods. Case in point, recently (October 28, 2009) David Gates has announced on his Twitter feed that they are about to lose, (and now indeed have lost 8 out of 10), satellite networks in Europe and the Americas reaching a potential audience of 200 million people due to (still) unpaid balances and a lack of funding.[25] Trying to do the work of God using, either explicitly or implicitly, worldly, (economic) principles will always result in such slow progressing, and even stagnating, if not, failing, work. With the outright capitalistic business/corporate mentality that determinatively reigns supreme in the SDA Church, while seeking to do God’s work through these parameters, it is quite interesting, and actually, quite telling that, as David Gates said in 2006, in his message in which the Church, its present condition and future mission is analysed through a business-like model and approach, is the one that was most positively received by members of the SDA leadership and the Church.[26] (Have to speak their language[27], I guess).
            The problem really does not only lie in acting like the world in conducting Church Matters and Missions, but also depending on the world in order to do God’s work when God’s extremely blessed 7th  Church is currently in a position where it does not have to do so at all, were it not for its worshipful attitude towards the riches and ways of the world. But as Jesus says: You cannot serve both God and Mammon. (This, correspondingly, is all analogous to most Protestants claiming to be separate, different and distinct from its Catholic, “Mother Church,” all the while adhering to many of its unbiblical practices, most prominently Sunday sacredness.) Only the Bible’s principles will bring about the expected grand results. (Cf. the message: Show the World - The Triumphant Church). But as Jesus would repeatedly say: “Be it according to your faith,” still such little/minimal faith also prevents Him from doing what He desires to do. Hence the conundrum of Laodicea - not cold enough to be utterly rejected or ignored, but also not hot enough to be fully/abundantly blessed. However it is quite repugnantly lukewarm! “Choose you this day whom you will serve....” (Jos 24:14, 15)[28]

Epilogue
            When the Church, on one side refuses to engage in structured cooperative works and also do significant humanitarian works, and on the other hand, doubts the power of God to step out in explicit and implicit faith to do bolder work, as David Gates, at God’s leading, has sought to spearhead, then really what other option is left - the dysfunctional, individualistic, sectarian, shallow, flailing, token works of today??? This whole episode mirrors the Rebellion of Israel on the borders of Canaan where, on one hand, the faith-based reports of Joshua and Caleb were discounted as not possible, and then it was deemed possible to conquer Canaan without God (i.e., today: ‘without living by his principles’). See Ellen White’s scathing commentary on this episode in 15MR 286-292 [#1179], which she links to the ‘halted unravelling of “Last Day Events”’ in Rev 7:1-3ff (Cf. this related message in this blog).


Epilogue II (June 2010+)     
            So now David Gates, as it can be seen in these June 2010 Faith Camp Asia sermons, nonchalantly is continuing, particularly his preaching/teaching, ministry as if he really had not tried to predict, nor prophesy, that ‘the end of all things would occur before the end of 2009’, with ‘SOP prophesied “Final Events” beginning in the early months of 2009’, or, ‘most precisely on January 20, 2009, at the inauguration ceremony of Barack Obama.’ Again this is the "Polytetrafluoroethylene Prophet" (‘Teflon Prophet’ for short) at work again, where he has absolute no care, nor concern, for what he has quite publicly, emphatically and repeatedly proclaimed in the recent past from ecclesiastical pulpits, thus all inherently in the ‘“color of” the name of God.’ It would have been one thing if Gates had only proclaimed that the Second Coming could be soon, -indeed thousands of, if not all, SDA preachers (and even the SOP) do so, however most of them have not, effectively, ‘despised and ignored’ the plain statements of the Bible and the SOP against time setting, and gone to the unbiblical extreme of David Gates to proclaim definite “ranges of years” when ‘the Second Coming will, without a doubt, occur,’ or even given specific calender dates when ‘events prophesied in the Bible and SOP will more than likely come to pass.’
            Furthermore, it is one thing to deliberately engage in such unlawful time-settings, however it is yet another thing to also mix in these public proclamations traces, and even blots, of various, and degrees of, sin. In Gates’ case, as seen even in the samples given above, this included such persisted sins, in Letter and/or also in Spirit, according to the higher standard against sin of the Bible, of: false witnessing, outright lying, slandering, libel, presumption, pride, arrogance, covetousness, fraudulent misrepresentation, larceny, abuses of ministerial office, effective incitations to extortion, treason and even murder, among other sins;[29] and furthermore, with all of these done/said in the name of God. So Gates may now “in chorus” with the rest of the Church claim that “no one knows the day or hour” but this is self-evidently not because he, not only tried, but moreverly actually claimed that he did know! Supposedly fulfilling “signs of the times” are not indicators that the Second Coming will occur but indicators that the Second Coming can/should occur, yet, as seen in Christ’s pertinent object-lesson on this with the fig tree (DA 580-588), [to which Matt 24:32 could be a direct allusion to], this “fig tree,” representative of Israel, and thus spiritually, the Church, can, by its own internal defects, not be ready to produce the expected fruit, and thus waste and nullify any expended effort and postpone the expected harvest.
            Unfortunately for Gates, but fortunately for subjected to/hearing Believers, it just does not work that flippantly in the ‘Falsehood Fighting System’ of God. Such publicly committed sins are not only to be completely and wholly abandoned, but they are also to be publicly repented of. Indeed this was the incontrovertible case for Biblical characters who failed in their duties towards God and His people such as David, Peter, and even Samson.
            David Gates (without really any substantiable reason) quasi-boasts of being the “namesake” of King David, well perhaps he should become as humble as King David was and publicly repent as he did. Indeed we not only know of the great sin of King David, especially for such an honored man of God, a man uniquely proclaimed as, “when he walked in the counsel of God,” having been “after God’s own heart” no less, but quite correspondently we can read of his most contrite repentance, deliberately penned, and publicly released by his hand, in Psa 51. (cf. PP 720-726). This was indeed a most fitting response because like the wide reaching effects of King David’s public sin, David Gates’s also publicly committed sins, as cited above (for all sin is (equally) sin), similarly have resulted in:

The Lord was dishonored. He had favored and exalted David, and David’s sin misrepresented the character of God and cast reproach upon His name. It tended to lower the standard of godliness in Israel, to lessen in many minds the abhorrence of sin; while those who did not love and fear God were by it emboldened in transgression [e.g., the “transgression” of not being wholly devoted to finishing the work. See e.g., these pertinent comments made on another blog]. (PP 720 - emphasis supplied)

            The apostle Peter’s sin of denial was brought about more by the fact that he, in his oblivious self-confidence and pride refused to hear the clear and specific warnings of Jesus. Had he believed Jesus he excusably would have chosen to remain away from the spotlight as the other disciples did. Indeed, none of the other disciples were so reproached for having fled and hidden during Christ’s arrest and trial. But Peter was, because his fall was caused more by stubborn pride, than by an excusable weakness. Peter only made this stubborn pride worst by his further proceeding to engage in such sins as lying, oath making, cursing and swearing. So when Christ had resurrected, it was indeed Peter, no matter how singularly devoted and bold he had always been for Jesus, who was pointedly made to recognize and confess this great sin. As the SOP generally says, based upon this incidence:

Here is given a lesson for all Christ’s followers. The gospel makes no compromise with evil. It cannot excuse sin. Secret sins are to be confessed in secret to God; but, for open sin, open confession is required. The reproach of the disciple’s sin is cast upon Christ. It causes Satan to triumph, and wavering souls to stumble. By giving proof of repentance, the disciple, so far as lies in his power, is to remove this reproach. (DA 811). [30]
           
            Even Samson was effectively quite repentant of his life of blatant sin and rebellion to God’s will. Despite his having been blinded and the secret of his strength having been discovered and thus held in check, he still, in contrite faith, acknowledged and recognized the source power of God for his great strength and offered to do what he should have done a long time before during his life, namely, spiritually speaking, give (i.e., dedicate) his life to the single service of God and be used as an instrument to “begin to physically destroy the power of the Philistines upon Israel”. So thus in his self-sacrificing, avenging death he ‘destroyed more Philistines then he had done over his entire life.’ (Jud 16:30). Indeed ‘his God-given mission was fulfilled, though in defeat, bondage and death.’ (PP 567-568). Rightly, he is thus mentioned as a hero of the Faith in the Bible, even in the same (summary) breath as King David (Heb 11:32).

            David Gates may “presume” that ‘if he was doing something Biblically wrong in all of this, then God, who he claims to ‘clearly hear directly and “instantly” from, would have already clearly told him so,’ however this does not mean that God has not been gently trying to convince Gates of following the clearly established truth on these various issues, especially outright presumptuous “prophesying” and not (‘merely informed future predictions’ as claimed by Gates). God usually does not forcefully restate what He has already clearly stated, as with the strict Bible/SOP warnings against specific time/date, and also “time/date-range”, setting post 1844. In such matters of ‘waiting/wanting to hear from God’, there is a thin line between faith and effective, arrogant/prideful “Divine blackmailing” (i.e., ‘if you don’t do this as I have said, then it will be Your Name only that will/(should) become of disrepute.’). David Gates’ applicably actually compared this whole exchange/process as being a “tennis match” where ‘his sole duty/responsibility is to “return the ball onto God’s side of the court”’ however, as in a tennis match, ‘the receiving player’ does not have to return a bad/(“unforced error”) shot which actually scores as a point against the sender, and for the receiver).
            So like Gates’ self-claimed “namesake” King David, the explicit warnings and reprimands from God for this wrongful course against clearly stipulated principles, will similarly have to come from an exterior, and even “prophetically-derived”, source (cf. 2 Sam 7:1-17ff).[31]

            So David Gates should follow these Biblical examples of honest and contrite sorrow for misfeasance, and even malfeasance of past leaders of God’s people, and publicly acknowledge the blatant wrongs and “sins” that he engaged in; even if solely for himself and his ministry. This would do a great deal to restore a sense of credibility, and ready perception of the leading of God in his work, because it honestly is hard hear him preach now without (even more) second guessing and questioning everything he says and claims (e.g., here), and this is probably the case for the hundred of thousand of people around the world that have heard his previous ‘wave of definite, imminent doom and gloom’, either live and/or over a broadcast medium. While someone is not automatically and irreversibly discredited for having made a mistake, they quite distinctly discredit themselves by not correspondingly, appropriately confessing and repenting of that mistake.
            Still, like any other sins, sin is indeed not without its consequence(s). Case in point, the rest of King David’s reign was filled with internal strife and even bloodshed, greatly paving the way for the great tribal two-part schism that later occurred in Israel; Samson paid with his physical life; and Peter may have caused the hearts of many who knew of his previous denial to be hardened against his post-resurrection Gospel proclamation, much like the other disciples had become distrustful of him after the denial until this evidence of his repentance (DA 811). Such consequences are applied even when the sin has been confessed and repented of, then how much more when it has not been. The example of King Saul, and also Judas, are indeed the perfect example of the utter, unsalvageable defeat that such an attitude of ‘despisement of reproof and the hardening of one’s heart in impenitence’ can extend to. (PP 726). Indeed such tragic ends are really self-inflicted, especially as such a person either in faithlessness commits “spiritual suicide” or through solely a surface/face-saving “penitence” continues to act in his previous functions, but this time increasingly devoid of the guidance and spirit of God. (cf. 1 Sam 15:24-31, 34)
            Not surprisingly, it can still be seen in the “post, set-time, Lazarus Experience” preaching of David Gates a trace continuance in the waywardness of the recent past. In alarming fact, it can even be seen that he is rekindling the sparks for another imminent doom campaign, this time focusing on his Plan B that the Second Coming cannot occur later than 2031 A.D., i.e., 2000 years after Christ’s crucifixion, (if not, and expect it, -to the date|day|hour- i.e. Friday, 14th of Nisan at ca. 3 P.M.). While you can only successfully “cry wolf” so many times, you can then resort to ‘crying out FIRE’ in a crowded hall and get even greater “results.” And so now it is no longer ‘the economy that will collapse, but life itself on earth that will soon entirely “self-destruct”’, and that... ‘as it should.’

Gates’ Second Prophetic Campaign
            So now David Gates in indeed concretely kindling these second campaign sparks in his sermons. First he tries to re-establish his “prophetic credentials” by assertively claiming that he had accurately predicted the recession of 2008,[32] and then, as it can be seen in this sermon at [24:02-25:20], by now bringing to the pulpit with him, as if it was a lost Biblical book, or some sort of inspired writings, the published memoirs of Jacques-Yves Cousteau where Cousteau supposedly claimed that (quoting here David Gates’ expounding on Cousteau):

 ‘Even take the evidence... from science. The famous marine biologist Jacques Cousteau who perhaps knew more about the world than any of us know about the world, -the planet. He studied the planet all his life, he loved Planet Earth. And when he died, he left his memoirs {picks up and opens a book} that were not so optimistic. And in his memoirs he wrote {glances into book, but puts it down}, ‘the world is so rapidly deteriorating, through the abuse’ -I am not quoting him word for word- ‘through the abuse of mankind and what they have done to our planet, -it is deteriorating so rapidly, that mankind will only be able to live on this planet for a maximum of.. 40 years,... maybe, through a miracle, 100 years.’ He was not a Christian, he was an atheist. But if you asked Jacques Cousteau if something catastrophic was about to happen, he would say: ‘in one generation’.’ [(...) indicate here Gates’ speech pauses, not omissions]

            I don’t know if it is the way in which this statement was oddly delivered by Gates, strangely putting down the Cousteau book from which he was about to (supposedly) read this solitary, single-phrased, statement; and/or due to the fact he also strangely said that ‘he was not quoting directly’ this, actually short statement [why not???]; or because of the telling mens rea hesitancy of Gates, as he cautiously, and with overqualifications, made this brief quasi-quote; that all made me become highly suspicious of the accuracy of this statement of Gates, even much more than when I had heard him say it before (as cited previously in Note #18), but I here undertook the task of verifying that statement, and the claim that Gates was making.
            First of all, I have contacted Gates and six other people at the GMI ministry for the exact bibliographic reference of that supposed source book, but thus far, i.e., since this emailing back on June 17, 2010, I have not received a valid (i.e., bibliographic - book title & page #) answer yet. I had to contact them personally for this because an internet search for this statement surprisingly turns up only one relatable statement of the sort. (more below). It is surprising that, as popular as Jacques Cousteau was, and still is, that such a significant, relatively quite imminent “scientific, apocalyptic fact would not be more publicly known, stated/quoted, and discussed on at least the web, however it is not. Indeed, most oddly enough, not even on the Cousteau Society Website. David Gates states that this statement comes from a memoir that Cousteau left behind, well the only two books of Cousteau that are overtly called “memoirs” (cf. e.g., here, herehere and here) are: his book of 1953 called “The Silent World”, and, what truly can be considered his memoir, as it was his last book and self-labeled “testament” is the initially released 1997 book entitled “The Human, The Orchid, and The Octopus: Exploring and Conserving Our Natural World”, coauthored by Cousteau and Susan Schiefelbein. This book was finished a few days before his death on June 25, 1997, and publish just six days after.
            As just mentioned, an internet search for this statement only produced one source. It is this March 1996 interview of Cousteau with an Environmental Magazine. In that interview this “40-year” statements was said three times, however it was specifically, qualificatively said as follows (bold emphasis supplied):

(1) “The problem has nothing to do with food. This is always the question people ask, but
it is a bad question. The food will be there; they are not going to starve. But what kind of life will they have? How will we have sufficient supplies of potable water? There lurking problems can become monumental. We have only 40 years to find solutions [i.e., solutions to various vital shortcomings], but that won't include actually reducing the population. The population cannot be reduced until 50 years from now because the majority of people existing today in the third world, where populations have exploded, are less than 16 years old. Even if we reduced the fertility of people now to two kids per family, we would still reach 10 billion in 45 years. It's mathematical; there is nothing we can do.”
           
            (2) The UN is preaching the elimination of poverty, balance of income between the generations, yakety, yakety, yak. We give very good recommendations, but they are not decisions because the UN has no power to decide. It is a club of nations leaving the sacrosanct national sovereignty intact. If we had time [i.e., time to implement the proposed UN recommendations], these recommendations would finally prevail, but after centuries. Knowing that we have 40 years before we see the population reach that crazy number of 10 billion, we have to find shortcuts.

            (3) We have to prepare for what life could become in 40 years. We need to outline what is possible and what is impossible with the non-renewable resources of the Earth. What role will technological improvement play? Taking all this into account, what kind of life can we produce in the best way for 10 billion people? That's a problem that needs to be solved.
                       
            It can clearly be seen from these statements, and especially the bolded portions that Jacques Cousteau did not believe in the telic apocalyptic scenario that David Gates is trying to convey. Clearly Cousteau says that life would not come to an abrupt end in 40 years (ca. 2036), but would have to be quite different from today’s course in order to continue to be sustainable. He therefore fully allowed for better governmental policies and concrete actions, along with technological improvements, to be able to reverse this looming, mainly lifestyle-based, problem. Gates on the other hand wants to make it seem that in 40 years all life will completely cease to exist on earth, so the Second Coming will have to occur before then. That however was the furthest thing from Cousteau’s mind, and indeed he saw that these man-made problems could easily be stopped and reversed by man-made solutions.
            This “final” view of Cousteau is indeed explicitly and implicitly seen in his last book, his memoir/testament where he envisions “life in 1 billion years” in a chapter by that name. Albeit, he does not believe that man would have implemented their possible man-made solution, and thus he speaks of the year 2050 as a year of restart where the world’s population has dwindled down to tens of thousands, due to a so called “temporary accident”, but this time, man rebuilds life on earth by now having learned their lessons for the past careless ways of their “primitive 21st century ancestors” which led to this “temporary accident.” So in this new life, science is used to better man’s life rather than destroying it through e.g., nuclear weapons, and man now has the capability to infinitely prolong their lives, command and tame the cosmos such as modifying the moon’s orbit, redirecting incoming asteroids, etc. Families now have children once every 10,000 years with these children taking ca. 15,000 years to grow up. As a result, even in a billion years the global population does not ever exceed 10 million people. Also, according to Cousteau, mankind now even has the capability to eradicate by vaccination such destructive character traits and defects such a greed and violence. (Wow! to say the least.) Anyway, all this to say that Cousteau’s actual view essentially is that only if man does not change, its way of life, as it is today, will then become unsustainable. Still there is no possible basis, nor corroboration here, to preach, as Gates does, that ‘the end of the world should occur before then,’ especially if, as claimed by Cousteau, and also as stated above, these man-made problems can indeed be fixed by feasible man-made solutions. God indeed has placed in this world enough water, living space, energy, material and renewable resources, and even knowledge to sustain life for as long as it is necessary so that the work of His Truth can be done without being pre-empted by such man-made causes.
            Gates also, self-convincedly, seeks to point out that his view on Cousteau is objectively Biblical because Cousteau himself was supposedly “not a Christian and an Atheist.” However there are several doubts that this assertion of his is founded, or true. Some say that Cousteau was a life-long Roman Catholic. In fact he was buried in a Catholic cemetery, which is a privilege/rite that is definitely not granted by the RC Church to someone who would have denied God all of his life. Even if Cousteau would have made a “death bed” conversion to Roman Catholicism, his enduring (supposed) “atheistic” life work would come to preclude him from receiving this reserved honor. Also while the spouses/family of Catholics are often allowed to be buried with their believing marital partner/family member(s), this concession is only made for people who are of another Christian Faith; so definitely not for an Atheist.
            Cousteau did firmly, and fully, believe in Evolution, however this is also a belief that the Roman Catholic Church, officially, from the fall of 1996, has also credited as an acceptable theory for the origin of this world. So that would not necessarily prove that he did not believe in God. (Just ask some professed SDAs at LaSierra University who have also drank this Kool-Aid! (See these contra.-Evolution website & 6-part series))
            Strongly speaking against a supposed belief that Cousteau was an unbelieving, God-hating/cursing atheist (i.e., not even an agnostic) is the Chapter in Cousteau’s last book entitled: “The Holy Scriptures and the Environment” where he seeks, predominantly from the Bible, but also from other “Sacred” books, to appeal to various religious peoples of the world to take care of the environment. While indeed this was done through a ‘look-at-what-your-own-Holy-Book-is-ordering-you-to-do’ approach, it is easily noticed that when he makes references to Christianity and the Bible, he almost speaks from an inclusive, faith-based, perspective. Apparently he may probably just have wanted to, as much as possible, seem to be neutral so that his appeal to other Religious Faiths other than Christianity, would not be detrimentally diminished. However, the simple inclusion of this chapter in this book, actually does not at all paint the picture of a hardened atheist, for a true atheist would not even begin to acknowledge the possibility that a God could exist and has so made sacred/authoritative statements through inspired spokespeople in the Holy Writings. It would be like someone who knows that Santa Clause does not exist seriously telling others that ‘Santa goes around on Christmas night delivering gifts to kids through their home’s chimney.’ Making arguments from religious faiths is much more likely of an Agnostic who has left open this possibility, than for an “atheist” who has, by definition completely barred, even the likelihood of that possibility. So at worst, Cousteau was an agnostic, but more than likely, he was simply, the quite common, life-long, but non-practising, “hatched-matched-dispatched”, (as Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi used to seriously joke), (nominal) Roman Catholic adherent. In fact it is actually completely irrelevant whether Cousteau was a ‘Christian or an Atheist’ because if his statement was so scientific and inevitable as Gates would have us believe, then it really would not matter what faith one has, or does not have, just like gravity equally affects everyone irrespective of one’s religious convictions. It very well may be the fact that Cousteau had a deficient knowledge of, and belief in, the sovereign power of God that he would conceive of, and subscribe to, such a man-made apocalyptic scenario. So clearly Gates’s extolling of this “effectively” atheistic, survival-of-the fittest/richest dogmatic view is simply, circularly rooted in the fact that since he sees his 2031 prediction as a Gospel Truth, then this “corroborating” view of Cousteau must also be the Truth, if not even, an Inspired Statement.

            Also, by sole self-necessity, David Gates profusely touts Jacques Cousteau as ‘the person who knew the most about our planet.’ Why??? ...because he dove 80 meters below sea level? Again this is one of those surfacely plausible arguments that, in research and closer scrutiny, also does not hold up as being so “undeniably true.” While most people would claim that Cousteau was quite knowledgeable in his field, some critics actually highly questioned his scientific credentials. In other words, he was indeed smart, pioneering and observed a lot below the sea surface, however he did not have an academic, scientific background and actually entered into the field of marine exploration for purely photographic purposes, pursuing his childhood love and hobby. Some even say that he became influential more by the panache and charisma he brought to marine exploration, which before him was completely unentered, (to the point that it was Cousteau’s diving team that developed the first scuba diving equipments), but he was not necessarily a marine expert/scientist. Indeed it is said that his ‘talents seem more poetic than scientific’ and that ‘Cousteau did not considered himself more than a filmmaker, explorer, and environmentalist.’ Final-nail-in-the-coffinly, Cousteau is quoted here to have said of himself: “I am not a scientist. I am, rather, an impresario [i.e., promoter/showman/public entertainment sponsor] of scientists.”
            Despite the self-serving extolment that David Gates needs to affix here to ‘the authoritative source’ of his new theory, even highly scientific knowledge of the marine life hardly translates into the needed demographic, economical, political, medical, technological, military expertise, among others, to then make a claim ‘that life on this planet is doomed to soon complete destruction,’ which, as it was already shown, was not even Cousteau’s specific point. He actually deferred to the experts in these field as seen in the belief that they could quite easily come up with, and effectively implement , ‘life-as-it-presently-is-extending,’ solutions. Indeed the more one studies the actual view of Cousteau, the more it can be seen that the “paraphrased” 40-year statement of Gates is nothing more than the habitual “Gateism” [to rhyme, and be synonymous with, a form of “theism”], where ‘truth is not what it factually is, but what Gates, through his own private belief, claims that it is supposed to be.’[33] , [34]
            If there was one thing that Cousteau was utterly pessimistic about, it was human nature, yet herein should lie the feasible “expertise” of the Church. So really it could be seen that it is actually ‘if the Church does not do its exemplary, witnessing part that this world could end in such a man-made apocalyptic scenario,’ yet the word of God in Matt 24:14 prophesies solely, the exact opposite. I.e., ‘Gospel of the Kingdom of God as a witness/testimony (and not “hearsay”) to all the nations of the world... and then “the end” and not, in any rationalization, vice-versa.
            So guess what David Gates, this world will definitely not end by man-made causes, even if it is the last thing that God Himself does... one way or the other, i.e., to Himself prevent or effectuate![35]

Epilogue IIB - “Lazarus Is Dead”
            Interestingly enough, in this reset of David Gates, he does not now hesitate to formally announce, as in a recent sermon, that Lazarus, from his Lazarus Experience, is Dead. What is comical about this “confession” of Gates is that he self-evidently still firmly, implicitly believes that his “resurrection” was only to occur within that self-time-set period of 4 years, i.e., by December 2008. As Jesus would (effectively) say, ‘be it according to your (persistently flawed) faith.’ If only Gates had continued to “believe,” and that, the Truth, he also probably would have ‘seen the glory of God.’ (Cf. John 11:37, 39-40). However Gates view was indeed intrinsically and pervasively flawed, even beyond his unbiblical methods of proclaiming it. Foundational to Gates’ faith here was the outrightly covetous assumption that God would be taking this money from rich heathens to pay for his ministry projects. So he quite deliberately bypassed explicitly asking Church members to help fund this project and instead solely preached on how the world’s rich people, like Bill Gates, would be visited by “Angels of Death”, and forced, at the peril of their lives, to ‘write a check to Gospel Ministries International.’[36] So it is not surprising that Church members just, quite conveniently, sat back and waited for this, would-be, ‘misdeed of God’ to occur. All the while they themselves, during at least these 4 years, spent money that could have, even sacrificially, been given to this cause, on various frivolous worldly goods. Why in the world would God bother, to say the least, the wealthy people of the world, like Bill Gates, for money that His own people are actually also worshipfully funneling to them, and that, even at whatever exorbitant price. That “Angel of Death” should instead be visiting these homes of professed believers in the camp of Israel that have not followed this pointed directive of God to, typologically speaking, escape such a ‘final, first-substance, plague.’ (Exod 12:23-27). Indeed such a devoting and honoring, extra-tithing, offering should have been made today by SDAs in faith towards the fulfillment of this promise of God. (cf. Num 3:13). 
            Furthermore David Gates himself did not perceive, and thus learn, the uncanny object-lesson that God gave him in the ‘first death/resurrection (network) miracle,’ as explained above. And it is evident, from Gates’ own testimony in his 01-13-2006 sermon here|here (mp3) [24:01-25:45], of him perceiving God taunting him of: ‘not knowing of God’s ideal way of conducting/funding the Work, despite having a Masters in Business and teaching the basics of Finance to Bankers’, that God had wanted to teach him that lesson from the start, but Gates has gone on to miss the entire, Free-Will, “Messengers”-sponsoring, Sacrificing Offering (=16MR 32.2, 34.1), “Biblical Socialism” (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32-35; 2 Cor 8:7-15) of/from within God’s own professed people. Case in point, the two main payments for that $1.5 million network both came from the money left behind by people who had died. The surviving spouses, following the impression of God’s Spirit, proceeded to timely give this money to Gates. In this is seen the plain spiritual truths that (1) one has to spiritually die to give their all to God (2) but this must still be a deliberate and willing offering, so in a sense even these surviving spouses had to also spiritually die to this, evidently newly ascertained wealth which they could have easily kept and spent on themselves. In the same spiritual way, God’s people should have offered themselves as ‘living and wholly consecrated sacrifice’ (Rom 12:1) and give all that they possibly could towards meeting this primarily Church need, duty and responsibility. (Indeed the third payment of $100,000 for the first TV Station, which was actually refused by the sellers, came from a couple who made such a “living sacrifice”). However Gates, expounding on an exegetically baseless foundation, beclouded by a jealous avarice for the wealth of rich people was, and willfully remained, completely oblivious and indifferent to this fundamental expectation of God towards His people, and instead stoked up a campaign against the rich, relatedly including the Biblically baseless, vindictively envisioned, cataclysmic demise of the global economy!?! Again, ‘be it according to your unbiblical faith.’
            When a believer refuses to learn their lesson the first time around, a second opportunity is not always granted, especially when the first failed opportunity has not even begun to be improved upon, or its spiritually perceivable lessons learned.

            David Gates may self-righteous claim that people who are spending their time criticizing him, instead of using that time and effort to reach the lost are ‘wasting precious time,’ well through his patented pattern of sly spiritual waywardness, he himself has not only become a “mission destination” but because of the number of people he variously influences with his skewed understandings, he has also become a foundational obstacle to the proper upbuilding of an outreach work of God. It is not e.g., simply raising up a media network in an unreached place that is accomplishing the work, it is also what kind of message one is proclaiming through these networks, and thus what kind of portrait of God you are painting, You cannot reach others with the Truth by using both falsehoods and incipient and flawed teachings.[37]

            So all this to warningly say, in the facts brought out in this Epilogue II that David Gates apparently is just reloading for another unbiblical assault, definitely (re-)starting now with the ‘prophetic prediction’ of a sure to come, even life imperiling crisis within the SDA Church, way within the next 5 years.[38] And that this crisis is going to be like the ‘Jonah Experience’ and ‘affect specifically the North American Division, and that to coerce it into obedience, for having neglected to amply financially fund the work in other parts of the world, (in other SDA Divisions), in recent years![39] Here we go again! Indeed this self-claimed “Jonah Experience” seems to be the basis of Gates’ new prophecy of imminent Economic suffering for the SDA’s NAD Church. 
            Self-evidently David Gates has not learned his lesson yet of (1) making false prediction, along with (2) stoking up wrong motives for Gospel action. 


            Such public and unbiblical actions of David Gates are, according to the Bible and the SOP, and according to the derived, actionable stipulations in the SDA Church Manual (17th edition, 2005) Ch. 14 [pp. 185-200], grounds for formal censure, and indeed, a due, formal request for such has been made for such on June 20, 2010, albeit, via email correspondence.[40] In a Church that is to staunchly, transparently uphold the standard of Biblical truth, David Gates should, at the very least, be put on the minimal censure of one month, strictly barring him any public proclamation, from any SDA pulpit, and also probationarily pending an extended censure if he persists/continues in these public unbiblical and wayward ways, including, as he is resumptively doing now.[41]
            Gates may knee-jerkly claim that this is an attempt to silence his message, however he will find that many SDA preachers also bear the same message, the only difference is that they have not “disobediently presumed” to set specific dates and time-ranges, among other utilized open, sinful methods of his. And it is for these that he is being Biblically reprimanded in this blog, and should be, publicly, formally censured by the Church, especially in the light of no corresponding, sincere, issued apology, nor any manifested contrite repentance.[42]


Post Script (09-16-2013) - In this video release, David Gates goes on to relate (see starting at 14:43ff) how the General Conference has, since late November 2012, been formally looking into Divisional Complaints pointedly in regards to Gates’ ministry status and operations within the SDA Church. And also in that context of ‘formal holding to accounts’, Gates goes on to express a formal statement of apology, clarification and support (which was prepared on Feb. 28, 2013, fully posted here) for his various past waywardness. He states (at 25:48):

“1. I, as well as the ministry I represent, am sorry for speculative statements made in the past that have caused problems for church administration. It is my intention to refrain from making speculative, unverified, or sensational statements in my presentations.”

            This statement is apparently only in relation to claims made towards/about SDA Church Administration (manifestly such as, as presented in this blog, e.g., the NAD maintain GC sessions at NAD sites to have an automatic 1/3 voting representation; GC leaders agreed with some directive by George W. Bush to “toe the line” and refrain from anti-U.S., Mark of the Beast denunciations, etc), but it (hopefully) may be all inclusive of/for any [of the copious and patent many] ‘speculative, unverified, or sensational statements that Gates has made in his presentations!?

Update (07-09-2014) - (As brought to my awareness today in an email): In, manifestly, a formal/official communication from the GC a couple of months later to “all of its (13) Divisions” dated May 26, 2013 (see here (PDF)), the GC and David Gates’ GMI ministry were apparently not able to come to a cordial resolution on this matter and so it was resolved that: “General Conference and division leaders discourage field units and local churches from arranging or providing opportunities for David Gates (or other representatives of Gospel Ministries International) to engage with church members or speak at church events.” This is probably, i.e., over a year later, the present state of affairs...In this interview[at 10:13-24:45], David Gates goes into more details about the circumstances of his difference with the General Conference.

Update (08-29-2017) - On March 24, 2017 GC President Ted Wilson had issued a (GC-private)letter to, manifestly, an inquiring Church leader, [the former ‘South American Division (Field) Secretary, Magdiel E. Perez Schulz, -(who in/since 2015 has been appointed assistant to the GC President)], reaffirming the “non-endorsing” position of the SDA Church/GC vs. David Gates. On August 21, 2017, with that letter having been posted (-by a pro-Women Ordination group/website) and “circulating” online (e.g. 23,000+ views), David Gates/GMI issued a responding open letter (posted here) emphasizing his, [above reported], maintained reason for not complying with the GC decision/position.


Epilogue III - Gates’ 9/11/2010 Crisis!?!
            By now it is not really surprising that David Gates is continuing unabated in his ‘Three Angels Message date-setting ways, as seen in this August 2010 sermon (Audio) [01:03:02ff] where he claims that September 11, 2001-September 11, 2008 were the “7 fat years” from Joseph’s dream, which is to be followed by a supposed, sectioned “7 lean years” subdivided in 2-2-3 year segments with the first 2 years being fulfilled in the financial crisis of September 11, 2008-September 11, 2010 which is now to be followed in a 2-year assets crisis. Obviously David Gates wants to persist in going against clear “I was shown...” statements in the SOP in regards to such eschatological date-setting, and that with his, uncertain at best, profusely conditionally-couched (i.e., “perhaps,” “possibly,” “probably,” “might”, “if,” etc) speculative suggestions (?!?) -“conditional suggestions” which Gates however implicitly claims are ‘prophetic’ based on ‘the divine principle of Amos 3:7.’ It is further not surprising that Gates’ statements, which are again “borrowed statements” (as if that somehow disculpates him when they fail), again do not “check out” on key levels, namely: exegetically, biblically, theologically
topicallyprophetically, factually, economicallyhistoricallylogically and practically, among others.[43] Yet people still moronically, literally “applaud” these false prophecies. Furthermore David Gates himself does not care whether these statements prove to be true or not. Like the false prophet Balaam, he is just out for himself on this one, and the notoriety, and does not care how this affects the people of God. So if someone wants to and/or can still believe in David Gates’s time setting schemes after reading through this blog post exposition, then they, quite sincerely, literally deserve hitting the wall they are straightly heading towards! (cf. Hos 4:16-17; Psa 81:11-12). Perhaps that will shake them out of this completely unbiblical spell and stupor. Indeed in the end they will concretely know and understand that Biblical truth is to be determined and controlled by proper exegesis and not such fanciful speculations.
            Quite manifestly, and directly contrary to inspired counsel, David Gates is ‘trying to get a revival in the SDA Church by the means of couching the Three Angel’s message in set times.’ He thinks that this is the only way that Church members will be convinced to take decisive actions towards getting wholly involved in missionary endeavors and efforts. As it was stated before, this is all the desire of “an evil and adulterous generation” (Matt 16:4) and David Gates is, under self-deception, seeking to give them what they want. As the Spirit against this eschatological time-setting intended, if a Church, after seeing the precise fulfillment of time prophecies in Church History, still needs God to thus “prove Himself again” (indeed as Gates himself says for according to him, ‘in this “9/11/01-9/11/08 + 2+2+3-year” timed prophecy development God is “proving” that He is in control of end time events’), then they really do not have the type of faith in God needed to usher in prophesied Final Events, nor the degree/quality of Faith that Remnant Church members should have by now.


Epilogue IIIB - (November 2010+)
            As seen in this November 20, 2010 sermon [09:34-19:32] [video] in a Romanian SDA Church, during a weekend series of 4 sermons in 3 churches in the Loma Linda area, David Gates was asked to ‘make a statement clarifying some of the public claims that he had made in recent years. So he proceeds to make a half-truth revisionism of his previous claims. Of course he completely leaves out his recently also failed, ‘specifc time, Sept. 11, 2010 - Joseph Story Prophecy’ (see section above and in Note #43), probably because no one mentioned this to him. So as with guileful people, he will only address issues that you are aware of and not volunteer others. Gates’ guilefully, also (relievedly) claims that ‘he had never set a date for the Second Coming’, however, as shown above, the SOP Counsel against date setting particularly addresses ‘the setting of ranges of dates’ and also ‘setting dates for any final event’ (e.g., Sunday Laws, the Mark of the Beast, “National Ruin” (i.e., Gates’ falsely believed “Total Economic Collapse”) etc). These are proscribed things that Gates has patently engaged in. So this “clarification attempt” of David Gates was nothing more than a calculatedly guileful “whitewashing” of his previous waywardness, thus not showing any remorse or contrition for any of them. Indeed this statement of his was filled with clever diversionary obfuscations in order to fool his audience into thinking that he had not actually done anything wrong.            
            In fact this was a frequent occurrence in his 4 sermons that weekend in regards to past controversial statements or actions of his. However the real question then becomes: (a) were these past statements the actual candid truth about what had occurred; or (b) was David Gates lying when he said he made these statements, or related to have done certain unbiblical actions in the past; or (c) is he now lying to cover up all of these falsehoods and waywardness. Any competent interrogator/investigator will quickly tell you that ‘when someone freely makes an adversial statement in regards to themselves, it is probably the full truth, and any attempt to later rationalize it, or shift it to a more favorable light, and only once it has been “exposed”, is the lie. So at best, even with these granted supposed “corrective truths”, David Gates would be guilty of, oddly enough, ‘having lied when he had indifferently/boastfully related/admitted in the past that he had lied’!?! Since all of these past lies are fully, transparently documented, one does not have to give him any benefit of, actually, no doubt. His own past words and actions speak against him! The fact that he knew that he was being so transparently documented when making these statements and relating these actions actually show the depth of the skewed/defective spirituality in these matters of truthfulness, combined with a variously unbiblical presumptuous mentality. It is no mere Divine verbiage, David Gates, that “God's Special Forces”, the 144,000, are most expressedly also said to “have no guile in their mouths”, and that through ‘having been blameless.’ (Rev 14:5). Get the crucial clue! (Cf. 2SM 380.2; 5T 216.2).
            Nonetheless, so resolutely continues Gates’ work of preaching a spurious, fear-based, “motivational” message, bolstered by guileful falsehoods, (all inclusively proscribed by the SOP LHU 98.3 = {BEcho, June 25, 1894 par. 7}). Moreover, what to say of SDA pastors who consider this to be Biblical Truth and give him an endorsing platform!!! Nothing more than ‘the blind guide of the blind.’ Indeed they’ll both fall into a pit! (Matt 15:4).


New re-Beginnings!!? - (Faith Camp Series Jun-July 2011)
            After having viewed David Gates’s sermon series during Faith Camp 2011 it is quite manifest that, prophetic-teachings wise, he is a “reformed” person. As he stated in one of those sermons: ‘he no longer believes in using templates to claim definite dates and times for final event.’ Presumably, that includes his past claims, such as, (with them all related and debunked above throughout this post), his ‘timed Lazarus Experience’; ‘probable Sunday Law starts’; and his latest, Fall 2010, ‘Joseph Story Prophecy’. Even though this radical change of view may not be out of having followed Bible and SOP principles for not engaging in any specific “intervening” nor “Second Coming” time date-setting, but out of: literally having hit a wall running with a past path strewed with a litany of failed claims and prophecies, (indeed the clarion death knell of any “presumptuous” and “false” prophesying (Deut 18:20-22)), I’ll give him some kudos for not having, at least publicly, (-as he did say that he would only say some things during that Camp series “off air”), for not, as he surely would have in the not so distant past, make a ‘sure Final Events start’ claim with manufactured, and then looming, U.S. Debt Default Crisis that was on schedule to occur on August 2, 2011 which probably would have had, (given the whimsical way in which the Global Economy is also subject to), Global Recessionary repercussions, and was indeed averted at the last instances, officially/literally with 10 hours and 10 minutes before that deadline.
            So while several statements made by David Gates during that series would substantively qualify as issues that I would challengingly address in this blog, I have opted, at least for now, to pass on them, albeit mainly due to my current constrained schedule, nonetheless still allowing for Gates manifest restraint in not (re)-engaging in time setting and events pre-dating in regards to the U.S. Debt issue, (which, with all of the needed elements present in this issue, would indeed have dovetailed perfectly with his past ‘sure Final Events initiating’ scenario), to “atone” for those, relatively lessor Biblically/Theologically substantive, factually-speaking, personal and/or (SDA) common fundamental misunderstandings and derived assumptions.
            It seems that Gates was able to refrain from doing this ‘past false teachings/claims “relapse”’ here because, as several statements in that series seemed to show, he now more rightly and/or more fully, even experientially, (though not Biblically/Theologically perfectly), understands the Truth that: God is actually pointedly looking for His People to do His expected Full Gospel Mandate Work on the Earth and not instead constrainedly looking for a set time to arrive. As the Jer 18:1-10 principle shows, God can and will “change his mind” when circumstances on Earth/with His professes People, warrant such judicious and injunctive actions, postponements and/or alterations.
            As exegetically expressed in this post, the Church failed their ‘Lazarus Experience Sign Testing’, with David Gates, due to faulty approaches and theology, also contributing in some part to this failing, thus, according to the Theological View of the NJK Project, sealing the “Greater Gospel WorksEschatological Unfolding of God’s Redemptive Cause. There is indeed much, much necessary & tangible work to do, and what could have been acceleratedly accomplished through acting on supposed faith professions (as David Gates tried to spearhead), will still now be accomplished, but by now allowing for the normal unfolding of whatever time is actually needed to get this done, indeed through the due advancement, investment and proper utilization of the “earlier”/already given and readily available light, talents and mandate bestowed upon God’s Remnant People. And this all needs to start with understanding the Third Angel’s Sealing Message for, first, the Church, in regards to God’s Fuller Sabbatical Truth.



September 2011+ Regretting Relapsing!??
            All depending on what is his source of Truth, whether the Bible/SOP or his own Gateisms, just judging by succinct, but tellingly significant statements/segments his latest sermons/series, David Gates is manifestly regrettingly relapsing into his past ways of indifferently spouting off his Gateistic exaggerations/fabrications. Manifestly this is out of his expressed decision to now ‘outrightly ignore criticism made against him.’ (There is actually something much worst than criticism, and that is silent indifference, for at worst, expressed, substantively valid criticism tacitly challenges one to ‘duly prove your case/claim/point.’)[44]
            Such ‘regretful Gateistic relapse’ major statements namely are (and for again the constraints of my time, the specific relocating of these statements is not always done here):

-‘The Vatican controls the White House through its Catholic Religious advisors’.
[Which is why, I guess, the current Obama administration does not have an anti-abortion agenda!??].

-‘The present 5 out of “7” Roman Catholic U.S. Supreme Court Judges is out of a Vatican conspiracy.
[-As already debunkedly shown in this blog post, conversely speaking, not even a U.S. Supreme Court made up entirely of SDA’s could not prevent a Sunday Law if that indeed had, and that dually, become the Legislative and Constitutional Law/Right of the Land. (-I’ll personally give him the benefit of the doubt on his, actually ascertainingly pondered, statement that ‘there are 7 U.S. Supreme Court Judges’, as I myself had to ascertain if there actually were not 12. -There are actually 9 Judges, and of which 6 are actually Roman Catholics, with the other 3 (Ginsburg; Kagan and Breyer) being of the Judaism persuasion.)]

-Of course, since this “time” has yet come and gone, as his other failed prophetic times, David Gates is still claiming that Jacques Cousteau has accurately said that life on earth cannot go on for more than 40 years (thus not beyond ca. 2036).
[That claim, and the way in which it is being distortedly misquoted, has been discussed in this post; and more emphatically restating a point here: given what Cousteau had (disclaimingly) stated about his scientific expertise, or actually, the lack thereof, and that in any area, claiming that Cousteau has here made an ‘incontrovertible statement about the state and future of this planet/world’ is like accepting the defense of waterboarding by U.S. member of government ‘because it was done to an actress in/for a Hollywood movie.’ (And by the way, just for the similar/related “impresario” matter, there has also been numerous nuclear detonations in various places on this earth....in Hollywood movies, -e.g., “Baltimore, MD” [01:54ff].)]

-As I do not have yet can factually verify the recent Hungarian Constitutionalre-drafting, (cf. this memorandum), I cannot fully make debunking statements, (but in due time will), against David Gates’ claims in regards to it (see here at 13:00-14:27). However these statements bear all of the telling physical and rational signs of Gateism, and so, with actually no benefit of the doubt here being affordable to him given his past track record in such, and readily verifiable, matters, as documented in this blog post, these statements are indeed categorized as most probably (more) fanciful guiles. In fact his claim that ‘Hungary has voted to become a Catholic Country’, and that ‘the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom of Religion and Belief, and the free exercise thereof has now been abrogated’ is actually readily categorically diffused by Article VI of the (April 2011) Draft/Passed content of this New Constitution as it says:

VI. Article
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right includes
freedom to choose and to change religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or in private, to manifest or choose not to manifest religion or belief, in
worship, teaching, practice and observance. 
(2) In Hungary the churches and the State operate separately. Churches are independent in Hungary.
The State will cooperate with churches in the pursuit of community objectives. 
(3) Detailed regulations pertaining to churches will be set forth in a super majority law

As typical with his Gateistic mindset, Gates has sanctimoniously “extra-polated” these statements to instead/“surely” mean/imply:

(1) “You have to fall in line/harmony with what Rome says.”

(2) “You have to be a State-supported Church”
[This Article VI.2 statement is (a) limited to meeting community objectives, and (b) is not expressing a notion of forced acceptance of the resources of the State. “Cooperation” is not linguistically synonymous to “force.” So, in any potential legal eventuality, the Constitution did not ‘force acceptance, nor even Church participation’. It rather seems to be that the State, instead of setting up separate government institutions/establishments to meet community objectives, it will instead work with/through Churches who are naturally/already endeavoring to provide such selfsame community services. (E.g., food banks, clothe distribution, etc.)

(3) ‘The State will decide what is lawful religion for a religion.’
[Seems to me that normatively, it indeed is the State that democratically regulatorily decides on claimed “religious” issues such as e.g., capital punishment, polygamy, child-brides, abortion rights, civil rights/discrimination, certain civil/domestic corporal “punishment”, etc. Indeed nothing unusual here, and if those things were not being regulated before under the previous Hungarian Constitution, then that is a quite commendable improvement.]


Gates’ Claim for SOP Statement on Paul’s Tentmaking
-In this September 18,2011 Faith Camp (Malang) 8 A.M. sermon [01:11:37-01:15:13] (video), David Gates makes the most emphatic claim that it is said by EGW that: ‘“It is a crying shame” that Paul had to resort to tentmaking to support himself while ministering because the Church would not’ and ‘“How sad that the great apostle Paul had to waste his time making tents because of the selfishness and hard-heartedness of the Church”’. I have tried several SOP software searches combinations of these key words but have not found anything of the pointed sort in the SOP. One would think that the claimed, manifestly directly-quoting, expression: “It’s a crying shame” and/or “how sad that the great apostle Paul” would actually be exact statements of EGW  as being insinuated by him, but that is not the case. The closest I’ve come to find anything that alludes to what Gates is claiming/discussing here is in AA 351.2-3 & AU Gleaner, June 16, 1909 par. 1-3; however there EGW rather says that:

There were some who objected to Paul's toiling with his hands, declaring that it was inconsistent with the work of a gospel minister. Why should Paul, a minister of the highest rank, thus connect mechanical work with the preaching of the word? Was not the laborer worthy of his hire? Why should he spend in making tents time that to all appearance could be put to better account?  {AA 351.2} 

But Paul did not regard as lost the time thus spent. As he worked with Aquila he kept in touch with the Great Teacher, losing no opportunity of witnessing for the Saviour, and of helping those who needed help. His mind was ever reaching out for spiritual knowledge. He gave his fellow workers instruction in spiritual things, and he also set an example of industry and thoroughness. He was a quick, skillful worker, diligent in business, "fervent in spirit, serving the Lord." Romans 12:11. As he worked at his trade, the apostle had access to a class of people that he could not otherwise have reached. He showed his associates that skill in the common arts is a gift from God, who provides both the gift and the wisdom to use it aright. He taught that even in everyday toil God is to be honored. His toil-hardened hands detracted nothing from the force of his pathetic appeals as a Christian minister.

            Indeed while Paul being forced to toil with his hands was not at all Biblical nor ideal, and he certainly did not seek such occupation, and would have, as commended in his quoted statements made in this post, rather have had the Churches be all supportive of his ministry, he, as the SOP is rather emphasizing here, ‘made the very best of the “cards” that he had been dealt by the non-supporting Church’ and ‘God worked to give him ministering favor and advancement even during these period of secular/trivial manual labors.’
            David Gates goes on to presume that ‘such tentmaking occupation probably prevented Paul from penning another epistle’, however, as more than less rightly detailed during this study [video] [audio] by Doug Batchelor [16:06-18:36ff & 20:58-26:48] citing Gal 4:15; 6:11; 1 Cor 16:21; Col 4:18; 2 Thess 3:17; (but not Acts 23:2-5 for Paul actually did not “perceive” (Gr. oida Strongs #3609a), and not merely ‘not see”’ (Gr. blepo #991) that it was a high priest speaking; and also Paul did not need a travelling companion for a ‘physical guide to walk about’), Paul did indeed consistently dictate his letters to a transcribing writer (a.k.a. an amanuensis) and so, if that had been the urgent need, while mending/sowing a tent he could also have been dictating a new epistle to a writer. Rather, from what is said in the SOP here in regards to him ‘still keeping in touch with the Great Teacher’ and ‘his mind was ever reaching out for spiritual knowledge’ it seems sequiturly clear to me that this line/period of work and interaction with people in the business world gave him new thought and counsels in such regards, with probably these being later formulated for incorporation in later written epistle to Church members who daily dealt with such worldly issues. So, as with the case of Joseph being sold into slavery by his jealous brothers (Gen 37:8, 11, 20), God manifestly ‘turned that unjustly imposed situation into a greater good’ (Gen 45:5-8; 50:19-21) for both Paul personally and also for the Church, indeed probably resulting in many spiritually saving/enlightening counsels from Paul even to those who had wrongly acted towards him. And also, by this example of productiveness even while secularly working, though this not ever being the Biblical ideal for leaders in God’s Israel, Paul set forth an example for those lay people, and that for all ages of the Church, as they then could not claim their secular work as an excuse for not also engaging in tangible evangelistic ministry. So this “trap” set by those unfaithful Churches against Paul only turned out to be a judging ‘rock or hard place’ against them capable of producing saving works if they emulated it or being a most condemning reproach to them if they were not, at the very least, as productive in advancing the Gospel as was Paul even during the times of these also imposed “chains” of trivial/secular work and business associations.
            So the claims of David Gates here turn out to be nothing more than his, recent times, customary fancifulness, “Gateism” and probably even knowing guilefulness, which again, must be statements/claims which seem to be most plausible, and even damning if dared rejected; but as usual, simply are claims which are based on what he biasedly/fantasaically ‘thinks the, even readily verifiable truth, should be.’ Yet as usual, as seen throughout this present post, the actual Biblical/SOP Truth is much grand than what Gates is strong-armedly, self-vindicatingly and self-servingly trying to twistedly, sanctimoniously “elevating”, even, (and perhaps this was the attempted case here) correcting it to be!


April 2012+ The Rekindled Torch of False “Prophetic” Revivings
            These days David Gates is focusing more on sustaining his ministries work on the “frontlines” (i.e., the various mission endeavors which the missionaries of his Gospel Ministry International (GMI) are engaged in) than taking up many speaking appoints as before (e.g., ca. 3 weekends in 2012 compared to 52 e.g., the years 2008-2010, however he is evidently still (re-)continuing his prior spurious practice of ‘seeking to obtain a revival by false prophetic claims.’ In this April 2012 Extreme Faith Report [02:39-06-48], he claims during a preview of a sermon which he plans to more formally and fully preach on, “in Spanish and in English”, and widely broadcast and distribute, as actually he had before, (-a claim that was also debunked here in regards to what he otherly was also claiming then) that the SDA Church will be going through the Jonah Experience in the end. (This type of spurious and whimsical story-prophecy claiming is just what Gates had tried to do back in September 2010 with his “Joseph Story = September 11, 2010 Economic Crisis” false prophesy which also was discussed here, and detailedly, completely debunked in this expanded refuting note.)
            And so, getting right to debunking these new false claims, he states the following unbiblical things, including, as with his prior claims, discussed above, soundbite statements which rewordingly and mismashedly, misappliedly, contradict the Spirit of Prophecy:

Gates’ Claim #1: First of all, based on another story of a man surviving in the belly of a whale but then being severely scarred by the fish’s gastric acids, with his skin peeling and patches of hair failing off, Gates claims that (a) Jonah was also affected in this way as he went to preach to the Ninevites and (b) this prophetically represents how SDA will be like, following them having been affect by (Gates’ proclamations hobby-horse) “the coming great economic-initiated crisis”.

Biblical Response #1: The Bible and the SOP of course say absolutely nothing to the sort, nor any hint at all. It is, naturally speaking, probably the case that the fish which had swallowed that other man and severely scarred him was in the midst of its digestive process, and so its gastric acids were present in its stomach. But in Jonah’s case, that great fish had already digested all of its food and was also not hungry then and so its body’s systems did not try to digest Jonah. And so God knowingly/informedly of course, picked and appointed that non-hungry great fish to swallow Jonah. But on the more likely supernatural level, God simply told and/or overmasteringly prevented that great fish to secrete digestive acids all during the time when Jonah was in its belly.
            (Furthermore, there even is, at the very least, an expression of the manifest traditional knowledge amongst Jewish people, even here spreading to Gentile Christian converts in the NT Apocryphal work [cf. 16MR 34.3] the Third Corinthians Epistle which matter-of-factly states in passing as evidence for an unblemished resurrection by God that: “no part of him was consumed[/corrupted], not even an hair nor an eyelash.” (verse 30))


Gates’ Claim #2: When various crises will begin to occur, the wicked people of the earth will reproach SDA for not having told them of that in advance. They will then blamingly try to kill SDA because of that “throwing them overboard as with Jonah. But God will provide a merciful protection for SDA’s (as Jonah and his appointed great fish) and then send them on a mission to warn the world.

Biblical Response #2: The SOP is clear that these warning of reproach occur after probation has closed on the wicked, when God then is effectuating “National Ruin” on the world and many of its major cities through “balls of fire”. (See e.g., 9T 28.1, RC 243.6). The SOP also points out that these reproach will be made during the time of the open Judgement of the wicked, while they are themselves present, which will take place after the Millennium, during the Great White Throne Judgement (NPU Gleaner, March 16, 1910 par. 4; Rev 20:5, 11-12). So as probation for the wicked will have closed then, there will not be any ministry towards them then. Their Final, Loud Cry Warning (e.g., GC 603-612) had already been given and that by the Shaking-surving Remnant of the SDA Church.... Really David Gates did not know/understand that flow of Final Events....or is he just outrightly lying as he customarily, indifferently wants to do!?!!


Gates’ Claim #3: The “Death Decree where the wicked will be wanting to kill “SDA’s” because they find them to be responsible for all of the calamities in the land occurs before the Final Warning.

Biblical Response #3: The SOP clearly states that it will occur after the Final Warning (e.g., GC 613ff; EW 33.2ff)

Gates’ Claim #4: To make his Jonah story seem to prophetically speak on Final Events, Gates subjectively and speculatively has to insist that Jonah, after being vomited in the beach by the great wish was in a sickly state “but then still had to do his job, now under most difficult circumstance. He claims that this fulfill the SOP’s statement in LDE 174.3 (=5T 463.2), which is there restated and editorially, rightly commented on [CAPS] -based on what is stated in the wider, original context of that quote of 5T 454-467):

“The work which the church has failed to do in a time of peace and prosperity she will have to do in a terrible crisis under most discouraging, forbidding circumstances. The warnings that worldly conformity has silenced or withheld must be given under the fiercest opposition from enemies of the faith. And at that time the superficial, conservative [ELLEN WHITE IS NOT HERE DISTINGUISHING THEOLOGICAL CONSERVATIVES FROM THEIR LIBERAL COUNTERPARTS; SHE IS DESCRIBING THOSE WHO PUT "WORLDLY CONFORMITY" FIRST AND GOD'S CAUSE SECOND.] class, whose influence has steadily retarded the progress of the work, will renounce the faith.”

Biblical Response #4: Since those who are refusing to do the work will, during that, actually, merely Little Time of Trouble and Shaking period (=EW 269-273), be leaving the Biblically True/Actual Remnant Church of God, His Zion, and God will not be using this ordeal to force anyone to do His will. It will instead serve to purify the Church from spurious, world-conforming and idolizing worshippers. (=LDE 180.5) So though Gates desperately needs this claim in order to try to convince people that they will be forced to do the work in the future anyway, that is actually not what God has in mind for this Shaking ordeal. And so Gates is, as prophesied in LDE 179.3, is “faithfully” acting the part of ‘SDA ministers standing in the pulpits who, during the (indeed present) time of the Shaking, are deceiving people by: “with the torch of false prophecy in their hands, kindled from the hellish torch of Satan”.


Gates’ Claim #5: That the two options are: ‘work now when the doors are opened’ or ‘work later when they are closed’

Biblical Response #5: Since when the ‘doors are closed’, it will be because Law have been enacted to prevent those who uphold God’s True and Full Sabbath from freely preaching this, and also to put them to death, then there will not be any work that will be able to be done then. The Bible and SOP scenario instead is that those who will survive the Shaking will be in small number then, and thus have very few resources to freely do this work of proclamation (EW 270.4-271.1). That is also why God will supernaturally aid them by giving them the Latter Rain’s power. (EW 271.2). And it is only then that all doors will be closed to them, in direct porportional “power” to the Latter Rain power with which these faithful ones had been demonstrating. And the only viable option for victory then for the wicked will be to lawlessly put these faithful ones to death. (EW 272.1-2).
            So, as typical, Gates here has all of his elements mixed up, most likely, indifferently/purposeful, thus guilefully, so.

            So David Gates is just up to his old guileful and shoddy preaching again and, as with his prior past and failed claims of: Imminent National Ruin/Economic Final Crisis in 2008; Lazarus Experience Resurrection in 2009, 2010 Economic Crash, etc, he is just setting up all those who will believe in these claim for a deception and fall for when they, in the middle of that Shaking, which, as shown here, will be much more intricate than Gates and SDA think, will not feel “forced” by God to do what is right then, they will believe that what they are doing instead must be what God is “forcing” them to do. Only properly understanding the full testing truths for our time will prevent one from being ensnared in Satan great deception, already at work (EW 266-269), and not any form of “felt Divine compellation”.

             David Gates is indeed serving as the perfect object lesson demonstration in the SDA Church that Evangelistic and even Humanitarian Gospel Mission works without proper/accurate Biblical Truth is not viable, which is in contrast to the also not viable main stance of the SDA Church which remains in line with outline of SOP prophetic understandings, but does not have the expected and feasible Missions works. Only having both (i.e., see e.g., here & here [=Bible Understanding] and here [Gospel Works Acts]) will result in God's Victory and Acceptance. (Matt 25:20-23)



November 2013 - Australia 
Some major points of objection & correction from these presentations of David Gates in Australia:

(1) Syrian War & WWIII Claim - Well it clearly does not take much to get David Gates to easily and quickly revert to his prior-repentance days. Manifestly just feed him a story which dovetails with what he claims/believes and he’ll, as before, blindly run with it without first doing proper fact-checking. In this presentation [16:00-17:33] he claims that [in August 2013] Russia had threatened to attack Saudi Arabia if the U.S. went ahead with its planned strikes against Syria. Well that “news story” immediately struck me as odd/false because, since (1) I quite comprehensively and copiously follow the news, I had not heard anything at all about this, and (2) where/how in the world did Saudi Arabia come into this picture??! So upon hearing Gates make this claim here, I did a Google search of the story, which, I later gathered can be found by simply searching for “Putin Memorandum”, and tellingly enough to me, the top hits for the story were quite shady and amateur websites/blogs. Then a Youtube search revealed the same kind of low rated/hack reportings, and most with a World War 3 “agenda”. So I then did a specific search at several accredited News Network websites and came up with absolutely nothing. Then, to confirm what was now clearly merely a false story claim, I did a search for “Putin Memorandum Hoax” and came up with this Facebook posting dated/done on the same day (August 27, 2013) that that news story came out, which in turned contained links which showed just how that story was a fake one put out by a tabloid paper, the so-called “European Union Times”, which, as stated here, turns out to, as all searched out things considered corroborate, indeed be a journalism hack.
            David Gates could easily have done such basic fact-checking before presenting this not only in a sermon, but also while claiming this to involve prophetic fulfillment, namely the holding back of the 4 Winds related in Rev 7:1-3|EW 36-38. But, moreover, the wider fundamental fact here is that David Gates has no prophetic authority to whimsically and subjectively claim when a prophetic event has been fulfilled. For EGW herself, it took a special revelation by God (=EW 36-38, discussed in this post) to indicate when that, actually non-event, took place. Addedly, it likewise took proper prophetic involvement/analysis to confirm that this holding of the 4 Winds did again take place as claimed and discussed here, right at the second airplane strike on the World Trade Center on 9/11/01 and further historical/factual and comprehensive theological/prophetic studies show that this “holding back” process had begun to be set up long, indeed years, before that 9/11 morning, in the history and developments leading up to that event. It was indeed the sum of those various prior toning downs which naturally resulted in things not, as samply sketched out here, unravelling with pointedly the U.S. then ‘stomping off like a maddened/angry horse’ (=20MR 217.1) (i.e. a militaristic power which thinks it has a religious right/green light to retaliate from right then and there as it wants and indeed capably can. The subsequent, and still ongoing, “War on Terror” was residual evidence enough that things could easily have gone real bad on that 9/11 morning had God not long acted to tame the reaction/response.)
            So, as that study shows, God had long before 9/11/01 ordered that those winds be held, starting with His commissioned Mighty Angel Gabriel waving a parchment in its hand  (=EW 254.1 discussed here), and the 9/11/01 holding back effectuation was, as discussed in here, the first of 4 distinct winds, being the militaristic “human passions” wind (cf. LDE 239.3) that were held back of what should have begun the unravelling of Final Events.
            It is theologically key to note that this holding back of these “passion winds” actually revolve around influential forces which, when allowed to “blow” produce, as in a “butterfly effect”, and end scenario. So like stopping or turning a huge ship (as reflective of the weighty and complex various affairs in this world which societally make it go round), God’s initiating/effectuating of these events actually does necessarily, i.e., in order to seems as natural as possible, take much time to get set up or halted. [Vacuously enough, this “much time” notion is one that David Gates himself, as seen in his #4 presentation [ca. 18:30-21:11ff] actually, at least theoretically, understands, but manifestly has now trumped by his ensued [see at 21:11ff], and as discussed earlier in this post, false: ‘second time around, God’s people will surely cross the Jordan’ thesis (when the Spiritual facts of the matter is that God’s Remnant People are actually at least at their 5th opportunity (i.e, ca. 1844, ca. 1848, ca. 1888, ca. 1996).] To have the frequent stopping events that David Gates has actually been claiming for a recent while now, pointedly as he tries to, as done in this presentation, compel people to get involve, is actually not “naturally” possible. It would literally take a supernatural intervention by God, including, arguably most basically, him recognizably speaking to a world leader, either “audibly” or in a dream/vision, in order to get them to abandon a course that they are pursuing, but as seem with Pilate’s wife and Pilate (Matt 27:19-20), it can easily take much more forceful supernatural intervention to actually compel/force humans to heed that warning. So unless Obama later recounts in a Presidency memoir that he felt impressed by God not to strike Syria and not that this was a decision that was at the very least based on the advice of his advisors, then, contrary to Gates hollow purporting, nothing “supernaturally influencing” had taken place in the US standing down at the height of this Syria-WMD crisis.
            Comprehensive and Inspired Biblical studies show that the “Church Triumphant Greater Work” (15MR 292.2-4) to be done in the time after when these Four Winds have been held back is still to be done and also, contrary to Gates’ ‘repeated-chances-until-SDA’s-get-it-right’ scenario, it also involves a “border of Canaan-like” close of probation for those who, like most who hear Gates’s and like others sermons encouraging missions work, refuse to, and that timely, heed these calls. So is the theme and transpiring of the SDA’s Church Shaking.

(2) Content of Rev 5 Scroll - As usual when David Gates tries to systematically preach from the Bible, particularly prophecy, he quickly, quasi-defaultly enters into an eisegesis mode where he imposes his own subjective ideas onto the text. In presentation #4 [at 1:03:24] he makes the eisegetical claim that ‘the Rev 5 scroll contains all the evidence that is needed to justify God and to close the Great Controversy’. As ususal with a “Gateism” from Gates, that of course sounds great and quite plausible, however proper study and (actually) inspired revelation (9MR 7.2/12MR 296.3 (1898)), as fully expounded upon in this post, the content of this Scroll, which is implemented in Rev 6, actually has to do with various validating elements needed by God in order to set the future, and injunctively new, historical course that He will be justly ordering (cf. Dan 2:21) the world to follow. Indeed, as careful and exegetical study shows, time should have ended in the First Century A.D. around the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., but as the Church then had not Finished the Work, time had to be injunctively prolonged, and that was what the great crisis in Rev 5, (which the SOP revealed (9T 267.1), necessarily (=Jer 18:1-10) is to be (typologically) repeated post 1844), was all about. And that “injunctive and new” history is what is related in Rev 6, which actually is just an elaboration of/on Christ’s Olivet Discourse, which itself pointedly/literalistically had a defaulty applicable First Century A.D. scenario in mind.

(3) Tacit Re-application of 7 Seals - Directly related to Gates’ claim above in #2, is his “corroborating” and titular: “Conquering and to Conquer” claim, which he most manifestly sees as applying to himself. He is here of course citing what takes place upon the opening of the First Seal (Rev 6:1-2). But at best, that passage only thematically applies to David Gates for if, as it indeed is the eschatological case, the Seals are to be reapplied to the Final Work (see starting in this post), then it actually does not end at that First Seal. A finality “Conquering and to Conquer” notion actually comes to prophetically, and that typologically applies when the 7th Seal transpired and God’s “Heaven” is then emptied of its armies (Rev 8:1 = Rev 19:11-16; -see the presently/currently effective, typological wave of application in this post) as a warring campaign (=7 Trumpets (Rev 8:2ff) then ensues. Of course one would first have to grasp the many key typologically applicable citations in these passages to understand how and why God has allowed for these passages, which shallowly seem to only be speaking of Jesus Christ, be fulfillable by His righteous, 144,000 “army” (Cf. CET 228.1-3's Church/Israel Civil War discussed here).
            David Gates is inherently, infectededly, (still) guilty of the same virus as all SDA’s and that is for them to think that they have it all figured out and “in the bag”, and so they do not need to deeply/exegetically study out Scripture, especially prophecy, and if they do, then they cannot allow the text to diverge, at least too much,  from their traditional understandings, and speak for itself into what it actually is pointing to. The trumping fact here is that they just do not have the required “righteousness” experience to be able to see/discern/perceive  much more clearly and deeply into these Spiritual things. (=Dan 12:3-4, 10; 1SM 25.4; John 6:27, 53-58|TM 116.1ff). Indeed quite unlike the Sacrificial Jesus Christ, such-minded SDA’s, which is virtually all of them, won’t do anything which will implyingly involve that it will not come to “benefit” them by such actions involving a work/ministry which will have to mean that it will take more time than they naturally have left to live. So the Gospel mandate ministry of ‘helping the very least of these’ (Matt 25:45), which literally is babies being aborted, is certainly an “anathema other/false Gospel” to them since it requires an overhauling reorganization and sacrificial support which is more than they are willing to share. So they instead believe that (=murderously) letting these be killed at will and instead preaching a soon Second Coming is doing God’s/Christ’s Will (contra. EW 36.2; Matt 7:21-23; DA 825.4).

(4) Staying in Church - During these presentations, David Gates claimed that people should stay in the SDA Church because there is no where else to go. Well, as e.g., discussed here, that stance is not at all supported by the Bible or SOP. Fact is that the SDA Church has become systemically corrupt, indeed, especially in its pervasive Capitalistic practices a ‘sister to fallen Babylon’. It is funny to see the likes of Gates telling SDA’s to stay in the Church and from therewith, individualistically try to finish the work, when they should instead be exhorting people to completely reform the Church and its institutions, even formally/fully cutting off those who refuse to reform, whether it be (Regional) Conferences, Unions, Universities, Hospitals, etc, when that self-limiting approach itself is what is slowing down the progress of God’s Work. Fact is that God will not “Latter Rainly” do, (as many mindlessly claim and expect), for the Church what they are actually capable of doing for themselves, but are just refusing to do. What God has samply shown that he would do through people like David Gates is really only in an substantiated attempt to try to convince others to change, but as they still refuse to heed that light, then they are now acting against light, and will duly be judged. Staying in the Church then when it is now evident that its Babylonian Capitalistic reverence is what will produce its fall, would be like First Century Christians telling other Christians to stay in, even come to, Jerusalem after Rome had laid its siege against it. God’s message instead is to indeed set out to reestablish His Zion elsewhere for if sinners actually now refuse to leave “Zion” (falsely believed to be the physical SDA Church Organization), then Zion (=the place where God’s Throne can rest) itself must (correspondingly) remove itself from these impenitent sinners as God proceeds to expandingly destroy it through His Chosen instrument(s) (=Ezek 1:4-5ff; Ezek 8:1-4ff; Ezek 9:1-3ff; Ezek 10:1-2ff, 18-22; Ezek 11:14-25; cf. LDE 59-62)

(5) Conferences Hiring from Field Schools - While it manifestly is indeed the case that some conference, most notably the Michigan Conference, does hire students who attend field school (cf. here), I seriously doubt that, contrary to Gates’ implied, (probably “Gateisticly” exaggerated), claim, that it/they is/are now doing this instead of hiring Theology graduates from SDA Colleges/Universities/Seminaries, and also that most of these hired people are either employed as (non-lay) pastors and/or are actually fully, if at all, paid as pastors/conference employees. Most of these hired field school graduates are probably simply lay Bible Workers, and who, at best, may simply be given gas/mileage compensations for their Bible work.

(6) ‘Ted Wilson = Man of God’ [#5 - ??:??] - David Gates has no problem, effectively vacuously, heralding current GC President as a Man of God, and wants others to enjoiningly deem so, but just a couple of months before, in the GC probing documented/referenced earlier, he certainly did not think that the imposition of certain working policies by the General Conference, which Ted Wilson evidently fully approves of, upon his ministry were “godly”, and himself indicated that he would not be adhering to these. [Cf. this Gates/GMI-supporting, ‘anti-GC Bullying’, sermon by a, similarly, independent, self-supporting SDA ministry with its own (formal) church/congregation.].
            Fact is that, David Gates’ view of right/wrong, truth/error is so subjective that he should unjudingly let others, i.e., those who, unlike him, are more careful in properly weighing the “godliness” of people/leaders according to the impartial righteous standard of God’s Word (Heb 4:12; cf. here) and in His just balances (LDE 59.3-60.2; e.g., see Rev 6:5-6 “Third Seal” interpretational application in here*) come to their own, much more Biblically, righteously judicious (Isa 11:3-4; John 7:24 = Matt 23:23-24, 25-26, 27-28, 29-33), conclusions.

* Quite telling how both the David Gates faction and the Ted Wilson faction are at two extremes of God’s Will and Ideal for Fulfilling His Full Righteousness/Gospel Work. Ted Wilson, as patently seen in the GC’s “Missions to the Cities” tire-spinning/rubber-burning underachieving endeavor is worshipfully trying to do this according to Capitalistic tenets/principles/policies; and David Gates on the other hand is equivalently “Capitalism-worshipfully” trying to do this through unwise and irrational suicidal measures. Gates still cannot realize that all his fundings (as he relates them) have come, and are coming from the donations of mainly SDA Members who have the means to be able to give. God did not so abundantly bless the SDA Church, including giving it a “power to gain wealth”, so that they would stupidly burn it all up, and claim/believe to be thus obedient to Him. Even Jesus and the disciples he called needed people with productive means to tangibly support them. (Luke 8:1-3)
            As a sample solution: Instead of telling stray people here and there to just sell off their homes, putting it up for rental and using that monthly income to both finance themselves in a mission field and mission works, would, i.e., until God would give a clear signal/revelation to sell (=EW 57.1), not only be much rational, but would actually be more likely to result in more people readily engaging in mission works.
            God’s mandate indeed instead is to wisely/strategically invest these, (especially human capital), resources (Luke 19:11-27), and not actually, mal-construingly, “wickedly/lazily” in Capitalistic money-making ventures (Matt 25:26-27), but rather in the same ways in which the Holy Spirit led Apostolic Church made use of their wealth and resources and were thus able to overcomingly meet and defeat the economic demands and detriments of the world upon them, pointedly in regards to rightly and fully doing God’s Gospel Works.

(7) ‘2017 Death of Protestantism’ Celebration [#5 - 29:46-31:10ff]- Here again Gates makes a most likely mere sensationalistic, certainly, as necessarily typical by him, completely undocumented, claim that in 2017, on then the 500th Anniversary of the birth of the Protestant Church, that Protestants (especially in Europe) are planning to celebrate their killing of Protestantism and apologizing to Catholics..and moreover that SDA’s will be among the participants. A simple internet search for such supposed-to-be earthshakingly major plans actually reveals nothing even remotely of the sort, so I guess the days are fully back again when David Gates makes all sorts of wild claim and the sheeple just have to sheepishly take his word for it.
            Gates later expounds upon the unwritten “Whirlwind Judgement” vision of EGW, and Freudianly expresses his fears that he, because he is inherently also a ‘SDA Church shepherd’ (= indeed: ‘any pastor/leader’ e.g., Eph 4:11(Strong’s #4166)), well it is, along the lines of the indictment of such false shepherds in Ezek 34:1-22 (=EW 36.2), precisely why he is indeed most likely to also be condemningly judged. Because he repeatedly takes whatever good experience or blessing that God has led him to have and literally just “fouls it up” as he presents it to his sheep (Ezek 34:17-19) to the point where it is not even edible, let alone healthily beneficial, indeed now solely hazardously detrimental, for these sheep.
            David Gates now only takes a couple of major speaking engagements a year (which manifestly are those set up for production), well he should use that cleared up time to, since he does use Powerpoint in his presentations, to document, if he actually/truthfully/factually can, his various claims, not to mention to get up to speed on “Biblical Theology” through proper/exegetical Bible/SOP research, interpretation and application. Contrary to what he brandly claims/believes, he and/or his “SDA Man of Faith” experiences are not the definer of Truth or interpreter of Scripture, but the properly, and transparently so, studied out Word of God is!!...Which leads me to the next emblematic point:

(8) Comparison with Jim Jones {(docu-drama) (docs) (movie)} [#5- 16:40-18:01ff] - In response to an inquiring claim while working in Guyana that he could just be another Jim Jones, David Gates relates that his (substantively pertinently main) response was that: ‘Jim Jones [who actually had self-proclaimed himself to be an atheist] took away Bibles from his followers, whereas he is widely/freely giving them out’. And thus he concludes, that he cannot be another Jim Jones. Well the most ironic fact is that David Gates is much more insidious than Jim Jones, -which is why he has such a widespread and mainstream SDA pulpit and audience, because, as amply documented throughout this blog post, the patent thing that Gates does, and that with general facts, the Bible and the SOP, is that he gladly tells you to do read/views those facts, Bible verses and/or SOP statements, but then, quite slyly, through complete vacuous explanations and, especially circular, rationalization proceeds to complete distort, or outrightly ignore these various truth stipulations.*

            And also quite more slyly than Jim Jones, he proudly will “disarmingly/diffusingly” say, as it indeed is the case with most of what he says and claims, that he has not been hearing voices, he is not speaking prophetically, and/or just that he is not a prophet; or even more suggestively hoodwinking, as he does in this series: ‘that he never completed his theology classes...but was still ordained’ (as if that defaultly/supernaturally made him exegetically competent). But then he still goes on to, indeed as amply documented in this blog post, say and do exactly like a false prophet would!!! =Matt 7:15-20...and at the top of the doings of a false prophet, is this sanctimonious self-serving “Peace, Peace”, head-in-the-sand, indifferent sugar-coating of the full counsel of God, which Gates, like other SDA false shepherds engage in, so as to not lose whatever “position” they formally have or are managing to  have. (Isa 28:15; 30:12; Jer 7:4, 8; 9:2b-6; 23:25-34; Isa 30:1-5) Now that is Biblically what ‘seeking a position’ is all about.


* It has actually become quite popular now in SDA circles for SDA “False (Leader/Teacher/Pastor/Preacher) Shepherds”, most of them being in the (substantively misnomerly so-called) “Character of God” (COG) sect to likewise quite bold/flint-facedly, but sanctimoniously so of course, “guidingly” (ala. Ezek 34:19) engage in training and ingraining their constituents/classes/congregations/audiences to knowingly question and ignore what the word of God, and also the SOP, actually, clearly and substantiatedly says. That is also patently done with the direct revelations in the Bible and SOP.
            Prime example, the closet, half-COG-pregnant, pastor/preacher Jonathan Henderson, who, as emblematically s-amply documented around this posting (e.g., in regards to Hell) loves to wantonly/desperately try to arbitrarily, subjectively/fancifully reword and/or restate the Bible and SOP to most pointedly make it sound/seem that Bible people and writers, and also EGW many times just did not know what they were talking about, even, if now especially, when they claimed that God Himself said/revealed/did something, and were just expressing, even such direct revelation things according to their deficient and wrong view of God.
            A latest case in point/example from Henderson, in his 11-30-13 sermon (mp4) on Jonah, building upon his typical various slanderously fallacious claims about Bible people, including Jonah, Henderson, e.g., claims, and/or does, the following:

-[at ca. 22:19 & 22:58] explicitly, whimsically, calculatedly instills doubt as to whether or not God actually had sent a storm because of Jonah’s disobedience, whereas, as he actually knows, the Bible clearly says so (Jon 1:4);

-[at ca. 33:02] Jonah “sickly”, grossly misrepresented God by asking to be thrown into the sea in order to appease the storm, when that is actually exactly what God indeed wanted to be done (Jon 1:15) -and perhaps had Himself prophetically indicated this to Jonah (cf. Jon 2:3); If God had felt ‘defamatorily misrepresented’ here, as Henderson claims, then He surely would not, indeed had actually no need to for the subsequent great fish swallowing (Jon 1:17), have first increased that God-made storm when they were not heeding Jonah’s advice (Jon 1:13), and then caused it to, especially immediately, cease, moreover leading to the sailors fearing God (Jon 1:16);

-[at 33:34ff | Jon 1:13] The sailors, with Henderson, as he patently does, ad-libing his own erroneous, contra. Biblical dialoguing, had a better understanding of God and Jonah and thus knew that God did not want done what Jonah had “sickly” suggested, and innately knew that returning to land was the godly thing to do, -when the Bible clearly says in Jon 1:14 that they were actually scared to death to themselves do anything to harm this prophet of the Creator/Sea God, and even if God Himself was clearly angry at him;

-[at 08:53-09:44] as a prime example of Henderson’s subjective/bias/fanciful/fantasaical mindset, (and with his typical religio/pontifico, caricaturish-“vacuously waxing & pandering reverend” [which he hypocritically habitually likes to decryingly mock in his sermons [cf., at 19:54ff]]), “persuado-manipulatively” suggesting that: ‘he, between-the-verses, knows something that his congregation/audience just don’t/haven’t/couldn’t have known’), in formulating such fallacious theological and accounts claims, he says that he likes to think that Jonah “must have been one bad brother” for God to have sent him all alone on that mission to the ruthless Ninevites. Well (1) the Bible/SOP tandemly clearly state that Jonah fled, {and, as exegetically analyzed in here, most likely not “to Spain” as Henderson with others claim}, because he primarily feared for his life against the expected sure backlash from him making such claims against that city (PK 266.2|Jon 1:3) and (2) as the Bible amply demonstrates, with God (i.e, God willing), one person is an unstoppable and undestroyable posse, as that person is surrounded by an invisible company of angels, even, if/when physically necessary, ‘(tangible) angels who excel in strength.’
            Like with Jim Jones diabolical solution, these, even if comparatively/relatively small knowing divergings from what the Word of God actually says, are “cyanidely” sufficient enough to, quite literally/effectingly, taint the whole Flavor/Kool-Aid Punch. (Ezek 34:18-19)

            Indeed in his next week’s, 12-07-13 (mp4) [at 2:50-08:05ff] continuing sermon on Jonah, Jonathan Henderson smugly and pompously ups the ante and, merely non-literalistically said, pulls a Jim Jones here and defiantly “effectively” ‘flings the Bible like a football across the Church’. Firstly, out of his own mixture of selective and exegetical ignorance & pompous arrogance, and also pulling out his half-pregnant COG card, most, as stated above, as typical with him, “beyond-the-palely”, he wantonly claims that God, unlike pagan gods, is never behind any ‘adversarial/calamitous’ (a.k.a. “evil”) thing. Well the Bible is explicitly/didactively, versus merely descriptively, clear on that e.g., Isa 45:7 (see midway in here; cf. here); 1 Chr 21:7-17 (also exegetically discussed here|here); Num 16:31-35; the Egyptian (cf. here) and Revelation Plagues (cf. TM 432.1); etc. (None of these actions of God are “evil” as colloquially/commonly understood, just like a judge fairly and justly sentencing someone to capital punishment, nor the prison guards who carry out this sentence are “evil”). But for Henderson, such Biblical statements actually do not matter because he clearly also considers them as, as he goes on to yet again fallaciously claim in this sermon, the ‘bad theology that the Bible is full of, due to the ‘subjectivity, fickleness, temperament, and/or ignorance’ of Bible people/writers’, but he, like his other COG comrades think, LOL, -through actually their, at best, exegetical novicery/amateurism or grossly complete incompetence, to now know much more than what the Bible states.
            There of course are natural things/consequences which occur out of Satan’s (yet still God-allowed (see Job 1:10-12; 2:4-7)) doings and concoctions (Matt 13:28), but, (and this is indeed where such COG and COG-ish people just can no longer ‘psychologically compute’ here, and therefore, as Henderson does here, “sanctimoni-pompously chuck the Bible”, thus, like Jim Jones, making themselves the Final Theological Arbitrator, even Authority), God Himself also does many adversarial things out of various due, timely and/or exclusively mandated judgments which Satan surely won’t do and/or natural consequences are not pertinently or even merely strikingly present to/capable of do/doing.
            How typically completely, and calculatedly so, ambivalent for Henderson to also claim in this heretical diatribe, that ‘the Bible is full of bad theology...but, thankfully, God clear things up’...then it just is not: ‘full of any bad theology’, because if something is indeed mistakenly said, then God does clear it up. (e.g., Num 20:8-12; 2 Sam 7:4-7). Henderson cites Job’s sudden dark turn on God, which, as stated here, God does pointedly address (Job 38-40:2; 40:6-41:34)..yet God actually does not refute the accusations that Job made per se, but, generally, merely Job’s actually implied claim that ‘it was because God had no will/care/concern and/or power to do otherwise’* Henderson baseless spite with David has already been well-debunked for the Bible also therein does not “prescriptively” relate such actually inaccurate/sinful things, but at best merely “descriptively” relate them, thus not making them part of “theology”....and LOL, Peter’s false counsel to Jesus in Matt 16:22 never began to be, as Henderson claims, part of Biblical Theology...as Jesus promptly clarified (Matt 16:23).

* And God, for probably the same reasons that He did not tell Job even then why he had gone through all of this ordeal, here likewise does not tell Job why he actually allows such injustices, as also is the case today, to go on and, for now, go unpunished. There are indeed key GC reasons and limitations behind all of this, chief of which is that, as discussed here, God was actually always supposed to only allow sin to fully have its way upon this fallen planet, but He has judiciously, as per GC fairness restrictions, mercifully chosen to intervene, paramountly in “finally” (EW 149-153) letting Jesus Christ atone for the penalty of fallen Man.

            Relatedly as Henderson again vacuously bring these claims up: (1) blood defaultly, justly “satisfies” God’s justice for sinfully/criminally shed blood (e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Lev 24:17-18; Rev 16:5-7; cf. Gen 4:10|Matt 23:33-36)...and (2) God’s “vengeance” is actually not Calvary but the still to be fully executed Hell (e.g., Heb 10:26-31; Rev 14:9-11) and also the “post-Calvary” plans concealingly (Matt 13:10-17) related by Christ in Matt 22:6-7; Luke 21:20-22; cf. Mic 5:14-15)...Calvary was just an “olive branch” which is actually only “vengeance”-avertingly-beneficial to those who will have accepted it. (John 3:16-18).
            Also pertinent here, Henderson likes to claim, as David Gates also does, and which was debunkingly discussed here in this blog post, that ‘Jonah must have had a convincing physical sign that led the Ninevites to submit to God, and that this was either:

-Jonah being strikingly stained by the gastric acids of the fish; ---just not the Bible or SOP case...

-the Ninevites and/or their sailors must have seen Jonah being vomitted by the Great Fish; ---as any basic, pertinent, Bible map can show (e.g. SDABD (8) Map XII), Nineveh was located ca. 400 miles from the Mediterranean Sea.

-or according to Henderson baseless, fanciful and fictional =“air-headed” take: -the sailors who threw Jonah overboard “posted the miracle of the calming sea and swallowing fish on their Twitter account and the Ninevites, nay the entire then known world then, knew about it...---Well of course, Twitter did not exist then, and, moreover if as Henderson spuriously claims/believes, these sailors were heading to Spain, they, or the man-, even horse-, carried (as if it was that important), news just did not have time to either reach there before Jonah, who even after three days in the fish, would still, also being much closer to Nineveh then them, reach there first.

            The “convicting” truth here is that the feats of the God of Israel and His nation of ‘Egypt-empire-humbling-runaway-slaves’ were, though Israel was still greatly hated then, actually, due to all of those overturning feats, “greatly feared”, by all of those surrounding pagan nations and kingdom. So, as actually seen with both the sailors and then the Ninevites, just flashing the Israel of God passport’, or merely “dropping” the Creator/Powerful God of Israel’s name, was enough to most literally ‘put the fear of God (’s power) in those, especially sinful people, with them probably having an idea of the religious righteousness standards of that Israel of God nation. (As an example, it is in many ways like saying to people today that: one is an SDA... particularly if they are actually themselves striving to be Biblical (as the sailors, and most peoples then, in their own right, genuinely, “religiously’ aimed to be (Jon 1:5-6; cf. Acts 17:22-24ff)), and/or have seriously studied out the beliefs of SDAs.)
            Also important here is Henderson’s repeated spurious claim, as done here, that in Jon 2:3, Jonah falsely (= for Henderson “bad theology”), blamed God for throwing him overboard. Well, on top of the valid debunking contextualizing exegetical observations made there in response, at an also/added grammatical/syntactical exegetical level here, (a level that Henderson and other COG are just grossly and/or indifferently negligent in), succinctly said: (1) a Hebrew Hiphil verbal stem is used to say that ‘God cast Jonah’. That, as syntactically explained midway here, involves that God here acted through an agency. And defaultly here giving the Bible any benefit of the doubt, the non-contradictory understanding here can simply be that God did indeed, whether explicitly or merely out of the knowledge/awareness that the unfordable storm was indeed from God, that it was God’s will that the fleeing Jonah be cast into the water, ‘effectuated through the agency of these sailor’ and (2) significantly enough, the preposition “be” (=basically “in”) is not used to say “into the depth”, but rather the “min” preposition (=basically “basis of”), thus conveying the meaning which here combines the exegetical points of (1) & (2) here that, and as more detailedly substantiated over there, Jonah rightly perceived that God Himself intended for Jonah to pointedly be brought down to the very depths of the sea, instead of Jonah survivingly staying at the surface of the waters and making his way back to shore. And it was through the prepared fish that God effectuated that actual depth detour in order to first break Jonah’s opposing psyche (cf. Matt 10:28), at least as far as it was necessary to merely get him to go to Nineveh, (cf. Jon 4:1-4ff), before letting him fulfill his prophetic mandate.

            So when, actually, as far as I know/have seen/studied out, “IF ever” a didactic statement or passage in the Scripture is, and after exhaustively exegetically accurate translation and interpretation, (as e.g., done at the end here), is still “unsalvageably” seen to be in contradiction to established Biblical theology/teaching (e.g., the counsel of the mother of the pagan king Lemuel in Pro 30:6-7, -discussed in here vs. moronically licentious claims), then it is simply not considered as part of theology....But none of what Henderson and other COG’s patently cite as examples are part of this supposed “bad/erroneous theology” from Bible people....In fact, what is bad theology here is squarely their own take, claims and teachings from their own fallacious basis. Frankly I wouldn’t know what is worst: these pastors/preachers who, and that with impunity, wantonly, pompously claim such heretical things in various (SDA) pulpits and/or their audiences who sheepish just eat this up...were it but for the Ezek 34:1-22 prophetic (i.e., EW 36.2) revelation!!

            As with others who do such heretical teaching/teachers, (and why does it, from David Koresh, to Jim Jones to various SDA’s seem to especially be with the unscripted/extemporaneous ones, who moreover think that it is from God’s special “Spirit” gifting, clearly completely mal-construing/-applying Matt 10:19|Mar 13:11), such proclamatory misbehaving is all borne out of their own deficiency and/or indifference (and for some despite having a Theology diploma) to actual/proper Biblical exegesis, (cf. this sermon by Evangelical preacher John MacArthur), and combined with a psychologically skewed mindset and ‘growing up’ baggage about God and the Bible which they are now reactionarily, spuriously acting against and/or an unconsecrated, clingingly unsubmitted, outrightly egoistical and/or fantasaical mindset where they think that they have somehow self-qualified themselves to know more about God and the Bible than what God has actually revealed in the Bible and SOP. All the mentality and ingredients for the spawning of/for False Teachers, especially when fuelled by Conference overseers who turn a tacit blind eye and/or blocked ear to, especially “popularly” accepted people. [Notwithstanding, in here (04-27-13 sermon) [04:14-04:31] (mp3), the “strong encouragement” by a Local Conference President to Jonathan Henderson to ‘not preach heresy’...which Henderson said he would comply with merely for his payment’s, (-and not, in either potentiality, “actual Truth’s”), sake...case in point that, as typical of these charlatan & “mercenaristic” preachers, Henderson does prefer to express his “private”/subjective views, rather than presenting/expounding what the Bible actually says.] Talk about, as is the main theme of Henderson sermon here, all of these, thus false, shepherds: ‘Jonah-like running away from what God had called them to (professionally/ably) be doing’....No wonder they will all deservingly, duly be adjudged and replaced (Ezek 34:20-22, 23-24ff; as delineated here)...
            Funny thing is that such waywardness will actually be futilely excused and justified as “pastors having busy schedules and thus do not have time to fully study out things, to avoid making such errors. Well (1) clearly that is not the case as they could, and in most cases did, read what the Bible and SOP actually, clearly say, and (2) all of this foundationally is the natural fruit of the SDA Church’s Capitalistic, Individualistic, “Lone Ranger” modus operandi which all results in this cacophony of various dissonant trumpets. (=Pro 21:2; 12:15; Jdg 17:6; 21:25). An ordered/systematic cooperational approach would long have been providing that “rest” that these leaders/preachers are otherwise, idolatrously, capitalistically/individually striving for, and deludedly, fatally thinking that they have reached. (Deut 12:8-9; Heb 4:3-5, 6-7, 8-13 (=here)).


(9) ‘Choose Your Death[#6 01:30:36-01:40-43ff] - In his final presentation in this series, David Gates openly expresses his many ongoing trials and fears in the light of several of his major projects being in trouble of ‘not only failing, but completely disappearing due to financial support shortages, and not only that but him/his ministry being contractually penalized 10X|20X what they owe’. Evidently this is where is here [21:04ff] and here [01:04-04:57] related: ‘pending debtor’s prison sentence’ issue in Bolivia is involved. (Updated on 03-19-14 here [01:14-03:10])
            As I have been saying throughout this blog post, in fact in was the chief Biblically observed thesis for ever writing this blog post, then in regards to Gates’ then (in a couple of months by November 2009), winding down “Lazarus Experience”, I do not doubt at all that God has called and certainly blessed David Gates in all of these efforts, and as Gates says, that he has indeed done the right thing in faithfully and sacrificially obeying God. But, “naturally”, unlike what his Biblical/Theological knowledge and experience (cf. 1SM 25.4) can allow him to see/perceive/understand, God has, like he has indeed done with all of the ca. 6 other contemporary “half-prophets” that he has raised in these times, has candidly tested what was in the hearts of SDA, and even by raising a prophet that was according to the various things which were in their hearts (=Ezek 14:1-9), including through David Gates, someone who would address their money and material worshipfulness and lead them to think believe that these gods which they tacitly claimed was preventing them from Fully doing and finishing God’s work, would be fully taken care of....Although that would only become the case through a warranting, Divine-intervention, absolute necessity, (i.e., all SDA members truly believe Gates’ message, and selling off all their possession to immediately get involve and fund missions work, then would got, through that manifested faith, be fully warranted to intervene to help them out if ever they would come into financial/subsistence hardship, with him then indeed have the right to ‘procure funds from heathens’, by overwhelmingly convincing force if necessary, just as Gates had been preaching. But the Church as a vast majority whole just did not begin to respond to that call, and with them (mindlessly/vacuously, mantrally) claiming that they strongly believe that “Jesus is coming very soon”, they just have no excuse. (cf. John 9:41),
            The Theological fact is that, just as it occurred with Abraham (Gen 22:12), as stated in the SOP within EW 57.1; (cf EW 48.2-50.2ff), had the Church responded to Gates message, which literally has by now reached to every, especially western/westernized, part of the Global SDA Church, and the vast majority of such capable members began sacrificially endeavor to participate and contribute to such missions work, that ‘such a sacrifice would not increase, but decrease and be consumed’. As with Abraham God just wanted to candidly and necessarily/realistically see if they truly believed him with all of their hearts. But clearly, despite many sanctimonious and pompous professions, they just do not.
            What Gates and his, now relegatedly mainly, object-lesson experience, has shown, is that the abominable/capitalsins in Ezek 8, discussed here, still reigns supreme in the SDA Church. Starting with the God-replacing, most cherished idolatrous sin of “zealous jealousy” at the Northern (=Israel Expansion) Gate (Ezek 8:5-6), a first/chief abominable sin which leads into the “validating/rationalizing” of all of the others (Ezek 8:7-13, 14-15, 16-17ff). Case in point, I was going through the progamming of Gates’ New Zealand TV network and as, (as far as I saw), all of these programs, except for Gates’ “Moments of Peace”, were produced by other SDA Media Centers, TV Networks and ministries, and with e.g., 3ABN and Hope Channel already having a Full Global Satellite footprint then why, but for “zealously jealous” denominational rivalry are not these SDA organization and people just working together to effectuate this global broadcasting, of, again, virtually, especially with Gates/GMI and 3ABN, the exact same programming instead of this Satanic Capitalistic, literally cut-throat competitioning approach!??? Frankly David Gates should focus his ministry on building up terrestrial broadcast stations, especially in poor countries and communities to (“repeaterly”) make available the mainly satellite broadcast/programming of 3ABN, Hope Channel, and that translationally in the local languages. Really the only issue of difference between those broadcasting efforts is what order the (same) programming is broadcast!! I can easily Biblically see that Gates has completely misconstrued the miracle of his first TV network, which was the first Spanish speaking SDA network. It certainly was not so that he would engage in competing against other networks, especially by broadcasting the exact same programs and, by now, in the same already covered languages, and the same covered countries.
            SDA indeed have this patent “zealous-jealous” competitive mentality where if God does bless them to accomplish something, then they naturally pervert that blessing according to their innate and natural selfish disposition. Instead, God does call and bless various people, but, as I have seen in my Biblical research endeavors, that merely for complimentary purposes, i.e., to further something that someone else had been led to start, and not to, as being done here, reinvent the wheel and quite wastefully start from scratch. So e.g., God did, also through faith, lead Danny Shelton to establish the First SDA TV Network, then what God clearly had in mind in leading Gates through the First SDA Spanish Network miracle was to expand that then only English broadcasting into other languages, and also in terrestrial stations in needy countries, then when the GC finally woke up and Hope Channel idea came along, their contribution to these already, most evidently, God-started endeavors, would have been to compliment them by facilitating their global outreach, and even if merely by validating them both by fully endorsing and adopting  them as the official SDA Broadcasting medium. But no....they had to go and develop their own thing, and of course likewise repeat many of the same programming. And while these people will surely argue that many different networks allows for more different/original programming, the fact is, as seen in capitalism, that not only a waste produce, by this dilution of resources also hampers focused progress. The whole worshipful competitive model here is a colossal waste. One united network would have done much more to fully advance this broadcasting effort by (1) making it available throughout the world, in local languages, with localized programming, and available for reception through, especially ground or cable broadcasting.
            And though it is, as in Capitalism, Gates efforts, being the smaller one, which may suffer the most loss (with other SDA larger networks refusing to heed the indication of God’s blessing of Gates efforts and fully helping him out, e.g., by properly incorporating what he is trying to do in their own work, and under his then broadcasting division leadership (i.e., a (Terrestrial) TV for Urban and Mission Fields division), these other larger networks will still suffer loss from this non-aiding. E.g, 3ABN will not be able to properly accomplish its mandate of “reaching the world”, and the GC, which operates Hope Channel, will thus just contribute to the Work of the Church not being Finish. They will indeed all get their deserved reward.
           
            In regards to all of this, and the pending great failings of his work and projects, David Gates has said [#6 - 01:36:58ff] that he will deliberately continue to maintain a serene attitude, and that is what he should indeed do because he clearly does not know more, nor have a different Divine mandate, and thus must act according to his own “faith” (Rom 14:23b), but for me, having, as related in here, experienced similar Ezek 8 hamperings from the SDA Church in regards to properly doing God’s work, I must be faithful to act according to what I have been Divinely mandated (=Isa 6:8-13), however (naturally) unpleasant; and work according to all of what I have since then come to know, including about the, by now fully deserved judgement (cf. EW 48.2-50.2's Shaking resolution), and its totally dooming fate (see LDE 59-62) of this smugly/complacently failing SDA Church. (=Isa 63:1-6). For me to (self-preservingly) do any other, even water-down the warning of that promised judgement (cf. Matt 23:33-38) would, not merely ‘violate Biblically-anchored conscience’, but would itself disobediently (Acts 5:20, 29, 30, 32) become sin (cf. Isa 6:5-7ff|Dan 12:15-19|Jer 1:9-10)!!


(10) ‘Being Sealed is more important than doing Mission Works’ [#6 - 01:22:43-01:23:45ff] - Here David Gates quite oddly claims that God’s (supposed) people being sealed in much more important for them then doing missions work. Well David Gates has just straightly gone from anything respectable to an active “False Shepherd” (Ezek 34) agent of Satan in so whimsically misleading people. Clearly he, as, as copiously documented in this blog post, he is egoistically prone to do, is just “reverse theologizing” things here and so, as discussed above in #9, his missions and evangelism projects are in great peril of completely failing and vanishing, then he is presumptively assuming that God must not care about missions. So him preachingly going around, as he unobstructedly copious does, to “tell people that God is sealing His people” must then be what God Himself cares about. Gates retells in this series how he got vehemently indignant at someone who was blaming God for the injustices and senseless suffering and death that exist in the world, telling that person that the fault is because they themselves are not doing anything to right those wrongs, and not because God is not willing, well here, “right back at you David Gates”. Your missions projects are failing because other SDAs who can help them work are for various selfish/competitive/indifferent reasons, not supporting them. And him now telling people that it must be that God much rather prefers sealing people rather than helping people in need is just outrightly blasphemous. And such Pharisaical (Matt 5:20) self-vindicating complacent false- and self- righteousness is just the lullaby that Laodicea needs to hear. Gates is certainly not telling them that God is sealing his people, he, and also with his mantra mere repetitious sermons, is just putting them into a now comatose sleep. Seriously: What the HELL?!!!?? Contrary to what Gates now wildly, hellishly preaches, God does not need a final generation which does not care about helping others in need, for not doing that is itself THE most capital of sins (i.e, Matt 25:31-46). The last testimony that God needs from His people is ‘a demonstrative revelation of His character of Love’ (COL 415.3-417.4ff)...a character that would choose to sacrifice themselves for the life/salvation good of other then to remain in their sinless state and perfect/comfortable atmosphere. (cf. COL 69.1). Quite no brainerly enough, God’s people can only be sealed, i.e., with His Isa 58 Sabbatical seal, if they are doing such missions work, as fully entailed in the ‘perfection of character’ specifications given in e.g., LDE 221.1-222.1.
            It is also then transparently sequiturly quite indicative that David Gates has all along been doing all of these works for the wrong (=selfish) motive (as stated in LDE 219.2-3), clearly which was mere to appear to other SDA’s as “God’s SDA Man of Faith”. Quite ironic that through his patent messages which revolve around either Theologically fallacious/deficient claims or factually fantasaical purportions, the last thing that David Gates is even remotely contributing towards is the ‘intellectual/concrete sealing of God’s people’ (LDE 219.4). In fact with this sudden turn into more subjective, heretical teachings/claims from him, he is just, and that quite deservingly, binding up “stumbling block and lawless” unrighteous SDA tares (=COL 70-75), indeed by the wholesale bushelload, into bundles to be burned in Hell’s fire. (E.g., Matt 13:40-42; 25:45, 46; cf. Matt 7:21-23), and thus accomplishing that part of the (Biblical) “Shaking” (EW 270.1-271.2ff = Matt 13:43).
            Indeed, as related mentioned above in #9, all that Gates is doing in any relation to the Ezek 9 Sealing-Shaking, is doing his part as one of the six summoned men, which theological studying shows are the present contemporary 6 main SDA “half-prophets” who, by sharing what God has led to either prophetically see and/or Biblically do (=their destroying/shattering weapon in their hand (Ezek 9:1-2)), are inherently variously causing the destruction of SDA member, by the candid testing of their profession, which, due to their actual concretely and informedly manifested indifference to heed God’s Truth and do His Will, have thus torn down that pretentious facade of righteousness that they had (=Matt 22:1-14) and testingly revealed/ascertained what had really been in their heart. That is all in accord with what Jesus Himself did (John 15:24-25; 9:41) and thus warranted the “day of vengeance” (Luke 21:22 = Isa 61:2, 63:4) which should befall such unrepentant, pretentiously hypocritical, unloving people. (Matt 23:29-38), ironically enough by variously also “killing” even those, deliberately at best “half-prophets”, who nonetheless were also ‘according to their heart idols’, which God had sent them. (Ezek 14:1-9). 

(11) Gates “Understands” Rebellious Israel [#6 - 01:32:49ff] - Speaking of “What the Hell!??!”, David Gates, while speaking of the total failure perils at which many of his projects are at now, says that ‘he now perfectly understands why Israel complained/rebelled in the wilderness [which as “10 times” (Num 14:22)] when they would come up against yet another obstacle as they were being obedient to God in leaving Egypt towards the promise land’. Well, succinctly said, he must be more omniscient than God, because God certain did not understand any of those faithless, post-plagues/Exodus miracles, murmurings/rebellions, and in fact longsufferingly and/or wrathfully loathed each one, to the point of wanting to destroy all of that rebelling assembly, namely after their, significantly enough, 7th and 10th debacle (Exod 32:9-10; Num 14:11-13)!!
            David Gates’ problem all stems from his insistently deficient and erroneous theology where he thinks that God does things for people that they can do themselves. As already discussed and debunked in this post, David Gates’ expects God to take money from heathens to pay for his projects, while all of his fundings thus far have come from SDA’s. God is indeed  waiting for Gates’ fellow SDA’s to do their part in funding God’s work. It would be quite hypocritical for God to punish heathens but overlook SDA’s who are guilty of the same sins of covetousness, greed, indifference, materialism and selfishness.
            The problems of Gates here are indeed is pointedly due to the non-support of SDA’s. And it is quite telling that Gates keeps explicitly preaching that heathens need to lose their money, but he most deliberately and manipulatively never makes any explicit or direct appeal to any of the copious number of worldwide SDA audiences that he preaches to. He clearly expects that it will be God’s Spirit which will/should convict any of those people financially contribute to his projects. But even Jesus himself would clearly call people to “Follow Him”...But as Gates has no problem at all calling those people in SDA audiences to join missions work, even his own, it clearly is an issue of pride, evidently “wounded pride” from his earlier rejection experiences with his first major (TV Network) project, that prevents him from making a similar direct appeal for financial help. In fact, Gates manifestly excusingly thinks that his typical average/non-rich SDA audience should not have to make such, even if sacrificial, financial contribution..but the “rich” ones certainly must.
            Unlike Elijah who faithlessly failed like his fathers when faced with a sudden adversity (1 Kgs 19:4), (and, quite tellingly in itself, Elijah would have been a much better example for Gates to “understand” rather those rebellious Israelite congregation), Gates, again through faulty theology, cannot see that the root of the problem is with a rebellious, likewise ‘indifferently lukewarm’ (=1 Kgs 18:21|Rev 3:16-17) people, -which Gates has no problem at all cajoling, with, by now his mantrally-repeated, effectively bedtime stories, already drowsy “moronic virgins” (Matt 25:1-13).

            There is much more that can be said here in relation to Gates’ fallacious views and conclusion, moreover how he has by now clearly again veered of any Biblical course in regards to theological teachings (pointedly that ‘sealing SDA’s is more important than mission’), but why bother...Like SDA’s, Gates can only learn his lessons the hard way.


September 2015 - Pope's U.S. Visit & ‘Seasons-Setting'
            Just by video a recent video (see also shortly priorly here; and his wider expounding here[01:35:15ff]+chart) of David Gates ascribing to the various speculations & theories (cf. a debunking response here from Walter Veith) about how Pope Francis’s visit to the United States in Sept 2015, and pointedly, his address to a joint session of Congress on Thursday Sept 24 were to be prophetically significant because it coincided with the Jewish Day of Yom Kippur and other Jewish Jubilee&Ceremonial like dates/times, it is evident that David Gates has not at all toned down his prior erroneous dates/times/seasons settings because he understood the counter-Bible+Spirit of Prophecy error of his ways, as exposed/documented and discussed at the beginning of this post, but only because “he got caught”. So now, despite his prior trail of errors, when he thinks he has another reason to calim that some set prophetic date/time will likely transpire here, he again resumes this fallacious, and actually proscribe, attempt to understand and apply eschatological prophecies.
            Most comical is Gates trying to claim that his prior easily pre-debunked and post-disproven 2010 claim that ‘God was operating on a “Joseph Prophecy” involving 7 year periods since September 11, 2001 was still right on track with this upcoming Papal event in September 2015.
            The most dangerous element in David Gates claims is, beyond merely the erroneous dating and thus false and disappointing “wolf crying” expectations, is that he always endeavors again to try to ignore what the Bible+SOP have clearly said about final events in the time after 1844, which is, as discussed earlier, there will be no prophecy based upon set times after 1844. Indeed here David Gates heretically tries to use the precise fulfillment of the 2300 days on October 22, 1844 (but, as discussed within this post, actually firstly fulfilled on October 13, 1844 at the Feast of Trumpets), to serve as his Theological&Exegetical basis for his misleading claim that: ‘this shows that God will be doing things now according to set Sanctuary Calender seasons, as in this Papal Address to Congress on Yom Kippur. But the Bible+SOP Truth is that those October 1844 fulfillments were the very last two according to any sort of timed fulfillment for Bible Prophecies being the end of the Historical Prophetic Era and giving way to the untimed Eschatological/Time of the End Era. Which is why God has to make a special revelation in that Time of the End in regards to a set time in order to give “the day and hour” of Christ Coming to His enduringly faithful ones (LDE 272.1-273.1).
            The succinctly explain what is really going on here, God is merely sending “strong delusions” to also SDAs in order to fasten them in their long embarked on much preferred bifurcation of Full-Righteousness slighting ways (=2 Thess 2:12), the same type of course which had fastened the Righteousness-deficient religious leaders and people in Christ’s day (Matt 5:20), to the point where they could not see nor understand any Scriptural thing (=Isa 29:10-14) beyond their rotely/“tutoringly” given (Gal 3:23-25), mere, now long supercedingly surpassed, Letter of the Law, Mark of the Beast, applications and implications (cf. 2 Cor 3:7-11, 14-16).
            Quite telling that SDA who glibly claim to believe such “signs” (Matt 16:4), as being signs that “Jesus is coming very soon”, still are not doing anything different in/with their lives in regards to endeavoring to Finish the Work. So thus God has also candidly demonstrated that they are actually not true believers in what they are professing. Contrary also to Gates’ claim of a future later judgement on the living, -again also according to his/SDA “Letter of the Law” understanding, by such candid means, the Heavenly Intelligence is actually continuing to effectuate the proofing judgements of SDAs, which, as stated in the SOP, would actually be first done on them without their explicit knowledge of it. And they are naturally, atrociously failing this (Rev 13) MOB-Testing.
            And what God is also doing with these permitted, seemingly timely/prophesied actions is coalescing the actual Eschatological Developments of Bible Prophecies when even the rankest of heathens and pagans (e.g. here[01:02-14:24ff]) will gladly sing the praises of the also “anti-fundamentalists” (thus also anti-Bible) Papacy/RCC (See more here). -(And it is telling that Roman Catholics are actually Bible Fundamentalist/literalist where they should not at all be: in regards to End-Time Bible Prophecies. Whatever doesn’t expose them to be the Anti-Christ&Man of Sin of course...)

            All this, by various but same-sided True Righteousness deficient and opposing factions, in order to futilely try to oppose (=Rev 17:14; 19:11) what God has actually long-been (typologically) orchestrating in order to accomplish His (True) Temporal Jubilee, Last Saving Chance, Millennium Era.



Australia Series (Nov/Dec) 2015
            In this 6-part sermon series, David Gates, (who nowadays rarely goes on speaking tours, -because he frankly says ‘it is too tiring’ (but I would say, he has lost the all-overriding adrenaline)), makes various patent presentations on his ministry’s main theme and mission as well as give various missions works and incidents updates. All in all, to me, it would indeed be glibly generous to say that David Gates has changed from his prior ways, because he repeatedly flashes indications that he is just one exploitable event away from relapsing into not merely ‘sure Final Event’ claiming, -which I actually do not thematically have an issue with, but with hitching some degree of definite time element to it...as if God’s voice spoke the ‘day and hour of Christ’s Coming’ to him. (LDE 272.2)
            But in that series, while most of what David Gates said was not objectionable, and does need to be heard, and heeded already, by Laodiceans/SDAs, Gates did makes several claims which are actually generally detrimental to his overall message(s). I’ll succinctly cite and debunk them here:

            First of all, I actually found it quite odd that David Gates said he was nervous about this, probably lone, speaking engagement that he took for this Australia series because ‘for a long time, he had no idea what he was going to speak about’....Seriously....there are ca. 1200 chapters in the Bible, not to mention the SOP, that you can speak about...Doesn’t the average pastor preach from the Bible& SOP week in, and week out. But that is pointedly the issue/problem with David Gates. He’ll almost proudly tout that ‘he is not a theologian’, and that what he mainly does is tell mission stories....-(and obviously these miraculous mission stories have been greatly far and few between for him and his ministry for a while now)...and that is because faith in God is not to be based on mainly, or only, “signs and wonders/miracle”, but on “every Word that has proceeded from the mouth of God” (Matt 4:4). So it would behoove David Gates and his ministry, to learn to anchor his messages on the revealed Word and Prophecies of God. And that involves him endeavoring to become capable of “rightly dividing the word of Truth”.
            Case in point, he anecdotally, i.e. versus exegetically/theologically, claims that the riders on the Four Horsemen of Rev 6 (perhaps apart from the first), are all the work of Satan. Well that of course may surfacely seem plausible, but it does not exegetically check out. God/Jesus does at times take the reigns of his Church/People in order to Himself execute (remedial) judgements on them and/or on the World (E.g. Rev 3:3; Rev 2:16 [~Rev 6:4]; Rev 2:17 [Rev 6:5-6]; Rev 2:5 [Rev 6:8]; ).It is only when these merciful judgements from God didn’t work that God then, e.g. from the Fifth Series/Trumpet Era on, began to, -as the Church now had united with the Paganistic world, turn over this work of judgement (=Rev 3:3) to foreign entities/“horsemen” (Rev 9:7-10; 13-17), this time headed by Satan (Rev 9:11)...And to this day for this defiantly/pompously persisting drunken Babylon.)
            So that example was perfectly representative to me of how David Gates is significantly deficient in the proper exposition of the Word of God, and that in turn results in many faulty claims, conclusions, even actions, by him. It is also further indicative that David Gates relies more on “experiences” to form his theology and faith rather than sound principles and concrete Truth. Of course that is categorically contrary to what the Bible strongly recommends (e.g. Deut 13:1-5; Isa 8:20).

            Then, and despite having just seen that there was absolutely nothing to it, David Gates reprises and continues his time-setting claims which had revolved around, as discussed above, something significant with Pope Francis visiting the U.S. and speaking to Congress in the Fall Season, and around the Jewish Day of Atonement....So manifestly according to Gates’ theology...Final Events can only occur, or begin to occur in the Fall Season, including the Return of Christ. Such a “set time/season” view has already been debunked above, but I’ll here succinctly restate that since October 22, 1844, the Great Controversy has entered into its “Fall Season” theologically/prophetically known as the “Time of the End”. And also now, given the failure of the SDA Church, this Era has (necessarily) continued to become much more grander and glorious than they know and understand. (=15MR 292.3-4)...So SDAs should get acquainted with the judgement of God that they and their preferred/indifferent/slothful “fluff and deficient exegesis and theology and practices” generation will just continue to wander in circle and then die, especially Spiritually so (cf. 1 Cor 2:6-16), in their wilderness....
            ...But of course, David Gates’ rebuttal would be: ‘that is not possible...because the second time around, God’ people went into the Promise Land’...As if: (a) God forced them then to do so, (i.e. without pivotally involving their faith and obedience), and (b) the grown/adult generation that had failed God, -and misled the (trusting) younger generation didn’t all first die off in that wilderness [except for two actually faithful ones] (cf. Rev 11:13)...but don’t let those critical factors get in the way of a “great timed setting”....


-...Oh yeah, one more thing: I haven’t seen any evidence for David Gates’ claim during this series that: ‘the Vatican has purchased the television broadcast rights for the Second Coming of Christ’....(and from who exactly???)



References & Notes
[1] This post was begun after over 70 (now 450+) heard/viewed audio and video messages of David Gates. For the sake of the would be necessary extra time and considerable effort to pointedly relocate references, specific references for factual statements made, or alluded to, from these media resources are not always explicitly given. This would require that most, if not all, of these media resources, ca. 100+ hours, which were listened to periodically over the last few years, be all re-listened to now, at once. However this is not practically feasible now. If however one should come across something that is known to be factually incorrect or inexact, please bring it to my attention (via email - See in Profile). As much as possible do cite the specific reference where this correction can be verified.
            (Just for the record: I had first repeatedly contacted David Gates privately in regards to many of the comments made in this blog, particularly his SOP-disregarding time-setting waywardness. When he, not only ignored to respond to or heed these messages, (and there was (cyber) evidence that he did receive and open them) and also when I saw on the internet that others had also spoken to, and/or reproved him, either privately and/or (then) publicly (e.g., blogs, forums), I then expanded and posted my own messages, and this resulting and therefore just-ified commentary. All of this is indeed in the true Biblical and SOP spirit, e.g., even to the letter of Christ’s mandate in Matt 18:15-17.)
            
[2] It is interesting to hear Gates retell the story of this miracle as it was developing. It is seen that it was indeed a great faith odyssey for him. See e.g. this ca. July/August 2002 sermon [45:07-01:16:00] - a few months after a $1.4 million unfunded check was given to the sellers in surety of a future payment, which came some 19 months later; this November 2002 sermon [29:21-54:13] - about a month after the still unpaid TV Station went on the air (as a form of “advertising” in order to generate interest for financial support and donations; -with, as related in the 01-13-2006 sermon here|here (mp3) [53:51-55:52], the distinct satellite transponder fees of, settledly, $12,000/month paid by a broadcasting deal through a Satellite Uplink Service Direct Sales Representative for Latin America who, as he, (as they say): “serendipitously”, found out towards the very end of discussions, was an SDA); also see this April 10, 2004 (Spring ASI) sermon (and also this August 2004 one) given a little while after the TV Network was finally paid in full in late December 2003. (A full weekend (video) series from April 23-24, 2004 is posted here.). (See also the Red Advenir network (Spanish) archive for Gates). (For, not actually surprisingly of Gates, more (realistically) accurate (i.e. vs. Gates’ clearly “Evangelistic” sermonic version),* and even, (un-“Gateistically”), more truthful, and also additional, very interesting, details and story+(related) stories of this Bolivia Network miracle, see the written account in the book Mission Miracles [PDF] pp. 41-64; 75b-77a; 80-91; 100-108).

[3] Said in sermon: AYC - School of the Prophets IV - Unlimited Resources (Other Link) [58:10ff]. Using an inflation calculator, this $1.5 million in 2003 equate ca. $77,000 back in (i.e., as applicably far back as) 1844 dollars.
            As Gates further relates, obtaining the funds for the $1.5 million was a battle in itself as they had to then fight against an absolutely incensed accountant of the funds’ donor who even sought to take control of the funds claiming the donor, a still practicing, though then 87 years old, surgeon (and retired missionary), to be mentally incompetent. (See Restoring the Years - 3. Secrets of Spiritual Conquest [24:12ff]).

[4] Sermon: Restoring the Years - Sermon #1 [40:57ff--53:55ff--55:18ff–57:00ff–58:58ff--1:10:13ff]

[5] In this (for Dec. 25) 2004 presentation [32:36ff] (Youtube clip) (mp3) on this Daniel Sabbath School Lesson: Time of the End (or The End of Time), (and reassertively sustained as ‘a non-disproved possibility’(?!?) with, Biblical-Truth speaking, spurious and sly disclaimers, in this (for Dec. 11) 2010 SS Lesson [21:20ff] (video);* as well as, LOL, “‘dreamishly’”, -as if that proved anything (~Ezek 13:1-10ff), in this Nov. 23, 2013 sermon [03:31-08:08-09:43] (mp3 {+15sec} =Isa 30:9-10), Doug Batchelor tries to advanced the theory that, not only do the predictions in Daniel 12 have an eschatological application, (an exegetically quite self-evident truth that not too many SDA’s will deny), but that any time elements in these predictions, namely the 1260, 1290 and 1335 days, will also be fulfilled literally in their eschatological fulfillment. Such a “timed event” belief would in spirit go against this SOP statements and others against also attaching definite time to eschatological fulfillments, especially as the 1260, 1290 and 1335 days mentioned there have found a full, and specific, fulfillment in Church History. Still Doug Batchelor tries, and that, as usual with him when challenged by/confronted with difficult passages, and even contradicting evidence, with shrewd diversionary, hoodwinking, old-days NYC con-artistry, tactics. Many such examples of this could easily be cited from his attempted defense of his theory here, but for the sake of time, these false “reasonings” will be succinctly addressed here.
            First of all, he argues against this plain statement in 1MR 100 and tries to suggests that this was only a reference to the prophetic time of the 2300 days. If this was the case, then EGW subsequent qualifying words: “the longest reckoning...” would make absolutely no sense as it would be completely unnecessary. She would instead have simply said: ‘Its (i.e., this 2300-day prophecy) reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844.’ The fact that she has to qualify that statement with “the longest” indicates that many other time prophecies could have also been understood as the specific reference here. By saying “the longest” she then narrowed it down here, from a pool of all other time prophecies, to only the time of the 2300 days. Also it was indeed during the “time period” of the Great Second Advent Movement during 1842-1844, that a great ‘tracing of prophetic time’ was done. Interestingly they, (the 1260, 1290, 1335 days) all culminated in this historical time period. So EGW’s mention of “prophetic time” is a collective reference to all time prophecies extending to the “Time of the End”. (See also my comments in  this forum thread post for more debunking of this “Second Coming Time only” view). (See also my comments in this forum thread post, and also this one, for more debunking of this “Second Coming Time only” view).
            Then Doug Batchelor cites that in the 1850 statement of Ellen White to a Brother Hewit that she said that one of the errors of this brother was that he preached that the 1335 days were in the past. Her exact statement was : “We told him [Hewit] of some of his errors in the past, that the 1335 days were ended and numerous errors of his. It had but little effect.” (6MR 251). While it may be argued, as Batchelor has done that she was listing here an error of Hewit, it can easily also be seen that this statement could also be saying that ‘contrary to what Hewit preached, the 1335 days were already ended’ i.e, in 1843. Linguistically, an applicable, simple distributive reading of this compound statement clearly reveals what she meant. She would then have pertinently said here that: ‘We told him [Hewit]~that the 1335 days were ended.’ However her precise meaning can also easily be understood when her other expressed views on the 1335 days (as above) are duly also taken into consideration. Nowhere does she ever contradict or object to any expositor who believed that the 1335 days had ended in either 1843 or 1844. So then how can she be saying here in 1850 that one of Hewit’s errors was that he believed that the these 1335 days had already ended??? Only the contrary makes perfect sense. (Cf. this BRI article).
            It can be observed in the video that Batchelor actually realized that what he was about to advanced could easily be read, and understood in this other way, yet, as typical of him, he pulls a “fast one” here, and obstinately continues with his view. He then tries to corroborate this view with two, actually, exegetically completely, non-relevant citations from the SOP. Namely: (1) that GC 640.2 which speaks of ‘the voice of God declaring the day and hour of Jesus’ coming’ is thus a ‘timed, future prophecy’; (2) a statement in a letter that ‘Daniel 12 must be studied because it contains a warning that must be understood before the time of the end.’ (Letter to Daniells and Prescot, July 30, 1903).
The reference in (1) is actually not a “prophecy” per se, but simple a “statement of fact.” It actually fulfills Christ statement in Matt 24:36 [and it seems to have been only concretely set only after all other prophetic events have been fulfilled, thus leading to the sure, irreversible consummation of this fallen world history. (Cf. this blog post for the basis of this view)]. Obviously, in (2), Doug Batchelor wrongly assumes/believes that the phrase ‘time of the end’ must have only one technical meaning/understanding, so if it is stated to refer to a time period after 1844, then this must mean that the eschatological “Time of the End” did not begin in 1844. An erroneous generalization.
            Conclusion: Both Gates and Batchelor have no conclusive Biblical or SOP support for a theory that any eschatological prophecy that mentions a time period must also have a literal and definite time-involved/dependent fulfilment. Batchelor self-proclaimed “meat of the word” view here is actually completely “meatless.” Furthermore, trying, as Batchelor does [40:31], to delineate precisely how long end time events such as the ‘Little time of Trouble’, the ‘Great Time of Trouble’ and the ‘7 Last Plagues’ will last, by basing this on the 1260, 1290 and 1335 days respectively, completely goes against God’s necessary endtime purposes of testing the genuineness of the Remnant’s Belief and Faith. This would also mean that, as the misconstrued, quoted statement by Batchelor in GC 640.2 is made in the context of the “Deliverance of the Saints”, following their “Great Time of Trouble” (cf. LDE 272-274) then Batchelor, with his precise, ‘1335 literal days from the passing of Sunday Laws to the end’ reckoning and chart would know the precise time when the Second Coming would occur long before (i.e., ca. 3 years and 8 months) before the voice of God actually states it. Furthermore, in today’s C-Span type age where legislative proceedings are televised and Presidential signing of Bills into Laws are well “mediatized,” and that Live, it is possible to know, much more prominently than in, e.g., EGW’s days, exactly when a law was/is officially passed. So, based on Batchelor’s emphasized precision in his view, he would also know ca. 4 years before, the exact hour (if not also the minute and second), when Jesus’s Coming in the cloud will occur. So Jesus should really have instead said: ‘No one knows the day nor the hour except Doug Batchelor and (or then?) God the Father.’!?!

*Doug Batchelor is here reasserting his belief that his priorly presented view possibly could have a fulfillment based on time. As his prior view has been completely debunked, as done in the statements above, and he manifestly is aware of this, then this reassertion, which now lacks any semblance of any SOP or Biblical support, is self-evidently solely being propped up by his indifferent pride. Indeed with his “mere possibility” defence, and that with a (now, through insistence, moronically) infantile: “you can’t disprove it” argument, one can claim absolutely anything, like, e.g., Cro-magnon, the Secret Rapture or even Unicorns!!! Rather than merely seeking to present enchanting, and his patented, “truth duds”, all borne solely out of private opinions and conjured up possibilities, Doug Batchelor should instead engage in concretely proving what he teaches and believes. But as they say, ignorance is bliss, and evidently, also quite popular!

[6] This may also be the reason why this time period is not stated in an encrypted way (6X - Rev 20:2-7) as there then would not be any more reason to do so (cf. vss. 1-3).

[7] Said in e.g., sermon: AYC - School of the Prophets IV - 6. Special Forces (Other Link) [38:04ff]. Some have said that David Gates’ prediction of economic collapse came true with the Financial Crisis manifested in August 2008 however, not only is that factually not the case, i.e., the world did not come to an end then, that crisis was actually rectified by the very means which David Gates had based his total collapse prediction upon, namely, the U.S. printing more money, and that in the hundreds of billion! In addition to that it was also China that helped the U.S. to survive this crisis by lending it more money. According to Gates’ theory, China is so completely dependent on the U.S. for economic viability, that any economic crisis involving the U.S. would surely also bring down China, and then others, like a house of cards.
            As (1) I have finally uncovered the source of David Gates’ economic predictions which he (finally) explicitly documents/cites in this October 26, 2008 sermon (Part 3) [in Australia] at [18:18-21:06ff], as the econo-politico “think tank” LEAP/E2020 (European Laboratory of Political Anticipation) in its monthly bulletins known as GEAB (Global Economic Anticipation Bulletin), and (2) the pertinent bulletins, here namely GEAB No.22 (February 16, 2008), No.23 (March 16, 2008) and No.24 (April 16, 2008) which indeed did “anticipate” an economic crisis starting in specifically September of 2008, had incorporated the detrimental effects of the already great losses incurred by the underlying toxic assets of the sub prime bubble (a.k.a. an overvaluation of assets), which had “burst” back in 2006, I have retracted from this post the previous observations that ‘David Gates’ prediction of an economic collapse in the fall of 2008 had been based upon the wrong causal event.’ This correction however has led to discover the actual root cause problem of David Gates’ attempted quasi-prophecy here, for when a believers, using whatever pertinent temporal/secular facts, effectively makes a prophetic prediction from this as David Gates did (i.e., ‘these temporal developments have been “foreseen” by God as especially stated in the SOP’), it must first be ascertained if: (1) the message actually came from God (paramountly, involving if it was Biblically based), and (2) if it is ascertained that the message was of an inspired source, then why did it not come to pass as predicted.
            Not surprising, as he typically does, Gates actually took these secular economic “anticipations” which greatly corroborated his projects and wildly (i.e., unbiblically), frantically ran with them. (In actuality these economic “anticipations” may, in terms of timing, which actually can be, and indeed is, arrived at by using complex and comprehensive economic models and formulas, is thus actually a self-fulfilling prophecy, especially when the input parameters resulting in this predicted scenario are not pre-emptively changed and corrected. It must also be pointed out that the LEAP think tank repeatedly makes many such “anticipations”, as seen in their online archive of their GEAB abstracts, most of which have not come to pass in any way, and thus are now considered as completely wild, as this ‘September 2008 prediction’ would also have been classified if it hadn’t materialized in part of its “anticipated” degree. So this “fulfilled”, and even precisely at that, prediction may have doubly been only a complete fluke!) What Gates did is that he took these secular predictions and went Futuristic-Dispensationalist on us by forcing them unto the inspired prophetic statements in the Bible and SOP regarding the end. He thus felt and taught that this predicted, looming economic crisis would unquestionably be the “National Ruin” predicted in the SOP. Thus, as seen in David Gates’s famous/infamous, April 18, 2008 clarion sermon, apparently dubbed The Coming Crisis** at [59:38-01:13:56ff], which was an expansion of his previous week’s 30th Academy Alumni weekend sermon statement [see at 09:50-13:43], became so certain about a soon, “National Ruin” in a total collapse of the U.S. Economy, he went on to “reverse engineered” the spiritual Final Events based on the SOP understanding that “National Ruin will follow National Apostasy.” So since he felt that he precisely knew when this “National Ruin” would to occur, i.e., in the Fall of 2008, then he self-confidently stated that the preceding “National Apostasy”, of a full blown National Sunday Law movement (see LDE 133-136), would transpire before that time. In fact David Gates goes on to falsely claim, by actual necessity to validate his private views, that the SOP only says that ‘National Ruin will follow National Apostasy’ and not necessarily (i.e., ‘not as strictly causedly stated’) that ‘National Ruin will be caused by National Apostasy’!?! (See in this October 26, 2008 sermon (Part 3) at [38:14-39:08ff]). However it is clear from the Bible and SOP that “National Ruin” will indeed be solely and strictly caused by Spiritual/Supernatural events (Rev 15ff; 18:4-6ff), normatively leading to economic distress and upheaval. (Rev 18:6ff) and that these calamities are all the resulting, deliberate judgement of God on those who have accepted the Mark of the Beast.
            So the self-defeating problem with David Gates’ view here, as indeed with all other unbiblical views such as the speculations of Futurist-Dispensationalist with National Israel, is that it is completely devoid and deficient of any spiritual dimension. Indeed Dispensationalist fail to see that National Israel can only be God’s end time prophetic people, if they also accept Christ as their Messiah (Gal 3:28, 29). In the same way, David Gates has had to discredit and ignore the explicit and strict inspired counsel that ‘National Ruin is a deliberate judgement from God and not a man-made crisis’ as these secular scenarios envision. Case in point this statement of his in this late 2008 sermon [at 00:08-01:08ff] where he boldly, heretically, states that: ‘the “National Ruin” spoken of in the SOP (i.e., according to his view, the ‘sure total economic collapse of the U.S. Economy’) will occur with or without a National Apostasy.’!?! Whichever way he futilely goes on to try to harmonize that heresy with the SOP, he clearly indicates that according to him, “National Ruin” will not necessarily be a Divine judgement of God as mentioned in the SOP. Quite contrary to Gates’ false rationalization here, if there is no “National Apostasy” as prophesied, then any occurring ‘national crisis’ prior to it, is not, in any, even ‘synonymous’ way, the Biblically prophesied “National Ruin.” God does not readjust  His Perfect and Righteous Spirituality, Judgements and Prophecies in order to keep up with Gates’ base and sensationalistic, views and predictions!
            So clearly, in this spiritually and literally “blasphemous” stance of Gates, God is also not at all seen as directly entering into pointed and overturning judgement with those who would have just made void His Law, because their economic troubles are either partly and/or entirely due to their own prior overspending and mismanagement. Indeed like any blasphemy is takes an action purely from God and seeks to effectively undermine and discredit it, even if partly, for that is really all that this takes, and attributes it to man’s power and doing. How can such a secular message actually be preaching the final Spiritual solemn warning of God against the taking of the Mark of the Beast as seen in the Third Angel’s message (Rev 14:9-11). Indeed by attributing this National Ruin to man’s doing, it thus completely implodes this warning of God and thus the conviction and obedience that must be paid in regards to this fundamental Remnant Church’s message. One can see for themselves here the slippery slope of David Gates’ seemingly simple/inconsequential, self-justified, SOP editorial amendment here.
            Needless to say in summary here that all of these rationalizations and predictions by Gates was all completely false. Still he will now claim that this is mere “prognostication” and not “prophesying”, however as he (1) claimed that these were specific fulfillments of prophecies made in the Bible and SOP, and (2) tried to precisely state when end time prophecies would occur, it qualifies as “prophesying,” but false prophesying at that. (Deut 18:18-22). Indeed, like with the many false predictions and statements of David Gates, they are all solely the product of him having deliberately disregarded inspired counsels and relying instead on various human reasonings and base ways. So as the basis of David Gates’ “prophecy” was completely unbiblical in denying the Spiritual causation of the Bible and SOP’s prophesied National Ruin, it is moot to try to find and understand a Spiritual reason why the Fall of 2008 crisis did not unravel into his anticipated total collapse. He has, even pre-emptively tried to prepare for, and explain, this possible development by plausibly claiming that ‘this would be because God saw fit to give the Church more time,’ however his purely earthly statements were actually not at all “from God” to begin with. So the actual Biblical reason here why this crisis was not at all the Bible’s, nor SOP’s, prophesied “National Ruin” is simply that no “National Apostasy” had transpired before to be judged by God. Indeed there was not even a hint of such Sunday Law movements in the world in the months leading up to the Fall of 2008, a movement which, as David Gates defends against, while being concealed in order to prevent SDA opposition, will still need to be quite publically manifested because it, as explained in Note #14 below, will ultimately have to be knowingly, democratically endorsed, and legislatively carried and sustained by “the People.”

            In fact David Gates himself, as stated in this March 8, 2008 sermon [27:08-29:51] (video), initially fully recognized that his “National Ruin” scenario was contradictory to the SOP’s testimony on this issue, however, like he conveniently always does, he uncritically hitched on to a spreading rumor which had started in late months of 2007 and continued through the early months of 2008 that there had been secret Sunday Law meetings, with more planned in preparation for the upcoming visit of the Pope in April 2008. However these rumors had already been adressed and debunked by the SDA’s North American Religious Liberty Association in a widely circulated response letter. (See also this Adventist Review article; -also see Gates rebuttal to these NARLA and AR responses in this video Part 1 & Part 2). However, as explained above, even with this supposed ‘prior National Apostasy’ fulfillment, David Gates’s supposed National Ruin fulfillment would still not be linked to a prophesied “National Apostasy” as specified in the Bible and the SOP because his ‘total economic collapse’ would have solely been caused by man-made reasons, and not by God’s direct judgements.


            ** (Suspiciously enough, this hysterical ‘National Debt = Soon Coming Economic Crisis’ scenario of David Gates seems to be patterned, (SDA-)adapted, ad sensum, if not also ad verbum, and updated after/from the ca. 1993 documentary by Jeremiah Films entitled: The Crash - The Coming Financial Collapse of America [other link]. See also these related, and possibly contributive, documents). Indeed as per Gates’ own citation in this same October 26, 2008 sermon (Part 3) at [17:23-18:14], he states that his view on how the economic crisis can unravel into a socio-political crisis was based upon the 1991 book of Larry Burkett, updated in 2000 entitled: “The Coming Economic Earthquake.” (See also Burkett's 2000 updating article on why the anticipated collapse had not yet occurred.) Burkett was indeed one of the main contributors to the above mentioned Jeremiah Films production.
            In fact, as also explained below in Note #36, the total collapse of the U.S. Economy, to the point of also greatly affecting its government and policies virtually may literally not be possible on a purely temporal level, mainly because the most valuable aspect of the U.S. Economy, namely its educated and industrious people would remain, along with the U.S.’s natural wealth and the quite valuable tangible assets and infrastructure that it already has, and needs to have, for a productive economy. (Cf. in this March 2010 article). So really it is only the actually not realistic aspects of its economy that would collapse, i.e., any wealth that is beyond what its economy can really produce (i.e., without over-extended credit). So as the Bible and SOP presciently and divinely understand and foretell, it will indeed be God’s direct attack on these key fundamental economic aspects, especially in regards to standing tangible assets and natural wealth/resources, that would produce this National Ruin. The affection of the other key part of this fundamental wealth, the people would also have been specifically “touched” by God (se e.g., Rev 16:1-2ff). The rational minds of these people, which helps to prevents the destructive chaos of total anarchy, would have been detrimentally affected by them having given themselves over to the power of demons and the devil by knowingly having accepted the Mark of the Beast.
            As the end time, “fuller” understanding of God's Sabbath includes much more than the precise and proper observance of the 7th day of the week (cf. Isa 58), the focus of the Remnant Church should be on preaching this “full” understanding of the Sabbath and its wide reaching “rest” that it should procure. For until this warning/testimony is rightly and tangibly given, there will be absolutely no need for those who are opposed to it to turn in blind rage to laws and physical force in order to silence it and make it go away. Also it is only in the light of supernatural manifestations and calamities which a group of people have identified as God’s judgement that a “Death Decree” would then correspondingly be seen as being “appropriate” and vitally expedient. (EW 36)

[8] Said in this ca. March 2008 sermon [at 00:59-06:55ff] partly derived from this Febraury 2006 GEAB bulletin.which only mentioned the commencement of the ceasing of the U.S.’s publish of its M3 data, which actually had been pre-announced by the U.S. Federal Reserve back in November 2005 as seen in this public announcement.
            As this statement of David Gates is patently, guilefully, partly true but also partly false, especially in the way it is being conveyed by him, it is therefore included here as a false statement. First of all this 2008 total “debt” of $57 Trillion is not actually true because Gates makes what is here distinctly known as “Unfunded Obligations”, which are merely promises of future payments to future recipients of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid etc, part of the Gross National Debt (GND). So technically these funds are not a debt, per se, but solely a future budget deficit. In other words, this deficit is only on paper, in the forms of IOUs and not tangibly incurred and borrowed debt. The only part of Social Security that tangibly makes it into the present, annual debt is any annual surplus from annual SS payouts, when SS payroll contributions exceed that year’s payouts to recipients. The Government places these surpluses in the Social Security Trust Fund (SST), but also borrows it for its annual budget expense, and so annual interest is due on this borrowed SS Fund. So Gates claimed that the U.S. has to print money in order to pay the interest on $57 T, which, at apparently his used gross rate of ca. 5% (i.e., also including the separate rate for the SS Trust Fund) would be $2.85 T, thus exceeding the Federal Budget Income of $2.66 T for 2008, is not really the case. Gates’ figures are indeed fabricated upon a wrong assumption, or probably, deliberately, deceptively conflated statement that ‘the Government’s Unfunded Obligations are part of the tangible debt.’ The U.S. Government has not borrowed these $57 T from other sources and already spent it. Indeed for this to be the case, it would have had to currently spend it, and that, as it obviously wasn’t used to complete payoff is (2008) $9.985 T Gross National Debt, then, according to how SS works, on present SS payments, which would actually be to (future) beneficiaries; which all clearly makes no sense. So this future deficit is indeed solely IOUs. In fact, since this money has not even been borrowed, it cannot be included in an debt interest calculation, as it is not at all part of the borrowed principle. Indeed it does not even exist! Suspiciously enough, these are all facts that a person with a Masters in Business, as with David Gates, should have known, and perfectly understood!?
            Furthermore, the Congress could eventually, and that quite lawfully, though extremely, wipe out this future deficit, if it, through legislation, later votes to retroactively repeal these payout promises of this “Social Contract” of the Social Security Act. In other words people could be elected to congress who will represent a majority of the (working) people who prefer to have Social Security (SS) payouts repealed or drastically lessened rather than e.g., see their paycheck SS deductions be increased to an exorbitant (e.g.,) 15% (vs. the current 7.65%) in order to pay past and current SS beneficiaries, all while they opt to invest their money into privatized SS funds and/or directly into the Stock Market, thus effectively completely disbanding Social Security. This is technically quite feasible because when such drastic paycheck deductions would be needed, the payees to beneficiaries ratio would be ca. 2:1. As political history has repeatedly shown, a government’s promise, even one having been codified in law, especially in a democracy, is not automatically an “accomplished fact.”
            With such an exponentially heightened view which actually makes the U.S. debt problem at least ca. 5X more than what it tangibly is, it is not surprising that David Gates saw an imminent total collapse as the only possible next consequence. Indeed he wanted to, quite conveniently, make it seem that this unpayable “tipping point” of the U.S. Economy had indeed just been attained, thus most timely corroborating his quasi-prophetic predictions, as now, as he carefully setups this “insolvency announcement”, foreign institutional holders of the U.S. Debt (e.g., Foreign Central Banks) will now want to collect on their loans. However, using precise budgetary figures, including such “Unfunded Obligations”, and, just for the sake of argument here, considering Gates’ inclusion of these as part of actual interest calculations [source], the U.S. Federal Revenues would have been exceeded by the would-be resulting due heightened interest payments, as claimed here, since 2004! 
(It must be pointed out that this stance of Gates is not one that is unique to him, (see e.g., this article), however, in terms of “what has to be repaid; and that, now”, it is not the (scientifically/economically) accurate view.)

[9] According to Gates, as per this elaboration [12:50ff] (video only), apparently this will be accomplished, if supposedly everything else should fail, (i.e., these wealthy people do not want to freely give money to SDA ministries), or by default, by ‘an angel bypassing whatever high-tech security system these people may have, (“as an angel easily can” [really!?!] - an ‘incontrovertible reality’ which supposedly is to then make his entire scenario the absolute truth), and waking them up in the middle of the night and telling them to write, e.g., from Bill Gates, a $1 Billion dollar check to Gates’ ministry and projects or else his/their life will be taken from them that very night.’ He was confident that all of this would take place within a few weeks after this October 26, 2008 sermon (Part 2) (see at 01:12:02-01:15:54). This extreme view of his is derived from a (mis)understanding of Eccl 2:26 combined with an allusion to the parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12:13-21). However, theologically speaking, it is a completely baseless, unbiblical and even blasphemous portrayal of God and the Heavenly Intelligence!
            First of all, Eccl 2:26 does not say that what is to be given is “money”. It could very well be that the “giving” of Bill Gates and others is to be in the various technologies and inventions that they have painstakingly developed; with many of them simply being improving advancements of basic scientific knowledge and principles that were discovered in the 19th century by scientists and inventors who mostly were overtly devote believers in God.
            Also in support of this view, David Gates has to misstate Psa 2:8, a Messianic Psalm, to make it say: “I will give you the [wealth of] the heathen as a your inheritance.” If that was the case then vs. 9 would be pointedly saying that this inherited wealth should then be utterly destroyed. However, the focus of this statement is solely and specifically on the people, namely the nations/Gentiles and indeed this was a promise that was fulfilled through Jesus the Messiah, as also seen in the ever-expanding, tangible spread of the Gospel Message to “the ends of the earth,” despite, often times, great obstacles. (cf. Matt 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). So, as this text is pointedly saying, the Messiah’s influence, which includes a social influence, would not be limited only to Ethnic Jews/Israel, but be available to anyone throughout the world who wants to live according to it.
            Secondly, according to Gates’s view, God apparently is now to act like a mafia don!?! There is absolutely no example of such, effectively extortionist, mobster method of God in the Bible. The request made by the departing Israelites upon the Egyptian could mindlessly be cited as an example (Exod 3:21-22; 11:2-3; 12:35-36), however this was just as lawful as a judicial settlement for enslavement reparations due to Israel for their years of free and oppressive labor. (Gen 15:14). So even then, Israel came to fully merit this wealth. Pharaoh and the Egyptians suffered the consequences of the plagues strictly because they repeatedly refused to let Israel freely go, and not at all because they refused to give departing Israel part of their wealth.
            In the parable of the Rich Fool, where David Gates wrongly assumes he has an implicit Biblical precedence for his statement, Jesus could also easily have indicated this would-be desire of God to ‘forcefully extort wealth from the rich.’ However that parable is explicitly against such a notion. The whole episode/parable was initiated by the request of someone in the crowd for Jesus to forcefully ‘tell their brother to divide the family inheritance with him.’ (vs. 13) Jesus’s reply (vs. 14) and subsequent “corrective” lesson (vs. 16ff) shows that it was not by such force that He expected even such legally due sharing of wealth to be done. In the parable, the Rich Fool had an overabundance of crops. What better opportunity for God to coerce this wealthy person to share these eventually perishable items with those who were hungry and in need. But no! The parable ends with God actually suggestively telling the Rich Fool, despite the fact that his time had apparently been made to come: “And who will own what you have prepared?” (vs. 20). What better occasion for God to literally ‘rejoice over this wealthy person’s terminal fate/grave’ and then turn over his wealth to the poor and needy. Evidently God does not, and will not, operate through such an extortion, or even profiteering principle.
            God instead gives his people “power to make wealth.” (Deut 8:18). And in the many various resources, both corporate and personal, that He has allowed the Remnant Church and its individual members to have, through the special guidance and counsels of His Spirit, He indeed has given this Church and its members all of the resources they need to complete their commission. (cf. Deut 8:19-20 & Rev 3:17-19). So rather than coveting the wealth of non-SDAs, and envisioning and scheming mafia-style rackets and hits on the wealthy, David Gates should rather seek to get his Church and fellow members to follow and obey the Biblical principles in regards to wealth that they have, in a world-imitating, idolatrous stupor, cast aside.
            If God’s own professed people will not even begin to give, even sacrificially (e.g., forego buying the latest smart phone), to fund God’s work (presumably) beyond tithing, then why, even, how, should/could God hold this against non-SDAs.
            And furthermore, why, as David Gates is so deliberately, defaultly insistent upon, should this fantasied “visiting angel” to Bill Gates be an ‘angel of death’, especially in regards to Bill Gates, of all people, who, on a total amount (vs. on a percent of personal money) basis, may be the most charitably generous person with his money. So God is going to overlook the millions of other rich people of the world, such as professional athletes, entertainers, and even criminals, who openly and proudly squander their wealth on overabundant luxurious, frivolous, wasteful and/or sinful, things and threaten Bill Gates with death?!? Why not so “extort” these various people and collect any “so desperately needed money” from them. Also why would God even need to threaten Bill Gates with death. The simple appearance of, clearly an Angelic Being should be enough to convince anyone that the message should be hastily heeded. As stated above God does not act in such a way to coerce one’s will, in fact, He only has indicated such an, actually, resulting consequence when people have rebelled against clear evidence from Him, and that usually occurs with people who have professed to believe Him but then knowingly have acted to the contrary (cf. e.g., Exod 4:24-25; 32:1-14; Num 14:10-35; Ezek 11:1-13). However God never makes this effective statement of: ‘obey Me or I will murder you’; but if ever surfacedly so seemingly said, it is rather simply, and lovingly warned that: ‘if you do not follow what I have counselled then you will suffer the evitable natural/logical consequences for this wayward course,’ (including, e.g., being overunned and defeated by much more powerful, surrounding enemy forces who are already naturally bent on doing so). Quite tellingly enough, David Gates never mentions in his fantastical scenario that Bill Gates actually even rebels against this quite noticeably Angelic Being. (Unless this Angel is disguised as a masked hoodlum/thug, and then why wouldn’t Bill Gates absolutely refuse to later obey this extorting “capo's soldier”, - self-evidently hired and sent to him by David Gates and GMI in whose name this check has to be made!!! And why would an Angel need to physically bypass/disable Bill Gates’ alarm when the can pass through walls?!? This is quite manifestly just David Gates’ vindictive jealousy circularly speaking, where he wants to convey that ‘Bill Gates is bodily not safe despite his great wealth.’)
            So it really is David Gates (“Freudian”) subconscious speaking here and indeed this whole unGodlike scenario of David Gates speak more to his self-evident frustrated, covetous, and even murderous, jealousy of (his last-namesake) Bill Gates and his wealth, and the whole thing is due to David Gates own actual, effectively, worshipful view of money, which now God Himself is so desperately in need of, as his sermons imply, that He must resort to high-handed thuggery.

[10] Said in this June 2007 sermon at [02:20-04:06ff], under the claim that it had been stated by the Michigan Conference Religious Liberty director (Jerry Finneman) the week before. I haven’t verified Finneman’s sermon, mainly as it is a paid sermon acquirement [What’s the problem/dire need here, his denominational salary is not enough???]*, but I am willing to bet that either Finneman misspoke and said George instead of Jeb or he actually had said Jeb and Gates heard George. It is not beyond Gates to take something that an SDA leader has said (e.g. Ed Reid) and wildly run with it, without any verification, however incredible it may seem, especially when it perfectly fits into his own preposterous end time scheme.
(Later also said in sermon: AYC - School of the Prophets IV - 6. Special Forces (Other Link) [19:38ff].)
            Like in the retelling of any tale, especially when widely believed and unchallenged, it gets “bigger” and more sensational each time. Well so it is the case with the retelling of this “takeover plot” in Gates’ future mention of it following this ca. December 2007 School of the Prophets reference above. (By the way, isn’t the SDA Church also seeking to so “illuminate” so-called “dark counties.”)

* Quite tellingly, of the 46 series that have been posted on that webpage for the 2007 Michigan Conference Campmeeting, it is only the six-part series of David Gates, who, as stated elsewhere in this blog post, is vociferously opposed to the copyrighting, and also selling, of sermons/seminar presentation, which is freely available for (moreover, video) downloads!... And he does not even receive denominational remunerations!!

[11] Especially if, as David Gates mentions for corroboration of his “Takeover Plot”, immigrant Mexicans are allowed to be sponsored by the Catholic Church to live in the Northern U.S. (E.g., Minnesota) where they cannot, as George W. Bush has “Freudianly” quipped, ‘do the work that Americans won’t do - i.e., back-breaking, sun-baking, underpaid, agriculture work. Evidently Gates subconsciously believes that Mexican immigration/migration can only be legit/acceptable if they remain in the Southwestern part of the U.S.

[12] Along these lines of such evidently preposterous statements, especially in the light of readily verifiable facts, Gates reaffirmedly states in this talk [34:52ff] ‘that in 400 years, it has never rained in the city of Lima, Peru.’ That is verifiably, absolutely false. Lima, Peru, while having very little rainfall annually, still does receive, on average, about 7 mm (0.28 in) of rainfall annually. (Cf. here and here). [That would therefore be about 2.8 m (9.2 ft) in the past 400 years.] “Very little” is not synonymous with the “never” that David Gates tried to so emphatically convey in this statement.
            One has to wonder if such statements of Gates are based upon, an excusable, reception and/or acceptance of faulty information, or worse, that the symptom of what is being used here is a belief that all facts are to be completely irrelevant, and replaced by an, effectively, self-blinded/illusioned, misconstrued faith!?! While Biblical Faith does allow, if not most times, require, that what God has said supersede even what our knowledge and senses may be able to presently confirm, as many examples in the Bible show, there is absolutely no conceivable way in which this Biblical principle can be applied to these factually false and/or spiritually inconsequential statements of Gates here. E.g., To say that it “never” rained on the earth in the ca. 1800 years before the Flood (cf. Gen 2:5, 6), but now, in Noah's day, it would rain torrents, would be factually true and also require Biblical Faith to be believed to be a Truth. However to emphatically state that “it never rained in Lima, Peru in the past 400 years” or that ‘the U.S. President has converted to Catholicism in an, apparently, ascertainable/verifiable plot, are themselves unredeemably untrue.
            The only reason that can be observedly perceived for such emphasized false statements of David Gates, is a prideful, “believe-me-just-because-I-said-it” arrogant presumption. There surely is no room for pride in the work of God! Case in point, after such a blatantly false statement, couched in obstinate, egoistical pride, it is only natural and logical to doubt anything else that such a person would say, especially when it has to be solely accepted by faith, and that, sole faith in the speaker himself.

[13] Said in a sermon preached in the UK: AYC - School of the Prophets IV - 6. Special Forces (Other Link) [18:58ff]. Following this line of “reasoning,” I guess President Barack Obama is also a contributor to this “Catholic plot” because he replaced a Supreme Court Judge of Episcopalian Faith (David Souter) with one of Catholic Faith (Sonia Sotomayor) making it now 6 Judges of Catholic Faith?!?
            Gates further states that these five Catholic judges “always vote as a bloc” (i.e., always in the same way). Similarly, in this sermon preached in Germany [49:19-50:10ff] David Gates made a similar claim that ‘U.S. SDA’s had no one to appeal to in “North America” [sic] because the U.S. Supreme Court is rejecting all Human Right Appeals, as this majority of Catholic judges are taking orders for such directly from Rome.’* This is all factually false. (1) There is no documentation of this ‘default rejection of all Human Right Appeals.’ (2) These current five justices (not including the recently appointed Sotomayor) have giving opinions together since May 1, 2006 (i.e., Case# 547 U.S. 319ff  - see links to cases here) and in 84 out of total 115 judged cases where there was not a unanimous decision of the court, they have sided on opposing sides 50% of the time. The only pertinent cases where a “Catholic Bloc (i.e., biased) judgement” would be applicable would have been in cases where the Catholic Judges were the sole majority, however this only occurred in 27% of cases. A most pertinently notable divergent judgement of these Catholic judges, in the light of Gates’ later accusations that the U.S. Government and the Catholic Judges have already begun to implement their plan to treat any dissents with full anti-terrorist measures (see below in main text), was the June 29, 2006 Supreme Court 5-3 Decision in Hamdan vs. (Donald) Rumsfeld [548 U.S. 557] in favor of not curtailing the public due process judicial rights, vs. military commissions, for suspected terrorist Salim Ahmed Hamdan (a bodyguard and chauffeur for Osama bin Laden, no less).
            Apparently faced with the speculative theory-shattering evidence of this case, David Gates, as seen in a October 11, 2008 Sermon entitled “Lazarus Is About to Wake” (Part 1) [22:33-24:48] [Download], has had to come up with another made up scenario where he, matter-of-factly claims to know, or at least slyly, as usual, insinuates that the Catholic Judge here, Judge Anthony Kennedy, who actually is “often considered the swing vote on many of the Court's politically charged 5–4 decisions, although he reaches conservative results more often than not”**, made his supporting swing decision in ‘direct disobedience to an explicit Vatican Order that those five Roman Catholic Supreme Court Judges should vote against any case upholding civilian freedom rights.’ (Seems to me this “recalcitrant” Roman Catholic should have been excommunicated by now for this direct contravening affront to the Papacy!?!). So evidently here this forceful statement of Gates is nothing more than the circular fruit of his preconceived belief of factual Catholic bias and conspiracy in the U.S. Supreme Court and also Government.

*In hearing David Gates make his many preposterous statements in various sermons, it becomes tellingly clear that he deliberately saves such “whoppers” for his unassuming and/or relatively uninformed foreign audiences (i.e., people outside of the U.S.). If he made such statements in the U.S., he would probably be heckled right then and there, however as an American speaking to people in another country, he can be given enough of a benefit of any doubt so that such false statements can go unchallenged at the time when they are made. Also Gates is not at all trying to avoid making such, effectively, anti-American statements in the U.S. because he does not want this cause him problems domestically, because the current ubiquitousness of the internet makes any such public, recorded and widely distributed comments made anywhere in the world readily accessible by anyone, in fact, it can potentially bar one’s (re-)entry in the falsely denounced country.

**See Jeffrey Toobin, "The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court," and listen to or watch Bill Moyers Journal (PBS.org) 19 Feb 2010 - Buying America's Courts?)

[14] Along the same line as David Gates’s slant, as discussed in the previous note, on the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court had 5, (and now 6), Catholic Judges on its panel, Ed Reid, in this January 30, 2010 Sermon  (Audio) (Transcript) [at 29:09-35:39] tries to demonstrate based on a more factual scenario, as one of his ‘Unmistakable Signs of Christ’s Coming’, how this current (supposed) ‘Catholic (Faith) Super Majority’ is “no accident” and is most likely to be ultimately determinative in ‘the soon passing of a National Sunday Law.’ In this, supposedly, ‘Catholic-controlled  Supreme Court,’ Ed Reid then sees it as inevitable that any attempt, either by e.g., ‘SDAs, or the ACLU,’ to challenge a Sunday Law passed by the People through the legislative bodies of the Congress, would be futile as this ‘Catholic Court’ will surely go against the First Amendment of the Constitution and hold that a Sunday Law is Constitutional. In his later sermon that day (Audio) [at 49:22-51:40], Reid gives a “pointed example,” in the Bill Clinton Impeachment Proceeding of how Congress, specifically the Senate, in his view, has previously not upheld the Constitution by then having voted not to impeach the President on the charges of Obstruction of Justice and Perjury.
            However, when all things are taken into consideration, neither the current 6 Catholic Judges in the Supreme Court, nor/together with an assumed “pointed” example of Congress’ fickleness in a ‘clear deviation from its Constitutional duty’ does not translate into an ‘unmistakable sign of the end.’ First of all, in the cited ‘Impeachment Proceedings example’, the Senate did not ‘unlawfully choose, nor fail to uphold their Constitutional duty.’ That matter became effectively a trial by jury- a jury panel of 100 Senators needing a 2/3 majority, and some of them chose to render an acquittal vote. As a separate chamber, the Senate, as it is perfectly allowed and accepted even in Criminal Justice, allowed to use their, effectively, representative jury vote to acquit, and effectively, chose “not to press charges”, against the accused, even if solely done in the deemed best interest of the entity they represent, namely their states and the country. It could also be argued that the Senate, with its confirmation role in a impeachment trial, which is done subsequent to the House’s prior Decision, is really acting as the Sentencing Trial Court/Hearing in these proceeding. So they, much more than the House, effectively have to fully weigh the overall punishment that is to by imposed with a ratifying vote of theirs. As the Senate body inherently, ultimately votes according what they feel is best for the country as a whole, whereas the House of Representative inherently votes on what they feel/know is what the people want, here most of these Senators probably made a vote according to how they saw that this would affect the country as a whole. Probably seeing that there would be an overall adverse, quasi-anarchial, effect, they, as it is their prerogative, saw that the would-be punishment, and its related consequence of a sudden Presidential change, did not ‘fit that crime’ of even Obstruction of Justice and Perjury. Really, it is not like the President had lied under oath about, e.g., selling nuclear State secrets and technology to North Korea. I.e., the crime as a whole, however ‘religiously/popularly condemnable/offending that it was’ did not truly merit such a major political/civil change or even upheaval, (leading to who knows what kind of unsecure state of national, and even, international, affairs, through this sudden effective, even if partial/temporary, Super-Power “vacuum.”) Indeed such a “larger view and risk” issue was the crux of the “Defense” as seen in their Closing Argument. (Also a look at the actual verdict vote shows that it was done predominantly along party lines, (i.e., none of the 45 Democrat Senators voted Clinton “guilty” of either one of the two charges. So these parties were simply acting upon the typical political stance that ‘they can do a better job when in power.’)
            Secondly, as Ed Reid rightly, though implicitly, pointed out in his Impeachment example, it is indeed, rightly, the People in a democracy that ultimately has the final word. Indeed the power to impeach the President solely rests with the Congress. However here Ed Reid is greatly persuaded that the current ‘Catholic Supreme Court Judge super majority’ is a ‘clear sign that a Sunday Law are soon to be passed,’ since this supposed final Constitutional check is now strongly conditioned and primed to uphold any such Catholic Law. However: (1) the SOP is clear that the Sunday Movement will not exclusively be a “Catholic thing” but a cross-denomination endeavor also involving Protestants and other non-Catholics, and (2) as any Civics 101 class would easily show it is not the number of Catholic Judges that may be on the Supreme Court’s bench that Ed Reid, or any other SDA should be concerned about, it is instead, indeed, the actual will of the people at large. Since it is fully in the power of the People to make any change to the Constitution that it wants, it is not the Supreme Court that would ever have the final word in a Sunday Law movement. So what Ed Reid and any other, so preferentially self-termed, “watchful SDA” should instead be looking out for is what the underlying predominant will of the People is. For even if the Supreme Court would strike down a Sunday Law Bill as unconstitutional, the very next day, a congressman or even a private member, can submit a Bill to repeal, -(=as indeed a potential/possible, more formal, prophetic fulfilment of the SOP’s “repudiate” (LDE 131.4) ~“(formally) divorce”, and not merely a ‘still married separation’), a U.S. founding, cornerstone, principle in the Constitution’s First Amendment, and if that Amendment Bill gets the required votes, it will indeed easily be repealed, and not even a Supreme Court made up of nine SDA Justices could strike it down as being unconstitutional because, as it was a lawful move and procedure by the People, it therefore is inherently, and incontrovertibly, “Constitutional”.
            Moreover, while it may be knee-jerkly easy to presume that any Catholic will ‘surely endorse any Sunday Legislation’ and that ‘there is no such thing as a liberal Catholic’, if, however in the Catholic Religion, the word of the Pope is to be the paramount authority, then why have, especially American Catholics, repeatedly acted, inherently, in contradiction to, what the Church of Rome and even the Pope has stated as supposedly being the ‘infallible truth.’ To assume that any (American) Catholic will surely ignore the First Amendment of the Constitution in the light of a Sunday Law/Bill, is rather presumptuous, especially as the, would-be, real legal issue then before that Supreme Court will not be ‘whether Sunday is a day of Religious Observance and Rest’ per se, but whether or not ‘Congress has the right to pass a Religious law.’ Therefore rightly striking down such a Law as “unconstitutional” would not constitute, as rationalized by Reid, ‘a “mortal sin” by these Catholic Judges,’ neither would it be any lesser sinful disobedience of their Faith. It would simply mean to them that such a Religious Law cannot be imposed by the Civil Power which is Congress. Indeed such a Moral Law that will come to particularly affect the Free Will of all of the People can and will only be sustainable if it is indeed imposed by the representative Congress. (Also a Supreme Court, or prior Level Court, case search can probably reveal many instances where anyone of these Catholic Judge have voted for or against an issue that was actually opposite to their personal religious belief. But they instead unhesitantly upheld the legally accepted view.)
            So despite the desired, giddily hysterical hype that a supposed ‘determinative Catholic Super-Majority’ may create in SDA circles today, it is wrongly viewed to be an ‘unmistakable sign of the end.’ To state things rather succinctly here, the only “unmistakable sign that Jesus is soon to come” is, and will be, if and when done, when His people strictly follow His example of living out the principles of a true follower of God found throughout the Bible, thus reflecting God’s Character (see COL 62-69). Such a World-Systems-Shaking Testimony (cf. Acts 17:6) of actually God’s True Sabbath in both its intertwined Letter (e.g., Exod 20:8-11) and Spirit (e.g., Isa 58, cf. Matt 25), will cause and move those who oppose it to take decided and concrete measures to suppress it in whatever, even practical, form it is being manifested. It is then and only then, when the world has deliberately and knowingly taken all available measures to do away with the clearly and fully revealed and understood Law of God, that no other testimony would be beneficial, and Jesus will come to get His consequently then, vitally imperiled, Faithful Witnesses and Servants. The final opposition to God’s Law will be brought about by deliberate acts from those who oppose it, and not acts of genuine ignorance such as having appointed now 6 Supreme Court Judges who are of the Catholic Faith. It is only the manifest evidence of a guilty mind, and thus a full rebellion against God, that will indicate that there is nothing else that can be done, and that any and all consequential acts of final judgement and punishment from God, upon this living last generation of humans in the Great Controversy, are then fully warranted (cf. Rev 7:3).

[15] Said in this ASI Malaysia 2006 sermon [at 44:19-45:30ff]. Before this wild comment is duly picked apart, here is exactly what David Gates said:

            “Two weeks ago, approximately, our president of the General Conference and the Secretary had a meeting with George Bush. We don’t know yet what it was about. We’re looking, I’m waiting to read about it. But one thing I can assure you the President of North America speaks for Rome. North America and Rome are not just holding hands, they’re in bed together. George Bush takes orders from Rome. And I can assure you that he wasn’t alone in that meeting, though I don’t know who was there. No doubt their [sic] religious adviser was there. A leader in the Roman Catholic Church. And no doubt America is not speaking anymore as a lamb, it’s speaking as a dragon. So there is no doubt that our leaders were told to toe the line or else! Pray for your leaders, they’re under pressure. That pressure will be transmitted down the levels. Orders will come to back off, to control, to reduce.”

            As it can explicitly be seen from the bold comments above, David Gates was speaking from a total ignorance of what the meeting was about and what actually took place in it. At least he was truthful about that, yet that did not stop him at all from going on to make his thus, outright complete lies. And now a brief commentary on key phrases made by Gates:

“Two weeks ago... We don’t know yet what it was about. We’re looking, I’m waiting to read about it.”  -As David Gates was (assumedly) making these comments about two weeks after the meeting had taken place, then if he really wanted to know what the meeting was all about, (as if this was being kept secret by the GC), then he could have actually found this out on the very same day that the meeting took place, because the GC’s news network (ANN) released a news report of this meeting on April 4.
            As part of the overall point that David Gates was trying to make here that the Church should ‘play offense and not retreat and play defense’, a theme which evidently, ‘undoubtedly’ determined, according to him, what this April 4 meeting was all about, he had said just a few moments before, in giving a related soccer analogy, that as a fan of soccer and the World Cup, he had to keep up with it online. Well maybe he should more diligently seek to ‘keep up’ with actual Church developments before taking the pulpit with such false, insinuative speculation.

“But one thing I can assure you...”  - And how exactly???

“...the President of North America...”  -Personally, merely as a (native) Canadian, I am greatly offended by this carelessly mindless National conflation. George Bush was solely the President of the Unites States. It is quite safe to say that almost everyone else knows that Canada is/has its own country, life, political system, economy, society and history which, factually, all are, relatively, much better than the U.S. ... but I (thematically) digress... [By the way did anyone else perceptively catch the base, relatively “unrestrained,” competitive, jurisdiction/national ‘pep rally’ that broke out at the 2010 GC’s “Parade of Nations” [video] (cf. here). I thought that the spiritual intent of that habitual segment was to highlight, and pointedly cheer for, the progress and growth of God’s work in these countries!? (This is all probably due at the root to the odd fact that GC Sessions are overwhelmingly, and quasi-snubbly, mainly held in the NAD.)] Pertinently though, almost without failure, David Gates has also conflatedly spoken of ‘a collapse of the North American Economy’ when actually pointedly speaking of the troubles in the U.S. Economy. However a clear, case in point that this is also a mindless overstatement is that, currently, while the U.S. economy is greatly struggling, the Canadian economy has been thriving. In fact, Canada currently has the most healthy economy of all G-8 countries, and was the only one of these countries not to have to bail out any of its corporations and/or financial institutions during the 2008 financial crisis. Thus it, not-far fetchedly, currently is the healthiest, most stable, and most secure economy in the world, and as is currently the case, is progressively, ultimately likely to solely, inversely greatly profit, both domestically and internationally, from any downturn in the U.S. Economy.
            (In this 2007 sermon, preached in Vancouver Canada [at 6:38-6:50], Gates evidently learned to recognize, and make, the national distinction between Canada and the United States, however this may solely have been done here because he was about to discuss the prophetic element of Rev 13:11, which SDAs know refers specifically to the United States of America. Indeed in the heat of his later prophetic predictions of ‘manifest, imminent economic collapse’ (i.e., 2008+), when it was expedient and convenient for him, Gates did not refrain from making his “North America” conflation, especially if he also wanted to allude to his also claimed simultaneous judgement of the SDA’s North American Division for not having made proper use of their abundant means and wealth.)
            (Indeed, as suspected, whenever doomsdayly convenient, David Gates uses his knowing and calculated, indifferent national conflation of Canada and the United States. As seen in this October 2010 sermon [58:08-58:45] in Norway, Gates states that ‘the 2008 Financial Crisis started in North America.’ Well, not only it did not, in any way, start in Canada, it became quite widely heralded that, as already stated above, Canada was the only G-8 economy that was not significantly, if hardly, affected by this downturn. America’s “Wall Street” is not synonymous to Canada’s “Bay Street.” No Canadian banks or Financial Institution had to be bailed out due to its already utilized, strict banking policies and regulation. (This is duly normative when deposits are being “guaranteed to a certain limit” from public funds). The only adverse impacts in Canada of this Global recession were mainly directly due, and really, but for, and that mainly in its initial suddenness, the U.S.’s severe economic slowdown, as this affected the normatively high trading between the two countries. So despite what Gates may desperately wish**, in order to fuel and heighten his sensational, ‘imminent doomsday’, speculative conjecture, North America’s Canada was neither responsible, nor even severely affected by this recession as was the “creating and causing” United States of America.
            **Case in point, despite steady economic recovering numbers to the contrary, David Gates indifferently, guileful claims in that sermon’s segment that the 2008 recession is ‘going to get deeper and deeper’ and will eventually reach Norway.’ The fact of the economic matter is: any still present, unrecovered damage of that recession is solely due to the realistic fact that prior to 2008, economies were operating way above their means, and as/when that was no longer sustained, and no private entity today wants to again over extend themselves like that, many people who were able to thrive under that fictitious economic bubble, are forced to now live according to what the realistic limits of the economy should indeed be, and also, should have been back then. So e.g., jobs and economic booms cannot be created out of ‘derivative thin air’ again.)

“...speaks for Rome. North America and Rome are not just holding hands, they’re in bed together.”  -This is pure speculation on David Gates’ part and simply a premature attempt to claim a fulfilled prophecy.

“George Bush takes orders from Rome.”  -Still more fanciful and fantastical speculation.

“And I can assure you...”   - And, again, how exactly???

“...that he wasn’t alone in that meeting, though I don’t know who was there.”  -Oh yeah... that’s how!?! So we are suppose to disconnect from reality as he has. Obviously Gates is not shy to make such a self-contradictory remark, and that only reveals that he is absolutely convinced that he does not have to deal with reality, and worse, by, effectively, expressing this belief out loud, that other people will surely readily accept this as a given reality!?

“No doubt their [sic] religious adviser was there. A leader in the Roman Catholic Church.”  -Since Gates seems to know precisely who this ‘religious adviser, who was a Roman Catholic leader,’ is then his name would have been helpful here. Seems to me from a brief research that George Bush only had Evangelical Religious Advisers while in office (i.e., distinct from campaigning advisers) -e.g., Kirbyjon Caldwell, David Barton, and apparently (pre-fall) Ted Haggard vs. Catholic campaign adviser Deal W. Hudson. That is of course if any Religious Adviser was even present at that meeting, because the ANN report makes absolutely no mention of such, nor of anyone else besides George Bush at that meeting. Surely if such an overshadowing Catholic adviser was present at the meeting, this would have been reported. So this is indeed merely pure conjecture by Gates.

“And no doubt America is not speaking anymore as a lamb its speaking as a dragon.”  -When it is that this nation will ‘speak as a dragon’, i.e., through its legislation, everyone will loudly and clearly hear/read about it. No need to “jump the gun” here and actually make completely false and inciting accusations. (By the way Rev 13 does not say that America would ever ‘speak as a lamb.’ That would actually also be a violation of the Separation Between Church and States, for it would then be legislating religious laws. The prophecy simply says that this kingdom would “have two horns like a lamb.”)

So there is no doubt...”  -Really??? And how, yet again? Apparently Gates strongly believes in infinitely looping circular reasoning.

“...that our leaders were told to toe the line or else!”  -That is solely the “gospel truth” according to David Gates. Let’s see what SDA leaders were actually told at this meeting from a more reliable and journalistic source. ANN says that the main discussions were on “Religious liberty and humanitarian concerns.” They also discussed a bill that was then under consideration by committees of the U.S. Congress called the Workplace Religious Freedom Act and that Bush “disclosed how passionately he feels about religious liberty; freedom of conscience, freedom to worship, freedom to think,” Nothing here that sound like “dragon speech”. Unless of course SDA leaders were ‘under order to lie about what had really been said, and taken place, at that meeting!’

“Pray for your leaders, they’re under pressure. That pressure will be transmitted down the levels. Orders will come to back off, to control, to reduce.” - With this falsely set up resultative conclusion, David Gates goes on to claim that ‘such orders were already taking place’ and that he was ‘actively trying to contravene them’ ‘so that the Church can continue to remain on the offensive.’ Frankly, with such a history of lying, there is really no reason to believe that what David Gates went on to claim here, i.e., with such a persecutorial slant. At best he probably simply misconstrued certain administrative directives for the Church to not offend others in their various efforts,’ and that due to his manifest view that the Image to the First Beast of Rev. 13 was already, fully established.

            §Even two years later, in this June 14, 2008 sermon [at 33:06-35:47], David Gates, continues to adhere to his fanciful speculations on this meeting, by, tellingly enough, going on another “no doubt...” speculative rant on ‘what must have taken place in this meeting’ again, and that, in the clear, even first hand, knowledge (i.e., having spoken to the GC communication director) of what was reported on this meeting, -evidently also wildly speculating that a Jesuit Catholic priest and Catholic advisor were also present and ‘running the show’. Indeed he himself states that he is solely here “reading between the lines” and “only assuming”. Clearly David Gates prefers to remain oblivious to, and in denial of, actual facts so that he can uphold his (repeatedly proven false) theories and predictions.

            -Later on, in this 2009 sermon in the Ukraine [14:05-16:33], Gates goes on to make his, as stated above in the end of Note #13, calculatingly customary, ‘prophetically  fanciful’ circular reasoning, ‘foreign to North America whopper’ that: ‘not only did George Bush find out who was really in charge in the White House, i.e., the Catholic Church, and kept running to them for advice, but now Barack Obama is quickly also finding out who is in charge.’ So.... that is why, e.g., contrary to Catholic Liberation theology George Bush passed many measures that favored the rich and Obama now cannot undo, nor overturn most of them, or establish ones that favor the, even middle class, being opposed mainly by Congressional Republican.
            Also in this same early to ca. mid 2009 Ukraine sermon [01:09:20-01:15:18], David Gates, as usual, grossly exaggerates a geo-political development to spuriously and fancifully claim, (as similarly stated in this later September 27, 2009 sermon [45:54-48:09ff]), that they are fulfillments of Bible prophecy (i.e., lacking factual veracity as an actual fulfilment will involve). So, to relate it succinctly here, he claims that: ‘by Ireland refusing to ratify the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty, the formation of a one world, Catholic-controlled, government was averted by God’. However, as it can be seen from the actual facts involved in that, actually, “Reform Treaty”, its main/major, explicit and implicit, aims were to make the European Union a much more “checked” democratic entity in many of its key constitutional/organizational/institutional areas. And in the area of the, already in existence and power, (rotating) EU Presidency Council, the creation of an actually distinct entity in a single-person office of a EU President, actually substantively affects nothing, especially detrimentally, as this non-voting President’s function will be purely administrative and also for EU external representational purposes. He is thus more a chairman and ambassador than an empowered ‘(Executive) Head of Organization’. And not only was the referendum voting by Ireland actually legally expected and normative, and not a ‘last minute, preferential decision as the Irish people were Catholics and would surely approve it’, as Gates fancifully wants it to be, but to indeed completely trump Gates’ entire apocalyptic scenario here, this same Lisbon Treaty was later passed a short time after in an October 2, 2009 Irish Referendum with a +20% swing approval of the people of Ireland... and Europe is still not Gates’ ‘Unified Catholic/Papal, First Domino, SDA-work impeding, Bastion’.
            And clearly, as expressed in this segment, Gates believes that the intended crashing of the U.S. economy was being orchestrated and directed by the Papacy, and it was also manipulatively aborted at their directive when Ireland had not ratified the Lisbon Treaty on June 12, 2008. So then why did those Catholic operatives still “cause” an Economic Crisis in mid-September 2008 if they had been told to abort it back in June!??? If the Papacy could crash the U.S. Economy at will as Gates claim, then why didn’t they do so in October 2009, when they finally had a ratification of “their” keyly needed EU Lisbon Treaty????
            And what in the world is his completely factless and baseless, sensationalistic claim that: ‘if an economic collapse had occurred in September 2008, George W. Bush (“the Papacy’s ideal president” [...why???*]) would have stayed on as U.S. President despite both the end of his 2 year term and the election of a new President (Obama).’ [01:14:03] Even during the depths of the Great Depression and the compounding World War II outbreak, the U.S. still normatively held binding elections, with F.D. Roosevelt only staying on in power for 4 terms because there were no Presidential term limits then. It’s easy to claim something for truth when you don’t/won’t have to prove it, and Gates specializes in such ‘negative proofs’.
            And all of this actually speaks volumes against his and other similar 'Catholic Takeover' Conspiracists as it indeed shows that it is the People who have the final say as to what will or will not be done, and not even elected officials. Indeed, as the EU’s constitution allows for in its European Citizens' Initiative (ECI), the represented people in the EU can have a direct voice in the governance if 1 million people sign a petition in agreement towards a desired course.

*At least with the Obama-Biden Presidency, the Papacy would have had a practicing Roman Catholic in the presidency in Joe Biden, rather than the completely Protestant, Methodist duo of Bush-Cheney. Perhaps Bush was ideal because he was more ‘“guttly” influentiable’ than the more cerebral/professorial/thinking Obama.

[16] Said in e.g., sermon: AYC - School of the Prophets IV - 6. Special Forces (Other Link) [37:17ff]. Such, effectively, highly libellous, statements, in time of war, from a defaultly/deferently credible  pulpit (as the religious pulpit is, at least to the audience), and which claims to be verified, first-hand, by U.S. officials from the field of war, actually borders more on being a treasonous act, than an Inspired/Biblical proclamation. At the very least it would be testifying to a conspiracy to commit treason against the United States (which Constitutionally is much more than its elected officials or military officers) by purposely seeking to lose a war. Talk about actually “levying war against the U.S.” and also “giving aid and comfort to the enemy.” Furthermore by his claim of ‘inside knowledge,’ (self-evidently the case as apparently no one else in the world knows of this), David Gates himself would be fully impleaded in this would-be Criminal act. Frankly, and factually speaking, such a belief/statement of Gates as a whole encroaches into a delusional realm, indeed beyond any Spiritual understanding/rationalization - i.e., simply more personal, presumptuous talk of his.

[17] Said in some detail in this November 12, 2008 sermon [at 31:33ff], and then with the mentioned specificity of “January 22, 2009” in this ca. December 21, 2008 sermon [exactly at 04:47]. Quite typically, in keeping with his “hoodwinking” “Teflon/no fault” tactic after he emphatically mentions this date through a ca. 15 minute validating set up, he goes on to falsely disclaim that ‘he actually had not set a date’!??

[18] Sermon: Faith Camp 2008 - Video [15:01-20:18ff] | Audio [14:46-20:03]. This statement was made to corroborate a belief that this world is doomed to a soon self-destruction due to supposed natural reasons which make it impossible to sustain life and also to the collapse of man-made systems such as the economy. So Gates repeatedly cites the undersea explorer Jacques Cousteau who supposedly had claimed some years ago, that life on earth cannot possibly go on for more than 40 years.
            First of all I personally get my “definitive word” not from a person who, at best, was a nominal Christian, but from God, through His Word. Such a “definitive Word of God” instead e.g., is that He is actually not limited, nor constrained, by any time, nor will He allow this earth’s vital, natural or geo-political systems, to catastrophically self-destruct before His commissioned work on earth is fully, and properly accomplished (Rev 7:1-3), especially not from the man-made reasons that David Gates has greatly “invested” in, namely the economy, war, terrorism, etc. (Case in point, the well-supported Sunday Law movement of the late 19th Century which were comparatively rather easily halted by SDAs.) Claiming that the Second Coming must occur by a certain year because many of these systems are sure to collapse is actually expressing a complete distrust of God’s Word (Isa 55:9-11), Wisdom, and Sovereign and Overwhelming Power (Dan 2:21).
            Even “calamities” such as lack of potable/fresh water, hunger, sickness, etc could all be resolved if man was not so solely concerned and obsessed with “making a profit.” Why should God doom billions of people to hell fire and Eternal Death, through a premature “end”, because of such man-sustained problems. Unfortunately this quite capable, and equipped Church does not want to step in and “Show the World” the practical power of God’s Word, for they too are just as worshipful of these man-made methods and institutions.
            (This whole, often cited. “Cousteau quasi-oracle” of Gates is debunked in more details below in the section entitled “Gates’ Second Prophetic Campaign”.)

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

            This 2031 view of David Gates is self-admittedly an explicit furtherance of a view that was advanced by the NAD’s stewardship director Ed Reid called the “Great Week in Time” view (i.e, 7000 years with 1 day = 1000 years). A sermon where I’ve heard Reid presents this view is in this February 21, 2009 sermon of his. [See at ca. 53:16ff]
            At 01:17:34ff of this sermon Ed Reid (irresponsibly) says that he would not say such an extreme limit date of, evidently 2031, solely because ‘the sermon was being recorded’!?? (He had claimed back at 01:02:24ff that his implicit dating would be ‘the closest that he would come to (effectively) setting a date.’) He then, self-evidently “guiltily” for implying advancing a date 22 years in the future, adds that he believes that ‘time would be cut short’ so, according to him, the Second Coming would occur before this ‘extreme date limit.’
            In another sermon [present location not found] where David Gates makes an allusion to this view, and also the caution of Ed Reid, he goes on to say that ‘he himself is not so ‘fearful’ to not make this explicit dating,’ and indeed goes on to pompously state this 2031 year date.
            As I have explained in an SDA forum (see here with its other relevant/contextual comments), EGW did not mean for her 4000, 2000 or 6000 year statements to be specific (i.e., to the very year or day) as she then would not have been expecting Christ to return in her day as she clearly did, because it would have been ca, year 5900, and not a literal 6000 th year, if Christ had returned in her day (i.e., ca. 1888). The perfect example of this notion of EGW is her 1888ff statement in GC 518 (quoted, but wrongly applied by Ed Reid at 01:08:30 of his sermon) that: “The great controversy between Christ and Satan, that has been carried forward for nearly six thousand years, is soon to close.” Clearly she did not think that a literal 6000 must past before the Second Coming would/could occur. So trying to attribute this definiteness to her many 4000, (nearly) 2000 and (nearly) 6000 year statements today, as many SDA expositors do is actually exegetically disingenuous.
            Ed Reid’s ‘literal Great Week in Time’ view is also refuted for many other points. At 43:58 of his sermon, he relates that EGW in GC 370, 371 said “with italics” that: “One saying of the Saviour must not be made to destroy another. Though no man knoweth the day nor the hour of His coming, we are instructed and required to know when it is near. We are further taught that to disregard His warning, and refuse or neglect to know when His advent is near, will be as fatal for us as it was for those who lived in the days of Noah not to know when the flood was coming.” The problem with the understanding and reading of this statement is that people like David Gates think that they are perfectly free to presume to “set a year” or ‘range of years’ for Christ’s coming and also others, including Reid and Gates then look at the economy as a great indicator of when this end is near. Instead they should be looking for, and also looking to fulfill the only sign that Jesus directly associated with the end, namely ‘the proclamation of the Gospel of the Kingdom to the whole world, as a witness to all nations.’ (Matt 24:14). Many claim to indeed be looking for this sign however they wrongly understand this sign. The Biblical context for this statement of Christ shows that:

            (1) the “proclamation” means much more than only “vocal preaching of Biblical truth”. Indeed Jesus is clear that the Gospel is exhaustively comprehensive and includes much more than preaching (see Matt 25:31-46);

            (2) an actual “witness” is nothing in the line of “hearsay”. The NT notion is clear that a “witness” is an “incontrovertible, tangible proof of faith,” which is why the underlying Greek word here is “martyrion” from which our English term “martyr” comes from. Indeed a proper witness is one that can “testify first hand” to the crucial issues at hand and not rely on “hearsay”.

            (3) the “Kingdom of God” as especially demonstrably expounded upon by Christ in the Gospel, actually includes the tangible implementations of these kingdom wise and just principles found throughout in the Bible which were given by God to overcome the oppressing systems of this world, and when done would indeed be this need ‘incontrovertible and unimpeachable “witness”’.

            (4) this “witness” to the “whole inhabited world” as the Greek literally says, puts an emphasis on reaching people throughout the world and not seeing a fulfillment of this sign by the simple “entering” or establishment of the SDA Church into a country’s territory. So although the SDA Church has work in now 231+ countries and territories, there are still over 6 billion people who have never heard of the Truth of this full Gospel message.

            Other exegetical fallacies of Ed Reid which have contributed to his false literal 6000 year limit theory here are:

            (1) [at 00:59:45ff] - He ascribes to the plausible though not necessarily “concrete” view made by early Church Fathers that ‘the fact that no one live longer than 1000 years in the history of the world is a fulfillment of God’s statement that Gen 2:17 ‘man would die “in the day” when he ate the forbidden fruit’ since ‘a 1000 years for God is like unto one day’ (2 Pet 3:8). However the passage in Gen 2:17 which literally says: ‘in the day in which you eat from it, dying, you will surely (eventually) die’; meaning that a process of death would begin on that very day and end in this certain/condemned death sometime later.

            (2) [at 01:09:50ff] - Quoting DA 32 that the Exodus took place ‘400 years “to the day”’ after Israel captivity had started. However that is an incorrect/fallacious assumption. The underlying Biblical text for that passage, Exod 12:40-41 is clear that this Exodus to the very day actually took place 430 years after the time period had begun and not 400 as stated at first to Abraham in Gen 15:13. Most SDA preachers/authors today cannot properly explain this difference, and so it is either (as normative) outrightly ignored, or worse, claimed to be an error,* however as explained in this other blog post, the Biblically proper understanding of “God and the Future” shows that God had indeed only planned for 400 years, however when Moses went out of God’s will by killing the Egyptian, he delayed God’s fulfillment by 30 years by having to flee in the desert until the Pharaoh who wanted to kill him died. The fact that the Bible is emphatic that the Exodus took place ‘on the very day, but 430 years later’ indeed only means that it took place on the very same calender day (Nisan 14) when Abraham’s sojourn had begun and not exactly 400 years later. (cf. Acts 7:6 vs. Gal 3:17). Interestingly enough, EGW who may not have known/understood the reason for this 30 year difference, did not venture to claim that it was exactly 400 years later, but simply that it was on the very same day (i.e., calender day) when these years had begun. (Relatedly, it is probably upon the outburst of Moses’ inculcated warring behavior in that Egyptian slaying incident, that, as EGW states in YI, December 13, 1900 par. 5-8 [though she incorrectly cites Isa 46:10 as “sees” instead of the Bible’s: “declares”], God decided to [conveniently] “transfer” Moses to the desert for a different type of education, which then also served to hide Moses (=Exod 2:23-25), but with God probably not have wanted this educational-hiatus to take up to 40 years).

* The SDABC (see on Gen 15:13 {page 278}& Exod 12:40 {page 498}) had tried to reconcile this difference by claiming that Paul said in Gal 3:17 that the Law came 430 after the Gen 12:1-3 promise made to Abraham, however, summarily stated here, Paul’s statement in Gal 3:17 is actually more accurately (woodenly) translated and understood as:

What I am saying is this: [as] a covenant ratified in advance by God, the after-accompanying [time period of sojourn stated by God of] ‘430 years to come to be Law’, does it not invalidate, so as to nullify the promise.’

            In other words ‘the intervening period of 400 years leading up to the establishing of (Israelite) Law, which was to actually start at some point in the near future (i.e., when Abram left his home in Ur (Gen 12:4) in 1875 B.C. to sojourn in the land of Canaan), and which, as stated in Exod 12:40, who end up actually being 430 years (thus Paul’s mention instead of that ‘actually transpired number’ for that period), did not at all diminishingly affect, i.e., and that, ‘despite this great length of time until God gave more binding statement in then “Law”, the (simple) promise that God had originally made to Abraham.’
            So Paul was jointly emphasizing that God’s (simple) promises were (A) as good as “Law”; and (B) would still be binding despite any long intervening time, including this specific 400/430 period; which, moreover, was only to begin to be reckoned a some future time after the giving of that promise.

            (3) Also, as explained in that SDA forum comment, the number 7 in the Bible indicates a “perfect representation” and not as commonly assumed: “completeness”. So its use in a “Great Week of time” would be to indicate a “perfect representation” of the time that it should take to resolve the GC, and not a “definite limit of time allotted.” If needed more time could and would be added to this time period if circumstances on earth came to necessitate it. The Bible and SOP is quite clear that time can, and would be, injunctively prolonged if, and as, needed (cf. e.g., Rev 7:1-3 and 15 MR 292; cf. EW 36, 37).

[19] It is interesting to hear David Gates say in this December 2006 sermon [53:37-55:06] (video link) that he did a study on the word “presumption” in the Bible in response to a charge of such against him and ‘only found 2 instances... in the KJV’ (???) Assumedly Deu 1:43 & 17:13, however both claims are readily shown to be quite false/falsified. (Tellingly enough, Gates does not mention the distinct use of this word in Deut 18:19-22). However this word (Strong’s #02102 (10X), which is synonymous to Strong’s #02087 (11X)), occurs over 20 times in the OT and is clearly defined as involving: “pride” Exo 18:11; cf. Pro 11:2, 13:10; 21:24; “haughtiness” (Exo 21:14); “arrogance” (Neh 9:10, 16, 29; Jer 50:29; cf. 49:16, 50:31-32; Eze 7:10; Oba 1:3); “stubborness” (Neh 9:16); and “insolence” (Deut 18:22; 1 Sam 17:28). It is not surprising that all of these base and ungoldy traits are readily found in Gates’ preaching and actions. Indeed that is what happens when one rejects the plain counsel of God’s word with an attitude that claims to know more than (even explicit) inspired counsel.

[20] Said in sermon: AYC - School of the Prophets IV - 7. Q & A Session (Other Link) [29:16-30:32].

[21] I do commend David Gates and his ministry for also engaging in tangible medical missionary work in his Gospel Work (cf. here), however he can seek to do more in terms of seeking to help the poor and needy who are also facing and suffering various life damaging and threatening consequences due to economic hardship. Notwithstanding, what I especially find quite odd, to the point of being unbiblical, and thus troubling, is his persistence on seeking to motivate people into concrete gospel work action by trying to paint an imminent doom, Titanic-sinking scenario, where the planet and life on it will not be possible after a certain time. (See e.g., in this recent sermon [Video] (e.g., at 01:11:23ff) which manifestly was said in a full knowledge of the Biblical critics made in this blog post.) First of all, as stated elsewhere in this post, these “doom and gloom” reasonings are all based on an underlying skewed assumption that views the Economy as, in a god-like manner, being determinative of the future well-being of the world, regardless of the material and natural facts at hand. In other words, if life on earth in the future will become purely economically non-sustainable then it indeed should not go on and people must rightly die irrespective of the actual material resource wealth of the World. David Gates is here simply reverentially bowing down to the dogmatic gods of this world, and solely for such an unbiblical basis, his predictions and warnings are spurious and completely false. All of this is nothing more than the “wine” (i.e., teachings) of Revelation’s “Queenly” Economic Babylon (Rev 18:2ff).
            As the intended point of this parable on the Rich Man and Lazarus shows, people are to be motivated by the principles and admonitions made in the “Law and the Prophets” and not out of the seeking of a benefiting result, or the fear of an unwanted consequence. (Cf. this blog post that also makes the same point, but also in this forum discussion where people did not want to accept that presented Biblical view). Furthermore, where in the Bible or in the SOP is there a such a message that this Planet only has a fixed time, beyond which all life will effectively self-destroy itself?!? It seems clear to me that only God has this “annihilating” power, and He has sovereignly reserved this right and possibility beyond what any machination or technology of man can do.* Indeed to avert any manifestation of such a man-made/imposed apocalyptic scenario, God depends on His Church who have all of the knowledge and resources to do better, and lead in making a significant difference, to concretely act on these principles, if for nothing else, than to help prevent the message of the Gospel from not being able to do the work of genuine conviction and repentance that it needs to do in the minds of everyone that will live to witness the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. By correct Biblical definition, that can’t but include significant ministry to those in need.

* By now, i.e., ca. 2013, David Gates seems to be gradually deconstructing that view, as e.g., seen in a November 2013 ‘correction’ of his to the prior ‘imminently doomed life’ claims that he had been making in regards to (supposedly) the U.S. U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) saying that it would not have any effective antibiotics for upcoming viruses. Gates now (rightly) says that it is being discovered that weeds and plants have always had such remedies, (-which is actually a remedy source discovery that was pointedly indicated in a dream to someone in my family.)

[22] Said e.g., in sermon: Restoring the Years- 3. Secrets of Spiritual Conquest [12:15]. Cf. Gates’s testimony in the December 2006 Sermon: Unlimited Resources Part 3 [41:40-47:42] (video link) where he relates that, in the 18+ month delay for the payment of the first TV Network, he understood that God was thus ‘creating a situation where the lack of faith/belief present in the Church would be exposed.’

[23] Said in this sermon (2005) at [01:04:57-01:06:49]; cf. (‘only first two’) here (2009) at [01:22:57-01:25:48ff].

[24] David Gates repeatedly states, as, evidently, a crucial fundamental basis for his end time view, that he believes that, unlike ca. 1888, when it is said that the Second Coming of Christ could have occurred, but did not because of the people’s unbelief and faithlessness, just like Ancient Israel and their initial Crossing of the Jordan into Canaan, the Second Coming will surely occur “this (second) time around” (i.e., in a few years), because ‘God’s people will cross the Jordan this time’ just like Israel had crossed the Jordan in their second time around. That sounds quite plausible, even surfacely Biblical, however Gates has not also taken into consideration a couple of key elements in his typologically predictive understanding.
            Israel only crossed into Canaan the second time because they had all fully learned their lesson from the past failure some 40 years before, especially in the light of the consequential penalty of death of the disobedient and faithless generation. So, quite contrary to David Gates quasi-definite time view here, where ‘the second time around will surely work’, it will only work if this current generation of SDA’s has similarly learned its lessons from past failures. However there are no clear signs of this today, especially in the light of the greater duties that are made on this more advanced and more blessed generation of SDA’s. Gates seems to try to circumvent this requirement of corporate “repentance” and “conversion” by claiming that this Second time will occur ‘even if it is only a few who cross over,’ which he at times immediately, contradictly then says that, ‘just like Ancient Israel, it will be all of the people who will cross over this time.’ However he fails to include the, also typological, needed requirement of genuine faith and belief, because this generation cannot strictly fulfill this type if it does not have the required faith. There is still a “Canaan” to conquer in these end times, and that by the supernatural power of God if it is to be done quickly, and this all also cannot be done with only a, relatively speaking, handful of believers.

[25] Hear the details of these closures in this sermon [01:13:31-01:16:17] preached on the same day when these networks were shut down. See also this June 24, 2010 sermon [at 01:33:08-01:38:17ff] [f4v] [mp4] [mp3], where Gates tells more about these closures. It can be self-evidently perceived, despite his incoherent attempt to rationalize this downturn as “God’s will,” that without the Biblical explanation that has been presented here in this blog post for the more than likely purpose of his “Lazarus Experience,” these gross failures do not make any Biblical sense at all, nor have any “salvific” purpose. As stated before, any actual “resurrection” miracle would have been to prevent these exemplary and pioneeringly bold networks initiatives from ever going off the air, as with the first network miracle.

[26] Said in Sermon: The Doctor's Diagnosis [06:51ff].

[27] A case in point of this, from David Gates himself, is from his “The Converging Crisis” talk [Part 2 - 28:25-33:10 - (Partial Clip) (Full Talk)], where he relates a situation in which he was seeking to obtain the right from the Pacific Press Publishing Association to read, in full, the stories of the 10-Volume, Arthur Maxwell Bible Stories, also displaying the illustrations in the books, for children stories series on his television network in Bolivia. He therefore had his team call Pacific Press to obtain these rights, but upon hearing the scope of what was planned they, (not surprising of them), categorically refused. When Gates heard this he, after mildly berating his team and effectively telling them that ‘they did not know how to do things with this (predominantly business-minded) Church’, picked up the phone, called instead the Inter-American Division Publishing Association who had co-rights to the books (probably for the Spanish translation), and effectively proceeded to misrepresentively/fraudulently, thus lie, to secure these sought rights by telling the director that he merely wanted to ‘help their sales by advertising these beloved books by featuring them in a series of short videos on his network, also providing a contact reference where they can be purchased.’ Of course the director agreed with such a proposition. (Who in their right mind would not accept an offer of “free advertising??). It is actually well within the provision of “fair use” to so “feature” any non-rights-reserved, copyrighted works, e.g., a sample chapter, 20-30 seconds of a media clip, etc. However Gates was fully intending to read through all of the books, verbatim, with scanned illustrations included. Beyond the issue of Church products being “shared” primarily, according to Capitalistic business norms, does God need His workers to engage in guileful lying, and that with fellow believers, in order to have His work advance and triumph? Seems to me that this is quite contrary to God’s vision of His endtime model generation (Rev 14:5). What Gates Biblically, should have rightly done is speak/pour the “Straight Truth” on, what he himself considers “flawed-thinking”, and tell these workers point-blankly that their false, and even baseless, restrictive methods of conducting God’s work according to strict, profits-obsessed, Capitalistic business norms is quite contrary to Christian/Biblical principles. (See Gates related story at a Christian Media convention at 32:06ff) In the face of such a “Straight Testimony,” which Gates later allusively claims to be bearing as a “True Witness”, these people would then have to make an ultimately, faith-based, spiritual choice. However by opting to misrepresent the Truth and Witness here, (indeed as David Gates himself says elsewhere, ‘a True Witness must be truthful’), Gates really, only deferentially paid homage to these idolatrous business/Capitalistic mindsets and methods, and certainly did nothing to correct this problem, and that at the root. These workers had, and probably still do not have, a true knowledge of their sin here and it thus persists unaffected, where even God cannot fully hold it against them in the light of their (presumed) honest ignorance of it. All of this is not being a “True Witness”, nor a “Faithful Watchman”, nor ‘giving the trumpet a certain sound, but only serves to perpetuate the Spiritually unimpeachable, and also “non-fully-blessable”, conundrum in the Laodicean Church. (Interestingly enough, Gates says (see here at [37:53-38:23ff] (video link)) in the experience for the first network of $1.5 million, when he was brought in to make the payments, which he didn’t have at all, and was agonizing, while in the bathroom praying, as to what he should do, he was told by God to ‘simply tell them the truth that you do not have the money yet.’ Gates was, oddly enough, quite shocked by this simple solution from God [What else should he have expected from a “God who cannot lie.” (Tit 1:2; Heb 6:18)]. Still Gates proceeded to tell these people a guileful “white lie” by saying that “he hadn’t been able to arrange for the money transfer yet and that they didn’t have all of their finances in order!?)
            I think that God has given this Church most memorable testimonies of exactly how He feels in regards to the placing of commerce|profit|business before His work in/by SDA Institution in the, then prophetically ratified, burning of Institutions, such as a wayward Publishing House. This should be a lesson, fearfully and enduringly learned by all.

            Incidently, David Gates insistently, repeatedly claims that the fact that the sales of his 2 books from his publisher Pacific Press were doing increasingly better and better each year since their publication (2002 & 2007) is because he allows for illegal downloads of the MP3 and PDF versions of the books from his website and encourages people to freely redistribute these copyrighted works. Anyone with a little common sense can readily perceive that this is really not the actual reason for their legitimate sales thriving. Clearly most, if not all of the people who obtain these free reproductions of the book, probably do not then go to the Adventist Book Center to buy a hard copy after having read them. Some may, but unless one comes to be on an unappeasable guilt-trip, or must have a hard copy to add to their physical library, or even feel that they are somehow hindering the support of David Gates and his ministry by not paying for a copy of the books, they indeed probably do not make this extra expense. (One would better support David Gates and his ministry by sending the money directly to them.) Clearly what is the reason(s) for these successes is, as normative in commercial dealings: “various forms of successful advertising combined with a “quality” product.” I.e., the fact that: (1) David Gates was at a different churches or large gathering, seemingly almost every weekend, telling of his story and also simultaneously promoting his books, (2) his story in itself is indeed interesting, and contains many captivating elements of God’s miraculous intervention, providence and guidance, (3) that a substantial number of SDA seek to try to engage in active missions, thus seeing this “Miracles” books as a great “textbook” on the subject, and (4) the fact that, upon hearing of Gates’ story, and the possibility of obtaining a copy of the book, the SDAs who are not convinced, as David Gates is, that intentionally violating a publisher’s copyright is legal, Biblically lawful, and/or ethical, prefer to pay for the book(s), are indeed the reasons why the books have continued to sell so well since their release. However it would be interesting to see the sales figures in the times following the self-admitted “death of his Lazarus Experience” starting in late November 2008. (See in “Epilogue IIB” section below). Indeed, there is nothing like a blatantly unfulfilled series of, additionally, intrinsically false prophecies to straightly drain one’s previous popularity and interest.

[28] Like David Gates, Ed Reid, the then NAD stewardship director, also, and probably in deliberate support of David Gates’ view, date-settingly, and also merely based upon a belief in a soon economic collapse, claimed in his ASI 2010 financial seminar [see at ca. 00:59:30-01:00:30] that ‘such a great economic crisis’ and thus, by contextually-insinuated implication, the beginning of Final Events ‘should occur within 2-3 years.’ (Similarly see the (resurrectingly) enjoining, summarily said, likewise: ‘reverentially, “spiritually/prophetically “moronic”/vacuous”’ 09-08-12 sermon by Dwight Nelson.) Seems like this ‘Doomsday, Date-setting’ is quite contagious in the Church! Not surprisingly, like David Gates, Ed Reid’s view here is arrived at from shoddy and poor Biblical exegesis, namely with understanding SOP statements. Early in that presentation, he had quoted Ev 240, 241, (as he has also done in many of his other recent end times sermons), which says: “Poverty is coming upon this world, and there will be a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation.” Indeed, out of its context, it would seem that this SOP statement is saying, as Reid implies, that ‘the Biblically prophesied Great Time of Trouble will be caused by global economic troubles,’ however when this statement is understood in its actual context, it neither says, nor suggests, anything of the sort. The greater context of this passage, even greater than the abridged one included in EV 240, 241, is found in MS 37 (1894). The focus of EGW’s counsels here was to disillusion church members who were discouraged by the fact that the work of the Gospel does not result in gaining wealth, or a life of ease, free of troubles. Indeed she refers to the Life and Ministry of Christ which clearly shows the contrary. Also a look into the actual historical context of those times revealed that when she made this statement in the Fall of 1894, that at that time the United States was in the depths of a severe economic Depression which had started with the Panic of 1893. This was the most severe U.S. economic crisis since the Panic of 1873 and this 1893 Panic launched what is known as “the Depression of the Nineties”. It is also viewed by many as the most severe U.S. economic Depression other than the one of the 1930's. In fact, by some, if not most, historical estimates, the crisis of the 1890's peaked in terms of unemployment, in 1894. So it is not surprising to hear EGW speaking quite matter of factly, and not actually prophetically, of a soon coming global poverty then, especially as this crisis and depression would continue to spread and last until the end of the 1890's. So it is in this light that she then says that: ‘poverty is coming upon the world’ {COMMA} ‘and [also] there will be a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation’. Meaning if Gospel workers are avoiding engaging in the self-denying work of the Gospel, they still will not be able to escape anywhere, because “the coming global poverty” as made manifest in the then deepening economic crisis, will affect both believers and non-believers worldwide; and also that ‘a Great Time of Trouble’ as prophesied will occur in the Final Events, thus then also involving physical suffering. So these feared hardships of ‘poverty’ and ‘suffering’ are actually inevitable for anyone, and especially, in the ‘persecutions in the time of trouble,’ of those who profess to believe in God’s Truths.
            So EGW is not saying, as Reid wants to make it seem, that ‘a (prophesied) global, impoverishing crisis will result in the Great Time of Trouble’, but, firstly, simply that the two most feared conditions of poverty and persecution are unavoidable, with the first being through a matter of current fact, and the second being a distinct prophetic fact. So resisting the call of God to do this Gospel Work now is really useless and futile. So whereas that first statement of hers was made, based on actual economical developments, her second, distinct statement was, as the clearly quoted Biblical language shows, purely based upon the prophecy of Matt 24:21. Ed Reid wants to make this statement of EGW a prophetic statement (i.e., one that, as it will be shown later, spoke of the years 2012-13ff), however the actual exegetical context and intent of that statement does not say anything of the sort, either prophetically or thematically. EGW was simply, distinctly, and not at all correlatedly, using actual events and prophesied events to discourage people from avoiding the work of the Gospel to vainly ‘chase after riches and ease,’ for soon, both would, according to the indications of her day then, come to naught, particularly for an Adventist, in regards to the second stipulation. So, not surprisingly, it is only when this statement is divorced from both its literary and historical, and also, Biblical, context, that Ed Reid and others, can here make a claim to have found an ‘“amazing” and “incredible” statement that supports an understanding that an economic crisis will surely result in the Great Time of Trouble.’
            Ed Reid (see at 01:00:25), also, double-ententely, implied to have found a support for his ‘imminent, Time of Trouble-causing, economic collapse’ view in another SOP passage in, namely, Ev 63 which says: “Money will soon depreciate in value very suddenly when the reality of eternal scenes opens to the senses of man.” Indeed, the way he emphatically reads: “very suddenly” would mislead one into thinking about the sudden monetary devaluation which is seen in an economic crisis. However that EGW statement is merely speaking of the way a Believer will come to ‘lowly perceive money and wealth when s/he has come to understand eternal realities.’ So no implication here at all here to 
‘financial devaluation in world monetary systems.’ Still, given the date of this statement, (originally published on January 1, 1874 - The True Missionary), thus in the immediate aftermath of the Economic Panic of 1873 which also caused a Depression that lasted until at least 1879 in some countries, it is not surprising that EGW would use these world developments of her times, not to preach of ‘it causing the Final Events’ as it is currently, waywardly being done, but to help church members, to literally, put things in perspective, pointedly, as the context of that statement here says, in the refusal of Church Members to generously invest in the work of God. Indeed, as shown in this post, it was this 1873 Economic Panic, the first since the Church had been organized in 1865, that caused the studying out, and implementation of, Biblical Tithing in order to more systematically and reliably support the Church’s Ministry and Work.
            So as with David Gates’ spuriously supported claims, the NAD’s Ed Reid also does not have any Scriptural, nor SOP, support upon which to base his own: ‘2-3 year economic collapse leading to the Great Time of Trouble’ false teaching|prophecy. In all solemn seriousness, when the Church’s formal leadership also decides to engage in eisegetical claims, prideful guilefulness, sensationalism and rebelliously defiant, even when “rangy”, date-setting, then: “May God mercifully help this Church,” for it and its members will thus effectively be doing the Devil’s work in setting up, even the Remnant Church, to accept and pursue after the actual, and ‘most convincing’ counterfeit (Matt 24:11, 24) to what constitutes the Church’s Gospel Work mandate for our times, -which, based on passages such as Matt 25:31-46, currently, clearly, and more than ever, is: to do all that we indeed can do to meet the vital needs of all those in need in the world, including the 65,000,000+ annually aborted infants!

August 21, 2013 - By the way Ed Reid's 2010: ‘2-3 year’ prognostication has really, correspondingly, “exact-ingly” now proven to have been false!!


            Similarly, in this ASI 2013 presentation [01:37-02:36] Lewis Walton spuriously doubles down on this claim, as with Ed Reid, that in Ev 62.4, EGW was prophesying about an economic collapse and hyperinflation. Again EGW is pointedly focusing on ‘Believers” here. Her new sentence starting with “But...” had actually caused a shift of “men” being paramountly/inclusively the ‘patents rights-investing people in the world [which could include SDA’s (cf. 15MR 68.1-74.3)]’, to now ‘men in the Church/God’s work’. And even if the final “man” is seen to again be genericly  inclusive of all/any ‘men’, with the precursor reference citing “moles and bats” drawn from the Judgement context in Isa 2:18-22 which actually primarily focuses pointedly on Jerusalem and Judah (Isa 2:1ff) who also have those abominable idols (Isa 2:8) and then extends to all other guilty entity in the Earth (Isa 2:12ff), but then refocuses on God’s people (Isa 2:22), and, as discussed in here at its Sixth Seal section, Isa 2 serves as the episodic background for Rev 6:15 which introduces Rev 6:16-17's Wrathful Lamb transpiring (=Rev 14:9-11), which the SOP reveals will also apply to God’s professed people and “naturally” separates the ‘able to stand’ righteous (=Eph 6:10-18 = EW 26.3) from the unrighteous (EW 15.2; 16MR 171.1-172.2; DA 825.4 = Matt 25:31-46), then while that final “man” in Ev 62.4 primarily focuses on the first Shaken and adjudged Church members. And so, that “sifting” Shaking is actually not for an utter, judgement-execution, end, indeed just as Rev 6:16-17 is not shown to result in the utter end. At best, seemingly most “natural” (vs. supernatural) events will transpire here to cause some in both the world and the Church to have that ‘eternal realities awakening’ and for these a radical change will occur in their perspective pointedly in regards to their view of, and relationship to, money....And an “natural-seeming”, but SOP-fulfilling, “Second Woe” 9/11 II event, now permitted to unravel into some sort of a geo-political/militaristic debacle resulting in Rev 18 damages, can indeed easily cause this paradigm shift in many “wised-up” people, but as seen in Rev 19, (expounded upon in this post), there still remains a “Righteousness” War to Fight (Rev 19:11) against now the Eighth ‘head-mountain-king(dom)’ desperate regrouping of a now globalized Babylon = Rev 17:11-15). So the Rev 18 Judgement is only a warning salvo to (Intently-)Capitalistic Babylon (=the 7th head-mountain-king(dom)) and not the utter end of the world. A spurious Philanthro-Capitalistic Babylon some time after that regroup and take over, all in rivalling opposition to the Rev 18:1 Loud Cry testimony of God’s People which had begun and been going on then. And it is that Final “Angel of Light” deception entity which truly/fully, thus most literalistically fulfills Final Events.
            So it is not, as commonly/popularly shallowly/moronically deemed in SDA circles, an Economic/Financial Collapse/Crisis which causingly contributes to the: ‘“Material [=James 5:2a] (vs. Monetary [James 5:3a]) Wealth”, Global Trade/Commodity and Socio-Economic’ debacle and consequential damages in Rev 18:11-19, 22, but precursively, and conversely, a distinct, ‘physically conflagrating & 'flaming'’ (=Rev 18:8, 9-10)  “(Second) Woe” (=Rev 11:14; 18:10, 16, 19) Divine-borne and/or -permitted, ‘“one day” (Rev 18:8), from its physically crippling “one hour” (Rev 18:10, 17, 19)’ judgement (Rev 18:8, 20) event (=RH, July 5, 1906 par. 14-15), as (mercifully (=Rev 7:1-3), halved-ly) were the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01 (=Rev 9:1-12 (Eschatologically); discussed here). Apparently that very same (type of) “eagle” is pendingly still “up in the air”!! (Rev 8:13) [SOP-prophecied, literal/God-borne “balls of fire” are for the utter-end fulfillment of this three-fold “woe” prophecy.].

            Lewis Walton then also claims [at 02:38-04:43ff] that in Mar 181.2 EGW was also “shown” that an Economic Crisis would begin Final Events. However the context of statements in Mar 181.1-5 is in an already begun time of trouble, manifestly the “Little Time of Trouble”, during which the prices of (basic needful) commodities such as food will also rise. For those with Spiritual discernment as to what constitutes God’s Sealing Full Sabbatical Will, this Little Time of Trouble, involving the transpiring of the ‘(Fuller) Mark of the Beast test’ (5T 79.4-81.2) has long already begun, -and during/for the Shaking of SDA's. And with the vast majority, really entirety, of the SDA Church refusing to heed that Full Sabbatical Truth, but instead are variously looking out for their own temporal well being instead of using those personal and denominational resources to fully accomplish Christ Gospel mandate, then they are doing what is being proscribed in that SOP passage. Contextualizingly, confirming enough, this SOP revelation is based on the manna episode when God’s People then were selfishly looking out for themselves, also acting directly against God’s similar commands/counsels not to do so, and Paul uses that OT episode to state that Believers should actually be Socialistically working to help others in need, starting with those in the Church. (2 Cor 8:7-15 = Acts 2:43-45; 4:33-35 = John 17:21-23). So SDA’s today refusing to live according to such Biblical counsels are indeed now fulfilling these prophetic depictions, and indeed all in the context of an increasingly increasing cost-of-living, failing economy. So SDA are unenlightenedly looking into the future for such fulfillments while they are actually in the midst of them transpiring, and are being deceptively slow-boiled all because they are not heeding the discerning sealing truths and True Righteousness message of God for His People.

            So like the Jewish Leaders of Old, SDA’s today smugly and pompously think that they can, and paramountly because of their straightly and only literalistic understandings, ignore the Full claims of (True) Righteousness of God on them (Matt 5:20), but all there is no safety in such a blindly course, which actually only produces the “darkness” in regards to the paramount Spiritual layer of understanding included in God’s, especially prophetic, (cf. Dan 12:3, 10) word, which is symbolically involved in the Matt 25:1-13 parable (=Col 293.3-294.1; cf. here)....

[29] By his own testimony (see this sermon at 10:24-12:28 [video]), David Gates is also guilty of having committed violations to criminal law by Impersonating a Police Officer, through Verbal Identification, which is a default felony that carries custodial/jail time. In this incident he threatened a woman with ‘taking away her driver’s license, arresting her and taking her to the police station if she did not move her traffic-restraining car immediately’!?! (Seems to me that simply explaining how moving her car would help unblock the traffic would be the right, Christian and lawful thing to do instead of (again) lying.) Clearly, as Gates goes on to state, he (falsely) believes that any means, (however unlawful) can be used “as long as the job gets done;” however see the SOP’s similar and whole condemnation of a certain Garmire, and that for a punishably, lesser crime (2SM 64.3-65.3).

            As seen in this October 2010 mea culpa [04:50-08:16ff] even when Gates tries to admit to choice waywardness (i.e., versus a weakness) he still blows it! In that story he relates how he, having thought that someone had left, never to return, a just-bought KFC bucket of chicken after having eaten just a couple of pieces. So in “righteous indignation at that waste of food”, he took it, went outside and distributed it to hungry people in the streets of Guyana, only to find out, as he was now preparing to leave, that the person had just gone to the restroom. Gates goes on to say that: ‘being so embarrassed[???], he just left’ (Not sure, based on his non-sequitur ambiguousness, whether his wife, who he had told ‘he was proud for having given out this wasted food’, was actually present with him, as it is implied, and should inherently, straightforwardly be understood by these “proud” and “wasted” notions.) He also cites a comic fear that it may be said: ‘The missionary pilot stole the man’s chicken.’ He then applies this to the subject of ‘how can God use people who make such big mistakes’. Later in that sermon [59:54-01:00:44], he goes on to specify that the ‘big mistake’ in that story was that (tellingly, self-contradictingly enough): ‘he had taken the food and distributed it without first finding out who it belonged to’ however that is completely proven to be a guileful lie, because in the prior account, he had assertively related, to justify his subsequent “indignant act”,  that ‘he had seen the “gentleman” come into the restaurant, buy the food, sit down right next to him, eat one, and then another piece, and then get up and just leave.’ ?!? So what’s the truth here?? As with all Gateism, whatever is most personally convenient for him at the time. So when he wanted to justify his indignant act, he “saw the guy...” but when he wanted to excuse, what was actually an unjustified act: then it was ‘simply a mistake because he had not tried to find out who the owner was.’ Whatever... [Seems to me like “not knowing who the owner is” is the ultimate reason not to take and dispose of this bought food!!] Actually the real mistake in all of this, which Gates either obliviously or guilefully tries to avoid confronting was that he had left without admitting his wrong to the, effectively, robbed man. Even if he then could not fully, or partially compensate him, it was his Christian duty to, at the very least, go back inside the restaurant and tell the bewildered man what had happen to his food, while, if needed, pray that the man would be gracious enough to understand the honest mistake and forgive him this owed debt. But no, he clearly ‘was just too proud to truthfully own up, and confess, to that,’ valuing more his standing as a quick-triggered righteous actor vs. God’s unchanging standard and principle of truth, thus, typically enough, also morally torpedoeing the whole Spirit of this attempted object lesson. Indeed, as it is quite commonplace with David Gates, in here choosing to also act in a base, prideful and guileful way, he came to actually (also) self-fulfill his expressed “great” fear here of: “The Missionary Pilot stealing the man’s chicken.’ As a person recently quipped on a unrelated issue, such a self-concerned “confession” is being more mea than culpa.

[30] For more on another similar ‘Peter’s sin’ of David Gates in wildly accusing people of being political subversives (i.e., Jesuit Envoys seeking to undermine the U.S. Constitution), thus effectively traitors, see the following posts of mine on a related discussion post (see also this post and this one) at the Adventist Online Forum, (see also the subsequent comments); and also this comment on Daniel Winters’ blog.

[31] While some may (falsely) consider Gates to be a prophet, an issue to which Gates has replied that “he is not a prophet, but he can prophesy based upon what God as done in the past” which actually is, undivorceably still one and the same thing, for a past action of God does not necessarily guarantee a future one, or else e.g., believers today would not need to use bridges to cross bodies of water, but just ignore existing bridges and just pray that God again parts the waters, Gates tellingly has a substantial panoply of actually failed predictions/prophesies which debitly, squarely puts him in the corner of being a “false prophet”, if anything of the sort. (Deut 18:18-22). It is important to Biblically understand that Gates’s great realized actions of the past are not be confused with, nor conflated as, being “fulfilled prophecies,” for these were accomplished strictly out of faith; a faith that is attainable by any believer, and not out of, Biblically speaking, “prophesying,” which is a distinct communicative prerogative that God strictly reserves for Himself, for any fulfillment then is not the result of a believer’s faith, but because of a word that was directly initiated by God. In other words, a prophetic fulfillment is from what God had said He would cause to occur, while a faith fulfillment is a response by God to a believer’s actions to an already stated promise of God. In a sense, from God’s point of view they are both prophetic fulfillments as they are the results of what He had said would happen, however from a human point of view faith is a conforming response, while prophesy is an ground-breaking relating of what God has directly, supernaturally communicated.
            Indeed a past action of God is only indicative of what God can in the future do if all of the various necessitating circumstances are genuinely again present; while a prophesy itself, declares with definiteness what God definitely plans to do in the future, especially if/when all attending conditions are met. So in David Gates’ case, while his efforts for the first network of $1.5 million was divinely rewarded, especially as then he really only had much smaller past experiences/miracles upon which to base his faith upon, (i.e., ‘less than $100,000 miracles’), the efforts for the second network were not so miraculously realized, as now fully aware Church members, who could have supported this second major effort, should have learned the lessons from the first miracle, which many of them knowingly opposed, but, they actually here obstinately, did not. This is indeed the main reason why God could not justly enter into judgement with heathens as expected by Gates, and ‘procure funds from them.’ In other words the real hindrance to significant advancements in the work of the Church is not that ‘the heathens have all the money’, but rather that God’s own people do not even want to give all that they can to support the rapid advancement of God’s work.

[32] However, as stated above, and clearly understandable, Gates predictive prophesy of a total and irreversible, global economic collapse caused by the devaluation of a then hyper-inflated U.S. Currency clearly did not even begin to materialize. This would be like Elijah prophesying torrential rain towards a plentiful harvest, but conversely getting a severe cold spell and precipitation as snow instead, which further complicates the drought and even destroy any grown crops. Similarly, a recession caused by the sudden burst of a “bubble” of toxic mortgage assets is not ‘cataclysmic, worldwide, lawless, martial-law resulting, economic collapse,’ and furthermore this recession actually help to correct a false economic growth, protecting it against further, and more catastrophic, atrophy. Furthermore, the exact opposite of what Gates had predicted could not, in any possibility occur, was used to resolve this crisis.
            I personally believe, based upon the also quite Biblical understanding of this “Lazarus Experience”, that God not only permitted this “Great Recession” to occur in the fall of 2008, but may also have prompted David Gates, starting in the late Spring of 2008 to precisely predict his surfacely synonymous economic crisis in the fall, all as a part of this ‘objective and tangible testing of the heart and faith of the professing Church.’ As far as I have seen, many Church members are ready to believe that Gates had prophesied the economic crisis of 2008, especially when it was occurring, still that did not move them any more into taking more concrete and bolder actions to “Finish the Work”. So the Church quite utterly failed this Lazarus Experience test. Talk about ‘not listening to either the Law, nor the (accepted) prophets’ (Luke 16:31). I guess one is only considered a prophet when they “prophesy” what you want to hear, i.e., ‘already begun Final Events’, ‘thus a soon Second Coming,’ and ‘all the money we’ll ever need, freely from those rich heathens’ and thus logically quite self-contradictory to, and cancelling of, the gist of Gates’ other messages, thus effectively making his “loudest” message a sweet lullaby to Laodicea of: ‘no needed preparatory, nor self-sacrificing work by Church members themselves.’

[33] The key to a surfacedly convincing “Gateism” is that it is to contain the element of something that someone would readily want to believe is true, including David Gates himself, and so the said Gateism will likely not be verified to see if it is factually true, but will instead be, even quite wishfully, and even sanctimoniously, accepted as, literally, a “Gospel Truth.”
            A quite typical example of such “Gateism” is seen in the statement said in this June 18, 2010 sermon (Fri. 7pm) [video] (mp4) at 01:36:19-01:37:18], where, commenting on the quasi-global passionate preoccupation with the then ongoing 2010 World Cup, David claims that: ‘‘FIFA’ has managed to “specifically program” their World Cup Tournament every time, (i.e., ‘every 5 years), and at the specific time (i.e., June-July), when there is an SDA General Conference Session.’ Indeed he self-convincedly states that: “[At] Every General Conference there is a World Cup,... because it happens every 5 years.” And to further emphasize the detrimental distractive results of this, he goes on to say that ‘over the many years that he has been attending GC Sessions’ (since 1980, as he stated in another sermon), ‘whenever’ (thus supposedly in the GC Sessions since 1980), ‘“Argentina plays with Brazil” he looks down upon the main floor and can notice that many SDA delegates from Brazil and Argentina are not present as they have chosen to remain in their hotel rooms to watch these World Cup matches.’
            At (a quite liberal) best, this comment of Gates is trying to spiritually say that ‘the Devil has inspired the FIFA organizer to schedule their tournament on the same 5 years cycle as the GC Session cycle, and in the same time period in the year.’ So to disagree with this ‘spiritual perception’ would seem to automatically paint someone as a supporter of the Devil and this, his subtle, deceptive schemings. Hence the key element of a classic “Gateism”, which in turn makes them readily, although quite gullibly, accepted. Now, at (a quite natural) worst, and this is indeed more than likely the case here, David Gates could care less about the actual facts here, for, as it has been seen many times before, it is what he claims to be the truth that is to be accepted as the truth.
            First and paramountly foremost, the World Cup has been held every 4 years (since its founding in 1930, [except for 1942 & ‘46 =WWII]) and not “every 5 years” as Gates claims. (This is a fact that David Gates evidently fully knew, as (1) a self-stated ‘avid soccer fan, and follower of its World Cup tournament, with his boys’, and e.g., (2) as seen in this January 14, 2006 sermon [at 44:27-45:45] when, while having just irrelevantly, parenthetically alluded to the recently completed 2½ year qualification for the upcoming tournament starting later that year in June 2006 (thus (“Freudianly”) indicating his fanatical excitement for it), he went on to say: “...[the] last time [the World Cup had occurred]... 4 years ago...”). So the World Cup only coincides with GC Session every 20 years, with the next being in 2030 and the last one being in 1990 (GC in Indianapolis; WC in Italy). As this is a incontrovertible, concrete and historical fact, David Gates, despite the many implied ‘up front and/or well-situated, observatory/vantage point’ positions that he may have had due to the various functions (i.e., ‘translator, delegate, “on the insides”’) that he has had at GC Sessions over the years since 1980, the only actual time that he could have observed that ‘Brazilians and Argentinians were absent from the delegates floor due to a World Cup game’ would have been during the 1990 GC. Thus clearly not at the implied “every GC since 1980”. So either this implication in itself was carelessly insinuated, or blatantly lied about; yet the end lying result is still the same).
            So did ‘Brazil play against Argentina’ in the 1990 World Cup... Yes... In the ‘Round of 16' elimination match... On June 24... Eleven days before the beginning of that GC Session which was held from July 5-15!
            So with Brazil eliminated before the 1990 GC even started, there obviously was indeed not even the possibility of a match “between these two teams” during that GC, (nor possibly, at any other GC since). In fact, in the case that David Gates’ use of “...with...” in that statement was, self-impeachingly enough, also a fibbing “Gateism” (i.e., such a match between these two Soccer powerhouses would make the claimed absence of GC delegates credible), the only match involving even Argentina during the 1990 GC was the tournament’s final match, held on Sunday, July 8 (which was Day 4 of that GC Session), between ca. 2:00-4:00 P.M. Indianapolis Time. The GC Sessions Bulletins/Minutes in the SDA Archive (DJVU format) of that day shows that there was a 4th GC Business Meetings at 10:00 A.M. (p. 5), and then a 5th Meeting at 3:15 P.M. (p.6ff). So there plausibly was a ca. 45 minute overlap between a game here and a GC Business Session. However it is indeed certainly, factually, clear that ‘Argentina did not play with Brazil in a World Cup match during this, nor any, Gates attended GC Sessions, i.e., since 1980, thus never resulting in an absence of football viewing Brazilian and Argentina SDA delegates. In fact the only other time that a major Soccer/Football tournament took place during a GC session, of course here: since David Gates began to attend them in 1980, was the 2000 quadrennial European Championships. However as a European Tournament, neither Brazil, nor Argentina took part in it. (See this June 7, 2010 Spectrum Magazine article on this topic of “Football and the GC Session.”). There it is said that a Brazilian delegate was late for a vote because he had stayed behind to watch part of a match between Italy and France. So perhaps David Gates had read this article and decided to, as he only dares to, fantastically embellish it to support a sermonic point he needed to make!?!
            (Also, as it may be corroboratingly pertinent here, in the often mentioned thematic illustration for his ‘Attack is the Best Defense’ sermon [see e.g., this one at 02:28-03:38], where David Gates says (that his sons said) that ‘England had not allowed a goal prior to their Quarter-Final match against Brazil in the 2002 World Cup Tournament’, this is factually not the case as England had allowed a goal in their very first match. Again here, it cannot be determined if it is Gates’ “source” that is at fault or him, however, in the light of the habitual way in which Gates’ liberally shades the truth in order to make his “spiritual points” he cannot be given the benefit of the doubt here. In fact, as his sons were probably quite fully aware of the result details of these World Cup matches, it is easier to believe that it is Gates who conveniently turned this early, lone goal against into a zero in order to “more strikingly” make his key point!??)

            So this clearly was indeed another “Gateism.” Nonetheless it must be said that it actually is the recourse of quite faithless and desperate people to resort to lies in order to ‘get their way.’ 
Indeed in this January 14, 2006 sermon [at 02:00:58-02:01:19], David Gates says:

            “I don't want to dishonor the Lord ever, because I/I've represent... something, that people look and say 'that represents faith in God' and I'm seen/seeing it as a representative of that. If I were ever to dishonor God, it would throw dishonor on the whole message of God. [...] I need that God will keep me from temptation,... [that would in] any way to dishonor him.”

            However his patent resorting to lying, 
especially when under some sort of fearing pressure to show/corroborate that his various "prophetic" viewpoints and claims are, effectively, God’s own, are similarly as wrong as were Abraham’s (the “Father of Faith”) when he lied to the king of Egypt about his wife Sarah (Gen 12:10-20). As the SOP says about this incident: ‘Abraham thus “betrayed a distrust of the divine care, a lack of that lofty faith and courage so often and nobly exemplified in his life” and that “this concealment ... was deception. No deviation from strict integrity can meet God’s approval”’ (PP 130).
            As it was said before, God certainly does not need such ‘guileful mis-representatives’ to Finish His Work of Truth (Rev 14:5), which pertinently enough, had been originally derouted by the same type of “crafty”, and “spiritually-minded”, surface truths. (I.e., ‘Adam’s and Eve’s eyes were indeed opened’ and ‘they indeed now knew both good and evil’ (Gen 2:16-17; 3:1-7; cf. John 8:44)). In fact the OT prophetic basis for the Rev 14:4-5 description of those blameless and guileless 144,000 then gathered upon God’s Mount Zion is Zeph 3:12-13 (which is in a wider context of God having just dealt out due judgement on a Rebellious Jerusalem and its leaders. (=this post)). And, as seen from the priorly mentioned failure examples of Peter and here Abraham, it was respectively pride and fear, both due to a failure of having full faith in God, which resulted in those failures which both involved guile. Similarly in David Gates case, this pride and fear resulted in him also resorting to guile in order to escape/have a “victory”.

            Another, briefly stated here, example of a “Gateism” is that he claims in, a June 2010 sermon, either in this series, or this later one, that: ‘the General Conference Sessions are constantly being held within the territory of the North American Division because, supposedly, the “hosting division” automatically gets one third of the delegates, and thus in this way North American SDAs can be assured to dictate to the rest of the World Church how the Church’s funds, [to which the NAD gives ca. 50%], are spent.’ That would indeed be quite dishonest if GC Session locations were appointed for such reasons, however the SDA Church Constitution and Bylaws (see also in (2009) SDA Yearbook p. 9-16) makes absolutely no mention of such ‘hosting territory privilege/right.’ And furthermore, it is quite insultingly demeaning to think, believe and claim that members of the 12 other SDA Divisions would knowingly allow this to happen without even ever attempting to either fix by motion and vote of the equal and partially proportional representative GC Executive committee (see Article VIII of SDA Constitution), such an unjust stipulation in itself, nor vote GC locations outside of the NAD as they easily could, due mainly to their much larger numbers. (Only 2 of 59 GC Sessions have been held outside of the NAD, namely the 52nd in Vienna, Austria (1975) [Euro-Africa Division], the 56th in the Utrecht, Netherlands (1995) [Trans-European Division]). (Also see in this article how SDA Constituencies are fairly represented at GC sessions.) (Relatedly, here [00:45f] during the 2010 GC, David Gates likewise “Gateistically” claimed that ‘between 40,000-50,000 delegates are present’ -when there were actually only ca. 2,400 “delegates”)
            And, Mr. Gates, even if this were true, an “automatic NAD one-third advantage” would still not be enough to carry such an unfair issue against the representatives from the other 12 Divisions,  even if it was to be a two-thirds majority, now would it??? It seems that the only privilege that a GC hosting Division has is in being the first to present their quinquennial report! (David Gate seems to have been admonished into making a (visibly annoyed) correction of this statement in a subsequent sermon in one of these series, however, as he does not explicitly state that his stressed statement now that ‘the GC is well, and proportionally represented’ is actually a correction of that prior statement, he is not, as he cannot be, given the benefit of the doubt here. A qualifying statement that ‘he had made a false statement on this in a prior sermon’ would have help, but of course, this would inevitably openly expose him as having knowingly and blatantly lied. In fact this independently stated, solely suspected, corrective statement, only further ‘dig his lying hole here’ as he now is seeming to admit that he knows, and always knew, that GC Sessions were proportionally represented. Evidently he is annoyed to have to tell the truth.)

            Along these same lines of preposterous, exaggerated and factually baseless accusations against the SDA Church, in this 2010 sermon [34:03-36:28] in Croatia, he states, by virtually including all of the Divisions of the SDA Church (= also his wholly citing of continents), that ‘these Division are, under the inspiration of the Devil, allpushing” Drums, Rock Music, with (Concert) Smoke, upon all of the Churches in their jurisdiction. He goes on to state, to the seeming increasing suspecting and/or incredulity of his Croatian translator, that this will also soon come to the country of Croatia (which is in the Trans-European Division (TED)), influentially threatening their current “good music” practices.’ “Pushing”.... Really?!? Seems empirically logical to me that if this type of worship is being done, it is not out of a Divisional directive, but out of the individual preference choice of a local Church. Evidently Gates desperately does not believe that he does not need to manufacture lies against the SDA Church, just point out their actual, persisted-upon falsehoods and unbiblical practices.


            Yet another instance of a guileful “Gateism”. In this January 3, 2009 sermon to his former home church in Marion, Illinois, (apparently where his father, Richard Gates, still attends and occasionally preaches) David Gates mentions [at 43:46-43:52], and I quote: “...when I was preaching in Montreal for It Is Written. -I went up there and I did a whole series for It Is Written, -in French...”. To any normal person hearing this, and probably also knowing that David Gates is functional, and/or fluent, in several languages, including French, then it would be believed here at “face value” that he did preach an entire series in Montreal, Quebec, in French for the french-language It is Written ministry, Il Est Ecrit. However, while it is true that David Gates had just done a weekend series of 5 sessions on November 21-22 in Montreal for Il Est Ecrit during their “10th anniversary”** celebration, this was held at an English speaking church, the LaSalle New Life SDA Church, and he spoke entirely in English, as it can readily be seen in the posts of the sermons from this series found on his own website. (See also this video from that series [video]). [He (evidently) did not even begin with a brief French salutation as he had done in his previous visit to Montreal some 3 months before (see this sermon at 00:13-00:28)]. The Il Est Ecrit website clearly states in the announcement of that series that there would be a ‘simultaneous french translation by radio device.’ Yet somehow David Gates wanted people at his former home church to ‘readily understand’ that he had done that series “in French.” How hard could it be for him to have simply have added in his statement: “...which was translated in French.” Apparently this is an absolute impossibility for someone who prideful wants to impress people, and thus prefers to lie.

**(That is the 10th year anniversary of the Il Est Ecrit TV program since they had relaunched the province-wide broadcast following a 7-year hiatus after having been on air (with a different, and the founding, speaker/director) for 17 years from 1974-1991. (See in their ‘About Us’ info). [David Gates himself will probably understand the reason for this elaboration here for he indicatively implies in a retort in one of his Faith Camp Idaho 2010 sermons that: ‘Il Est Ecrit had been on the air for solely 10 years,’ -most probably in a pointed challenge to my statement in this blog post in Note #4]). [So sorry David Gates, but, if nothing else will do, I certainly was not hallucinating when I watched that broadcast growing up in Montreal in the late 1970's and through the 1980's, nor sleep walking when I occasionally would go out door-to-door with my father to distribute pamphlets which invited people to watch the broadcast.]

Then there is always the often cited episode (related e.g., here [at 53:30-53:56]) of David Gates when he was translating into Spanish for a couple of Jehovah Witnesses who were doing a Bible study with someone else. Gates says self-justifying says that he took the liberty of changing the statements and words of these JW’s whenever they said something that was not Biblical. It sounds funny and ‘righteously great’ on the surface/at first until one realizes the complete “unnecessity” of it (not that lying is actually ever “necessary”). First of all, if Gates wanted to keep this person from hearing untruths then he just should have challenged these untruths with the JW’s as they came up. However he was also then trying to conceal to these JW’s that he was an SDA [see at 52:34-53:30]. Secondly, if the truths that Gates had were so Biblical, or more pertinently here, he could clearly and easily prove them in the Bible, then he later could have corrected those stated and truthfully translated, untruths of the JW’s with that Bible student. The Bible example of Abraham vs. Pharaoh (Gen 12:11-20) shows that God does not accept lies, or half-truths, and that for any reason, from people who claim to believe in Him, especially those He may be more closely working with, as it was the case with Abraham. In fact that lie added to the hardship of Abraham as, when found out was kicked out of, probably Egypt, where Abraham had come to more easily deal with the famine.


            And yet, another, recent example of Gate’s innate, flagrant indifference to being truthful, especially when it will self-promote him. In this October 1, 2010 sermon [09:10-09:50] in Norway, he tries to “wow” his audience by stating that ‘after he bought his first airplane, he flew “1000 hours” per yer for the next four years’. Then seeking to explain what this “1000 hours” represented in the piloting/flying world, he goes on to state that this meant: “being in the air, working, all day long from six in the morning to six in the evening... six days a week” and then added after a pause for the Norwegian translation, that: “only the airline pilots actually fly that much” ... [translation] “because they fly every day, all day long.” I am not sure if Gates was banking on a self-deceived belief that his audience were either complete idiots or hypnotized by him, or simply that they, at the very least, probably did not bring a calculator to church for that Friday Night meeting, but his “1000 hours”, stretched over 6 days per week, as he specified, only need 3 hours and 12 minutes per day to fulfill. His ‘12 hours per day for 6 days’ actually adds up to 3,744 hours. The western/industrial country normative work week of 35-40 hours result in 1,820-2,080 hrs/year.
            Now perhaps Gates somehow meant to include the supporting ground work associated with these “1000 hours,” however not only that this is not at all explicitly stated, nor made clear, in none of his 3 statements on this, quoted verbatim above, but as he directly equates these “1000 hours” to the work of (commercial) airline pilots. While a (U.S.) commercial airline pilot is limited by the FAA to fly no more than 1000 hour per year, their non-flying duty time is only 2-4 additional hours per 8 flying hours. This all results in ca. 1500 of total work per year or ca. 29 hours per week on average. And so certainly not Gates’ “every day, all day long.” Actual “Duty Time” (cf. e.g., here) only includes what one does once they have landed at their destination is a distinctly reckoned time. I.e., It may be “missionary work time” but it is not “flight duty time.”
            Furthermore, for the work of Gates vs. commercial pilots to really be comparable, it would have to mean that these pilots would similarly have to: e.g., load and unload their own airplanes, clean them out, refuel them, do various minor and major maintenance repair, plan and chart out their flight schedules and itineraries, sell and process passenger tickets; acquire the cargo contracts, check-in the passenger and luggage, let alone perform identity and security check to also, personally know, first hand, that it is safe to allow then on board; etc.
            Gates goes on to say [09:50ff] that soon after these ‘full-time’ flying days, he was then to graduate from “primary school to secondary school”, claiming that this ‘secondary school’ experience started with the lead up to the purchasing of the first television network. Well probably the reason why he manifestly did not “graduate” from secondary school, i.e., with the failure of his second television network attempt, as related in his “Lazarus Experience”, was that he failed in his early secondary school math and science classes, as seen in his, apparently from that “secondary school” time on, utilized and ongoing guileful lies and unbiblical principles!

[34] Indeed it is so commonplace for David Gates to make a degree of such guileful statements in all of his sermons that I was beginning to seriously wonder if this is not a clinical/pathological problem with him. Indeed, the manifested typical, subconscious, telling, behavorial idiosyncrasies that, almost without fault, accompany these false statements would strongly suggest this, however, in this October 26, 2008 sermon [at 01:37:14-01:37:54] he admits to indeed ‘making misrepresentations’, “not always telling the whole truth”, and “having guile in his mouth” and “prays for God to take it away,” but which he also actually all “attributes” and/or blames (see in this sermon at [09:23-11:16]) on ‘having been raised in a Latin American culture where people prefer to tell you what you want to hear, even if it is a lie, rather than tell you of disappointing/bad news or something that you don't like to hear’ {(cf. here [18:02-19:34]}; which automatically, conversely means that, if crucially necessary (i.e., even in the absence of bad news), they'll also make up what you actually would like to hear!’ (Perhaps this very rationalization is itself another instance of such Gateistic “good guile” which would be answering the question of: ‘Are you really such a liar?’ - His (effective) answer: ‘No, it’s actually a “personally accepted” part of my culture!(?!)’). Last time I checked, Christians were supposed to live above their cultural “down pull”, as David Gates himself preaches, and furthermore, considering the many “whoppers” that Gates went on to tell after that, e.g., as documented throughout this blog, God clearly has been prevented from answering his prayer for such ‘cultural deliverance.’ Nonetheless, such self fault recognition normatively should be a sign that this is actually not an uncontrollable problem of his in itself. Indeed as it can be seen by a causal analysis of these guileful and false statements, Gates should really be seeking to have his pride checked and subdued, because most, if not all, of these lying statements are made so that, ironically enough, his credibility as doing God’s will, and pointedly preaching God’s endtime message, will not be, also ironically enough, second-guessed. So these statements usually have the obstinately/blindedly resolute, contextual overtone of: ‘Well (i.e., ‘notwithstanding the (possible/disproving) actual facts/truth’), I am telling you that this is really what is going on.’!?!

            My prescription for this “diagnosis”: ‘Do duly deal with the Truth Mr. Gates! No matter how much time it may actually necessitate. For anything built on a wrong and/or hastily neglectful foundation will also crumble down when the actual “storm” does comes.’

            Also it is perhaps the fact that David Gates was apparently going around and claiming, in an attempt to demonstrate his ‘great faith,’ that he had ‘signed purchase contracts without having the money,’ while all that these corporate sellers had given him to sign were less legally binding purchasing agreements, (and that mainly for his advantage so that he could retain his “purchasing priority” until he finds the money. Indeed as he explains in a 2007 sermon, (alt. link) [16:22-18:33] even the check he had written out for $1.4 million was (normatively/customarily) being done, with the full understanding on both sides, that it was merely for guaranteeing the seriousness of this intent of purchase.), may be the reason why most people were led to believe that he was a dangerous business/legal liability and thus not a reliable/trustworthy “investment.” The fact of this development can be seen in David Gates’ quasi-apologetic attempts to emphasize this legal distinct when retelling his experience in sermons from 2008+, especially when speaking about the endeavor to purchase the second $35 million TV network (his “Lazarus Experience”), however his statement in this June 28, 2008 sermon [at 01:03:22-01:03:49] shows that in also purchasing the first $1.5 million network, he had indeed first been solely given a “purchasing intent agreement,” and then only later, in ca. the 23rd month following the signing of that agreement on January 31, 2002, he was called by the sellers to arrange for the signing of a more binding “purchasing contract agreement” and was also given a final 30 days in which to fully do so with payment. As Gates himself, albeit, “Freudianly” says/indicates there, ‘he fully understood what this “purchasing contract agreement” legally/bindingly meant.’ Indeed since David Gates is a graduate Business major (i.e., with a Master’s degree), and (former) university professor in this field, he should have known and understood the difference between these two distinct types of arrangements. So such a calculated, guileful attempt to conflate the two here ultimately, really only backfired on him. Again, can God actually bless such persistent guileful behavior(?!); for as Rom 14:23b says: “whatever is not from faith is sin”, and Biblical faith will never violate the Letter, nor the Spirit, of God’s Law; however faithlessness inevitably, surely will! I.e., e.g., just as Abraham faithless, base solution with Hagar actually only complicated his great faith journey and way into the future, and just like Moses’s sin in killing the Egyptian greatly retarded the fulfillment of God’s Deliverance by some 40 years (Exod 2:15, 23), (thus the elapse time discrepancy between Gen 15:13|Acts 7:6 and Exod 12:40. Cf. this blog post.), it very well may be Gates’ simple misrepresentation here that (1) complicated his faith journey, and (2) pushed it to be, as a last/emergency resort, quasi-supernaturally fulfilled at the last minute; case in point, as far as I know, from what he has related, David Gates never had to so wait for such a long and extreme time to have God answer his prior faith actions. (Cf. the inevitable and proportional consequences of Elijah’s lone ‘faith failure’ (similar to Moses’) in Ed 151.1).

[35] Having said all of this on this documented Cousteau statement, there is a similar quote on the internet attributed to Cousteau and his Orchid Memoir. It fully says: 

"The road to the future leads us smack into the wall.  We simply ricochet off the alternatives that destiny offers; a demographic explosion that triggers social chaos and spreads death, nuclear delirium and the quasi-annihiliation of the species." "Our survival is no more than a question of 25, 50 or perhaps 100 years." (See here, cf. here, here and here).

            However there are several problems with claiming this as the actual “quote” of David Gates, starting with Gates’ rendering of it himself. Firstly, since he made it seem that he was about to quote it from the Cousteau book, then how does, even “paraphrasingly”, “25, 50 or perhaps 100 years” substantively become “40 years,... maybe, through a miracle, 100 years.” Pointedly, how do you: (1) paraphrase “25 or 50” in to “40” and (2) then transform the simply “perhaps”, into now an elongated, and religiously-slanted: “maybe, through a miracle”. That is not “paraphrasing,” that is slyly, ‘putting thematically foreign expressions and concepts into someone’s mouth and mind,’ especially as the singular “40 years” here of Gates was evidently so construed to fit his overall “Second Coming in 2031 theory.” And to make Cousteau’s “100 years” further seem completely impossible, Gates makes his supposed “staunch atheist” seem so desperate to now see this capable of being done ‘only by a miracle’, and that from some deity, if not Yahweh Himself, that Cousteau does not even believe exist. (So David Gates, Cousteau was not an atheist!?!). That all was a clever attempt of his, but self-defeatingly, not clever enough, especially as Gates wanted to demonstrate that he actually had the exact quote right in front of him. So indeed he only proved that he was deliberately miscontruing Cousteau’s statement and, like he typically does, putting his own econo-religious doomsday slant/spin on it. That in itself further really proves that Cousteau is not the reliable source that Gates needs him to be since Cousteau could not here say these 40 years, or the 100 years, without depending on an “ethereal miracle.” In fact, Cousteau’s quote in context seems to focus, as also seen in his other quote discussed above, on the failings of man and not on the planet itself. ‘“Social chaos” caused by a demographic explosion’ is not the ‘unstoppable and irreparable ecological demise’ that Gates wants, and desperately needs, to validate his “prophetic” scenario.
            Indeed as Cousteau is quoted to have said here:

“If we go on the way we have, the fault is our greed and if we are not willing to change, we will disappear from the face of the globe, to be replaced by the insect.”

            And as a Francis Puyalte, in the Conservative daily Le Figaro, logically/naturally wrote on Cousteau’s memoir in general:

“is a distress signal, an SOS. It's the work of a planetary sociologist deeply worried about the madness of man”. [various emphases supplied] (source)

            Secondly, I have now gone through Cousteau’s book twice, page by page, including listening to the audio version, and have not found that quote in those publications. The quotes on the internet, which are without a page reference, were all made shortly after Cousteau’s death in 1997. (Indeed it was also, ‘timely’, used during this Net ‘98 presentation (video) (audio) [10:42-12:24], and perhaps this is where Gates was really “paraphrasingly quoting” from). Well unless I saw/heard everything else in the published book (most probably a similar copy of the publication which Gates was holding up), [and in a book filled with words, it is not easy to miss the strikingly distinct construction of “25, 50 or perhaps 100 years”], then this may either have been a Cousteau “agrapha” at worst, or a statement retracted just before the publishing, at best. If it was retracted, then why? All of this not only casts some doubts about the surety of Cousteau’s view here, (if even ever of any applicable import), or probably, that of his editors/publishers. Nonetheless, it would only speak against, David Gates with his would-be lying demonstration here of deliberately feigning that he could have read this quote from that published memoir of Cousteau that he was holding. So apparently this was another guileful Gateism, and now with ‘smoke and mirror’ props.

[36] While it is surfacedly understandable, and even commendable, for David Gates not to have engaged in the typical “beg-a-thon” (as 3ABN’s Danny Shelton quips) campaign for financial support, though to a limit, as these ministries themselves realize, for they do explicitly and deliberately, though indirectly, make their financial needs known as they present their planned projects or even speak of financial troubles, this stance of David Gates is particularly puzzling in that he almost forbids his SDA audiences to contribute financially to his projects!?! (See e.g., in this sermon at 37:44-38:54 [video]). For David Gates especially, and his particular message of ‘unloading or capitalizing on your assets before the imminent and unrecoverable total economic collapse’ this makes absolutely no Biblical sense. On the one hand he is telling people that they should invest in God’s work, all the while presenting his own great plans in this line, and he does go around to SDA Churches worldwide to preach this message, yet on the other hand he is practically ordering, if not deriding, these audiences to not support him financially!? It seems that he actually shot himself in the foot here, for he actually stifled whatever impressions the Spirit of God may have been making on his hearers. Case in point, most, if not all, of his funding thus far for his ministry and projects, to my knowledge from his own sermon testimonies, has only come from gifts of SDAs, and not from “rich heathens.” And he initially did fully “expect” and solicit funds from rich SDA entrepreneurs. In fact, he actually almost prevented the SDA funds manager who had promised him the $35 million dollars for the second network from even making his offer because, as he recounts in some sermons, he initially would not even answer the guy’s question in regards to how much money he needed for his projects!?! The guy practically had to pry it out of David Gates who evidently was irrationally, now defaultly snubly dismissive of any SDA who was offering to contribute to his projects. However he will be the first to tell you that ‘“whenever” Bill Gates does call him, (actually responds to the letters he has sent him), he won’t hesitate to make his specific requests known.’...  What is the relationship that the Bible says about “pride”, a “haughty spirit” and “destruction” and a “fall”?! (Pro 16:18). Indeed David Gates was the orchestrator of his own demise, and that, fundamentally by being variously unbiblical. You cannot be asking for God to answer your prayers and then obstructing Him from answering them how He actually, (i.e., Biblically) wants to!?!* Indeed David Gates is expecting, nay, thinking to dictate, for various self-confessed ‘demonstrative’ reason, that God manifest Himself in ‘“a great and strong wind,” “an earthquake” and/or “a fire,”’ but God instead still wants, in this pre-final judgement, probationary period, to express Himself through “the sound of a gentle blowing.” (1 Kgs 19:11-12)

* In fact, David Gates himself, in a recent presentation (if I recall, a Faith Camp 2011 in Asia, but which I presently cannot precisely relocate), manifestly, humbly/repentfully and responsibly, recognized/admitted/acknowledged that his waywardness (which I chiefly see as his guilefulness) was the (and valid) reason why his, particularly rich SDA friends, did not financially support his proposed projects. Indeed this knowing, guileful claim that he had sign a “contract” when in fact he had only sign an “intent of purchase” was criminal, and God certainly does not need criminal, nor guileful actions to finish His work. So Gates did indeed cause his own demise, yet the majority/rest of the SDA Church who actually believed that God was leading him, (hence his many invitations to speak in their churches/conventions), rejected him for an entirely distinct reason. Thus God was still able to ‘test what was really in their hearts’ through, pointedly, Gates’ “Lazarus Experience”, indeed just as God had done with the First Century Jews in the resurrection of Lazarus!!
            So, contrary to the knee-jerk comment made here, I am not “contradicting myself” but just “journalistically” relating the actual spiritual denouement in this whole saga. (And one needs to properly understand the Theological teaching of “God and the Future” here because if an initial plan of God fails, it is not because, as the Classical View can but state, ‘it was always supposed/doomed to fail’. This all reminds of how the eventual “shocking” waywardness of Israel (see e.g., Isa 5:1-7) made God Himself seem to be ‘contradicting Himself in regards to the earlier promises He had made to Israel, as also seen in OT Bible Prophecies, (=Jer 18:9-10; Cf. Mark 1:14-15-Matt 10:23-Matt 23:37-24:2), yet He was still able to accomplish, albeit in some greatly reduced part, His plans for that Israel, which was the ushering in of the plan of redemption for this world through ‘One born “from” them’, namely Jesus Christ. (Deut 18:15-19; cf. vss. 20-22 in regards to David Gates)
            However, in pointed regards to all parties here, namely David Gates, his “wealthy friends”, SDA leaders and the SDA Church laity, all being at fault here, given the fact that David Gates was honestly seeking to act in faith in obedience to God’s promises while those other parties faithlessly, variously were not, nor really trying, they, as it was the case with Abraham versus first Pharaoh (Gen 12:10-20) and then Abimelech (Gen 20), for having lawlessly made God’s faithful one to “fear”, they were the party that were more/most at fault. (Zeph 3:13 = Rev 14:5) And thus these respectively failing parties here (=Zeph 3:1-4ff) are the ones who are also liable of greater condemnation and judgement.

            Also, as seen in this June 28, 2008 sermon [at 01:21:50-01:22:58], Gates does make the acceptable statement that ‘he deliberately did not explicitly ask for money from people, instead relying upon God to impress people, who would obediently give,’ (which still does not justify him basely, actually, variously, standing in the way of people giving to his ministry, as mentioned above), and through this approach, he probably uncovered the real issue with Laodicea, namely that it is overwhelmingly, both individually and corporately, generally not willing to make the expectedly needed sacrificial effort to heighten the work of God, but instead prefers to advance solely mainly as their “due 10% tithing” allows. (What if tithing was not one of the 28 Fundamental Beliefs as such, also quite Biblical, sacrificial ministry work should additionally be??). The hard lesson here for Gates and Laodicea is that God has already given his Remnant people all of the basic spiritual and physical resources they need to be able to collectively make even seemingly sacrificial efforts for such heightened ministry actually painless and non-burdenful. So it is the actual intrinsic disunity (i.e., non “one-mindedness” of the Church that is the greatest hinderance to all this being realized and even the testing, faith-based, self-supporting example of David Gates, albeit which itself variously reflected and highlighted many of these deficiences of the corporate Church, could not literally “jump start” this Church into the level of devotion it needs to rightly have in regards to finishing God’s work.
            Indeed this whole stance of Gates paramountly seems to be more a pompously prideful, and also blindly vindictive, attitude where he was solely preoccupied with wanting to have proven his proclaimed ‘money from the rich heathens’ prophetic theology, a view which, as explained earlier, is actually not at all found in the Bible, nor SOP. This may also be the reason why David Gates so wants a U.S. caused global economic collapse, which he believes is foretold in prophecy. However, as explained before, the Bible and SOP speaks of God’s direct judgement ruining the wealth of the rich, and not such economic woes being the “natural” result of man’s own undoing, as in unpayable debt and hyperinflation. Indeed an economic crisis may be one of the four winds that God has been, and will hold back, so that His work can be fully and normatively done (Rev 7:1-3), (i.e., without such faith-void, coercive influences, effectively resulting in conversions ‘because the economy has collapse as “prophesied”!?!), however when such a crisis does occur, it will not have been because of the U.S.’s unpayable debt. In fact, it very well may be that the world has recognized that the United States as a whole has become “too big to fail” and as seen before , will be glad to bail it out rather than see its economy crash, for that would inevitably cause major losses to them. So expect to see “Great Global Recessions”, as seen before, to correct skewed financial markets, however, even solely temporally speaking, do not expect to see a complete collapse of the U.S. economy. Indeed when your economy ultimately continues to grow, and it can generate over $14.4 trillion dollars per year, it may be greatly indebted, even to the point of the National Debt practically never being repayable, but it is not likely to run completely dry of funds. (Cf. this article speaking against the virtual impossibility of a total U.S. Economic collapse). Notwithstanding, if this debt will eventually, ever be repaid, it will require that the U.S. Government to drastically lower its current $3.6+ trillion dollar annual expenditures by severely cutting back on many current, large and costly discretionary and even mandatory public programs such a Social Security, Health Care, Public Education, and even National Defense, in other words, revert back to a truly more Capitalistic Economy, where everyone suffers the fate of their own financial capability, for, as it can be seen for the listing of such public programs, it is primarily the U.S. and its population alone that will suffer from such drastic cuts in Federal spending in order to repay its debt. The other option of course, is the socialist one of increasing taxes, which again will still ultimately affect the U.S. population, but this time in less “vital” sectors, probably also leading to a Great Domestic Recession. So, worst case scenario, Foreign U.S. creditors will demand (i.e., force) these strictly domestic changes in order to collect on their outstanding loans. While domestic hyperinflation can be a problem, it ultimately is rectified by such domestic adjustments which forces a country to actually live within its means. Foreign economies may even, in significant part, cease to do business with the up to then, quite convenient American economic market, and seek other markets for reliable economic investment and trade, where even the investment in developing these new markets, which thus far has been the main reason why they have been largely bypassed, as capitalists typically seek to make a quick buck, will then be seen as a much more viable, safer and profitable investment, even if only in the extended interim when the U.S. economy would then be restabilizing and rebuilding itself.
            Furthermore, think about it, with this vital strong fundamental economic base of educated and trained people and highly advanced industrial and transportation assets and infrastructure, what is the worst that can ultimately happen? If ever the real value of the (hyper-)inflated U.S. Currency becomes an issue and it suddenly drops, the world will indeed go through a critical period of, somewhat chaotic, adjustments, no longer being able to depend on their U.S. exports for income, which was advantageous for the U.S. because they had a higher valued currency, but reversedly it will be the world that will now begin to invest in the U.S.’s now much, much cheaper and efficient production and exporting power. So the U.S. will, at least for a while, become what China currently is, namely the “Factory of the World” or more qualitatively accurate, the “Advanced Industrial Plant of the World”. Indeed, at worst, history will repeat itself, and just like it was the fact that the U.S. had a great industrial base and highly trained, industrious people prior to the Crash of 1929, that logically led many of its quasi-crippled World War II allies to send their money to the U.S. to produce the needed war machinery and weapons (e.g., “Lease-Lend”), and it is this great investment that eventually, finally brought the U.S. out of its Great Depression to the point that after World War II was won, it was the U.S. that could even give money to Europe for its rebuilding (i.e., the Marshall Plan). So at worst, expect such a scenario, even if, as David Gates repeatedly overclaims, the U.S. Dollar suddenly is widely known to be really worth “ca. 5 cents” or “less than toilet paper”!
            So, in conclusion to Gates’ repeated unbiblical and false views, indeed, like any ‘house that is not built on the solid rock of God’s Word,’ (Luke 6:47-49)  it eventually does get destroyed. Gates repeatedly disclaims in making his various views known that ‘he is not a theologian,’ well perhaps he should have invested a little more in this area before launching off on, especially his theologically implicated, prophetic predictions. Still “not being a theologian here actually simply involves not being Biblical, for all of Gates errors could have been completely avoid if he had properly, and even simply read and accepted what the Bible is actually saying, e.g., through proper Bible study.

[37] To think also that Gates quotes on his Twitter feed (July 3, 2010) that: “Criticsm is the price one pays to the public for being well known.” Well, actually...‘criticism simply is, solely, the inherent and normative consequence of having done something that is consider to be controversial’ because, case in point, if everyone with whom David Gates was so “popular” with, per se, (i.e, simply “widely-known”), fully approved of everything he did, then he would not even begin to be “criticized”!

[38] Said in this June 16, 2010 sermon (Wed. 7pm) [video] (mp4) at 02:00:20ff].

[39] Said in this June 18, 2010 sermon (Fri. 7pm) [video] (mp4), esp. at 00:59:01ff]. If recent David Gates history is indicative, also expect a ‘3 days = 3 years’ message very soon, probably then retroactively reckoned from the Economic Recession in the fall of 2008, when, especially the NAD Church, did indeed begin to significantly suffer economically; -and thus to end in the fall of 2011, when the Church, like a “converted Jonah” will then, after such a punishment*, obey the call of God!?!

* As discussed here, while God did act to punish Jonah for his (ultimate) rebellious resistance, that action was mainly done to “revive” in Jonah his by then ‘temptedly sunken in distrust’ belief that God could protect his life on this mission. (PK 266.3)  This thus helped Jonah to no longer be dreadful about confronting the expectedly ‘proudly obstinate’ Ninevites (PK 266.2), however, in regards to Gates’ SDA Church application, unlike Jonah, the SDA Church already have, through the SOP’s visions of the end, clear indications that God fully plans to, if/when necessary, most powerfully and supernaturally intervene to ultimately protect the lives of those who will proclaim the Final Warning (EW 283.2-284.1; GC 634.1), even if some people may priorly be literally or effectively martyred in the pre-Close of Probation Little Time of Trouble leading up to that final Great Time of Trouble (=Rev 14:13; 3SM 399.2). Jonah had absolutely no such ‘pertinently tailored’ assurances, and ‘depictively, quasi-explicitly, detailed prophetic plannings from God, and that is really what had led Jonah to become psychologically overwhelmed (by the Devil) and to shirk from his mission.
            Furthermore, also as opposed to Jonah who, as a result, thought that his efforts would moreoverly be completely futile, God has given the clear indication to the SDA Church that He would ‘so greatly assist their proclamation, through the aid of the Holy Spirit in the Loud Cry,’ that this message would most likely have great results by convicting its honest hearers, i.e., the “Great Multitude” from amongst, particularly, the wider Christian global community (=Rev 7:4b-8, 9ff; see e.g., 3SM 386.2, 386.4; 20MR 125.7; GC 612.2; RH, July 23, 1895 par. 3), with up to now, actually many evidences of this probability from the SDA Church’s current ca. 1,000,000+ baptism/accessions per year. A similar ‘Spirit-impressing’ was done by God amongst the Ninevites (see PK 270.2). However, in regards to Jonah, he was not given any indication of this ‘most likely’ success for the Ninevites, manifestly because God, who could read the hearts of these Ninevites, did not see many, if any, ‘honestly/innocently acting “sinners”’ (i.e., transgressors of His Law) from amongst them. They, indeed “proudly”, were unscrupulously plunged into their preferred sinful lifestyle, likely also, most awarely, violating every basic law of nature (cf. Rom 1:18-32). And so their conversion was indeed ‘completely out of the blue’, even, as Theologically understood in here, also ‘unexpectedly’ to God (cf. Isa 5:2b, 4b, 7b; Gen 22:12).
            So quite significantly, Jonah, relatively speaking, actually had “actionable” excusing reasons to not initially do his mission, not having been given any pointed indication, nor demonstration of either its worthwhileness or success, nor an explicit/tangible demonstration of his personal security, whereas the SDA Church has long ago, repeatedly, and for a while now been given all of those assurances. So Jonah’s (prophetic) commission, perhaps his very first (and only) one, required much more faith than the current, still pending one given to the SDA Church. So, in regards to the SDA Church, God would be use of further ‘compelling demonstrations’, even ‘force’, as Gates’s view involves, to get them to do this would actually be against Great Controversy (=Truth) rules, and thus would only serve bolster the case, if not also, (pre-maturely) opposing power, of Satan. Therefore in such a case where: ‘the salt [i.e., the SDA Church] has lost its taste,’ it indeed ‘cannot then be made salty again’, and ‘the only just, even most rational/logical, option then left is to discard it!!’ (Matt 5:13; cf. Isa 5:4-6)!

[40] This email motion was made to the (1) Venezuela-Antilles Union Mission where apparently Gates’ ‘purposely foreign to the North American Division’ membership is maintained (so that “it cannot be easily/readily removed”), and as stated below in Note #42 is where he formerly had formal ministerial credentials; (2) to this Mission’s Division, the Inter-American Division, who’s current president Israel Leito, according to Gates’ testimony, provides much “counsel and protection” to him; (3) to the North American Division where David Gates does a lot, if not most, of his preaching, as this is the world region where his particular message of ‘U.S. Economic Crisis-induced Final Events’ is to have its genesis; and (4) to the General Conference as David Gates does preach his substantiatedly skewed messages to any church in any of the World Church’s Divisions who give him a podium.
            If applicable as a SDA Church member you can second this motion by also contacting these Church entities and making mention and referencing this blog post, (i.e., including its URL). (Click on their links above for their contact info).
            As, according to the SDA Church Manual (p. 193), ‘the purpose of a Church censure is twofold,’ namely: (1) “To enable the church to express its disapproval of a grievous offense [i.e., e.g., determined and insistent specific date-setting proclamations which are “serious” and “crucial” enough to the cause of God, to have required expressed Divine condemnation and reproof when done in the days of EGW; guileful lying among other sins] that has brought disgrace upon the cause of God” and (2) “to impress the offending member with the need for amendment of life and reformation in conduct [i.e., stop the (public) lying (indeed a violation of the 9th Commandment), date-range setting, oblivious motivating through fear, and making Biblically spurious, self-aggrandising rationalization, etc, cf. 18MR 247.1]; also to extend to the individual a period of grace and probation during which these steps might be taken [e.g., time for theological studies and/or to Biblically fix his messages].” [applicational emphasis supplied]; -a lack of spiritual discernment in the great harm that is caused by such actions or even by its effective sanctioning and sustainment, is only a self-condemnatory statement on the state of the Church instead, where indeed precise Biblical truth is not really important, especially as it is variously much more “costly”. And just to think that this is the Church that condemns other Christian Churches for having the equivalent attitude towards Biblical Truth.
___________

            As seen in this sermon [video (#1)] in this late November 2010 series at the Loma Linda Filipino SDA Church (see especially at 20:13-24:53), David Gates continues to use his unscriptural and non-factual: ‘fear of a supposed,  imminent, economic-based, ecologically soon-doomed planet, crisis’ as the source of motivation for people to engage in Gospel works. Also as seen in this sermon on the next day, Nov. 20, 2010 [video at 12:58-16:05], David Gates fundamentally believes that it is going to be an economic crisis that will produce the trials that will resulting in the Shaking in the Church. However the SOP is clear (see LDE 175-182) that the Shaking will be the result of people opposing the way in which faithful members are advancing the work of the Church, which worldly and spiritually-slumbering members only see a threat, and when the world itself will rise up to oppose this Bible-based movement (1T 181), these will abandon the Church, probably with whole Churches, re-organizing themselves into a distinct church, and join in opposing the work of those Faithful Church members. The SOP says nothing of temporal reasons such as an economic crisis causing this spiritual event of the Shaking. Any ‘losses of wealth’ in the Church will not be due to an economic crisis, but will be the end game of this Shaking when a small faithful remnant in the Church will have to regroup with the little institutional facilities that they have managed to maintain, if any, as a result of this schism. Rather than suffer these institutional and marginalizational losses, many will opt to remain with the popular side who will have control of most, if not all of these existing properties. Therefore those who shallowly think that the true Church then will be the ones who retain the trademarked name and logos and control of institutions after the Shaking will also be deceived. God Truth is not limited to physical institutions. (Act 7:44-50; cf. the gradual departing of God from Israel’s institutions in the Shaking vision of Ezekiel 9:3; 10:4, 18, 19; 11:22, 23 and its subsequent return in the newly (re)builtTemple Ezek 43:2-5; 44:4 = EW 272).
            Interestingly enough, as this ‘get-ready-before-the-total-economic-collapse’ scaring approach, in now several years of being preached by David Gates, has not brought about the end-time revival that he most probably expected, he honestly should be asking himself if, either: the Church really does not have a Spiritual and Missions-minded pulse and/or the Holy Spirit cannot do its work of convicting through such a unscriptural message and approach!?! Indeed if such a “startling” message has not awaken people, then they are not asleep but dead or the message, though interesting and entertaining, is simply not seen as Biblical.

[41] Notwithstanding, see this July 6, 2010 personal testimony of Daniel Winters on his blog [comment #3895] of: ‘David Gates having been privately held to some account by some SDA leaders during the 2010 GC Session.’

[42] Interestingly enough, David Gates’s previously used to state that he was an “Ordained SDA Minister,” and indeed, as seen in the 2008 SDA Yearbook (p. 154), he is listed as having ministerial credentials from the Venezuela-Antilles Union Mission in the Inter-American Division. He is also listed as the associate director of the Communications Department and ADRA. All the while, David Gates, by his own testimony, was not being paid by these formally recognizing/endorsing SDA entities. However these official listings of Gates’s do not appear in the subsequent 2009 (cf. p. 157), 2010 [PDF] & 2011 Yearbooks, which, especially with the Ministerial Credentials, leads to the conclusion that they were revoked, and his ordination “invalidated”; and also that Gates was dismissed from his Communications and ADRA positions and replaced by someone else. Clearly it is not because he has stopped doing the same type of work that he was doing when he was honorarily given these positions and formal recognitions. So it apparently was done for some sort of disciplinary reason, for even if this was done out of an ultimate liability concern by the so formally “endorsing” SDA entity, such a pre-emptive disassociation is only necessary if the conduct of the one endorsed is inherently unethical and unbiblical. Biblical conduct is normatively not, in any way, a “liability,” especially to the Church itself. (Unless of course, as with e.g., the CIA’s sector of NOC agents, this was done so that David Gates can function as the Church’s Black Ops “spook”!??)
            Indeed, as the formal act (or “sacred rite” =SDA Church Manual) of Ordination is done in acknowledging and endorsing recognition of the Holy Spirit’s work in one’s Church work,  leadership, ministry, and also that it was apparently be done in David Gate’s case for the reason that: “The only way one may be qualified for serving the church at large is by ordination to the gospel ministry” (p. 51 [PDF p. 70]), the ‘invalidation’ of it is unequivocally a formal Church statement in regards to the belief of a no longer valid unction of the Holy Spirit on that person. However, as seen in this August 2011 Conference (media), as the Church, globally, manifestly still does not mind directly associating with David Gates and his ministry,* it can be logically deduced that the Church is therefore (at least in this case) unbiblically administering the “sacred rite of ordination” as merely a lawsuit liability disculpation. And in case-in-point corroboration of this observation, in this November 17, 2011 Extreme Faith Report segment [06:47], David Gates states that he will perform a marriage, and that in Canada, thus, moreover, cross-jurisdictionally, within the Canadian Union Conference, which all implies that he is manifestly actually still being (somewhere and somehow) considered as an ordained minister in/by the SDA Church. So then, by process of logical elimination, it is “self-obvious” that this is not being formally/officially recognized nor recorded in the SDA Church for such base reasons of “(financial) liability disculpation”.
            As indeed entrenchedly usual with this Church, it is money|finance|worldly lucre that determines what the truth is in matter of its Faith and Practice.

* However see the attempted, (albeit quite quibblingly shallow, on top of, substantively tangential), opposition by the Euro-African Division (EUD) in the communications documents on this page- and given the actually gross demonstrations of incompetence in a lack of knowledge and judiciousness in their decision making and its substantiations, it is not at all surprising, that, as David Gates later relates in this 2012 sermon [28:00-30:08ff] about that affair, that those Division leaders were eventually all removed from office. (By the way, contrary to what Gates claims in that sermon, the EUD had not issued an “order” to not invite David Gates, but merely, as explicitly stated in their opposing communique (Point #5): a “recommendation”.)

[43] 
Once I had decided to write a more detailed response to David Gates “Joseph Story”/Sep 11, 2010 Prophecy back on September 2, 2010, I was intending to pointedly have it completed and posted before that September 11, 2010 date because, contrary to some people who are even also against this time setting, I do not judge if something is prophetic from the angle of: “if an event actually occurs, and/or, on a specific date, but first and solely if the looked for event is actually Biblical to start with. It is indeed quite unbiblical to try to so “reversely interpret” the Bible based upon daily events. People who do so will be prime candidates to ‘go and see false christs and false prophets’ (Matt 24:23-26), and thus put themselves under the direct influence of powerful deceptions. David Gates has chosen to so “reverse interpret” Biblical Prophecies, where he does not even really care if his exegesis and prophetical interpretation is correct, just a long as he sees an event which he believes is a fulfillment of his Prophetic scenario, and then he selectively and obliviously builds, and also rebuilds, due to past failures, his prophetic understandings and theology around that latest plausible event.
            So this post was not posted today on September 12, 2010 out of an unsure ‘first wait and see for 9/11/2010’. Indeed the 20 pages for the points presented here in this detailed note were completely drafted and written out before this date (except for a due (“final nail”) statement for indeed nothing occurring on 9/11/2010, since this transparently naturally/logically, completely defeats David Gates entire “definite time prophetic scheme”). Due to the complete unbiblicalness of Gates’ view, I was more weary of something occurring that was in any way remotely relatable to an economic crisis on that date to give any life to any part of Gates’ speculations (e.g, Greek protesters planning to confront their government on their economy, or even far-fetchedly, the planned burning of Qur’ans and the potential/probable global backlash - in fact look for David Gates to revisionally and sanctimoniously claim that ‘God in His mercy chose to avert another 9/11 type of crisis by persuading that Florida pastor to not follow through on his book-burning plans on that day’). So if people then still want to cling to the intentionally “Teflon” prophecies of David Gates, as if God Himself is either not powerful enough to timely accomplish a prophecy of His, or completely state such a prophecy well in advance, or cannot make certain and definite statements about what He will do in the future because He is so dependent upon the condition of professed people in Him, then suit yourselves. (The future possible faithlessness of His People, has never prevented God from making definite and even timed prophecies, so why should this suddenly be a handicapping issue with Gates prophetic scenarios.) Despite being an SDA, you are actually being misled and deceived by a textbook “false preacher and false prophet,” and do not allowed the fact that David Gates end goal (i.e., endeavoring to “finish the work”) may in its isolated self, be Biblical, because the many and various unbiblical methods which he is resorting to seek to achieve this end goal, actually do not lead to that end.
            With that said, here is the detailed refutation of David Gates latest false prophecy (These main points have been arranged thematically. Time markers indicate the time on first the Audio followed the [Video/(Alt Link)] {initial link}] of the Gates’ talk. (I.e., It’s so full of lies, it should not even be considered a sermon.) [These precise time markers may slightly fluctuate for some reason].
A. Exegetically
1. Bible Examples (1 Cor 10:6-11)
01:03:05 [V 01:13:45] - David Gates prefaces his false exposition by, actually paraphrasingly, quoting 1 Cor 10:11, implying that what happened to Joseph is to be “an example” to us, and that a ‘definite time example.’ First of all, that is pure eisogesis, especially in trying to make the 7-year periods there literally, eschatologically reapplicable. Secondly Paul was making this Old Testament reference to highlight the moral/spiritual lessons from a past OT example, namely a warning against falling into idolatry, immorality, faithlessness and murmuring against God (see 1 Cor 10:6-9) and not to make a literal, prophetical reapplication as David Gates is doing by saying: ‘because these things happened to Israel in the past, they will now also happened to us again today.’ There is no model, nor instruction in this statement of Paul to make Old Testament Stories ‘definite time prophecies for the end.’ Paul was only saying here that the present “New Israel” should be careful not engage in such sinful behavior lest God also deal with them as He did with Ancient Israel. These episodes were indeed fully carried out by God then as object-lesson “examples”; and were indeed written down for spiritual “instruction”, but not for “set time prophecies.”

2. Lean Years = 2-1-4 Split
01:15:28 [V 01:30:24]- David Gates’ claim that there is a 2-2-3 year splitting up of the “lean years” in the story of Joseph is wrong. The Bible rather recounts a 2-1-4 storyline: (1) Gen 45:6 - the first 2 years of the famine; (Gen 45:11 - Joseph's Family Come for last 5 years); (2) Gen 47:13-17 - the money of citizens in Egypt “runs out” starting in year 3 therefore livestock is given in exchange as a means of currency, (which indeed was quite normative for many centuries until ca. the 18th century); (3) Gen 47:18-22 - livestock exchange only was sufficient for one year, so starting in year 4 the people offer their properties and themselves as workers for Pharaoh in order to pay for obtained grain. This remains in effect from years 4-7. (Gen 47:18 speaks of the “second year” since agreement for livestock back in year 3, so therefore, year 4. (cf. end of vs. 17)). Joseph then sets up the mandatory one-fifth return from now the pledged private properties of the people (Gen 47:23-26) vs. the same system that had previously been established during the “7 fat years” for, apparently, solely the public lands of Egypt (Gen 41:33-37). (Apparently private citizens also had this opportunity to ‘“fat years”, one-fifth storage,’ but most did not. That is probably why they were now intransigently required to pay, however they can, for grain that had been stored by the Government from public lands.)
           
                                                                                                                                   
B. Biblically
1. Bible Stories Are Not (Time) Prophecies
- By arbitrarily making Bible Stories become prophesies, and that when current events are (subjectively) suspected to be following their pattern, David Gates is taking away the deliberate distinctiveness of a prophecy, as then, virtually the whole Bible could be taken as a prophecy.

2. Non-corroborating Biblical Example
01:11:03 [V 01:24:26] - David Gates vacuously claims that the examples of ‘the Deliverance of the Jews during Esther’s days’ and ‘and the miraculous Red Sea Crossing’ corroborate his Joseph Story prophecy because these shows that God will provide a way of escape for His people. While that notion itself is Biblical and therefore true, that hardly, inevitably makes his current view/prophecy also true. Such a correlation and understanding of Gates is only due to his private and unsubstantiated bias that there is an inevitable (i.e., both in temporal and prophetic terms (= the SOP’s “National Ruin”) total economic collapse coming soon, a view that is actually not supported by any facts as shown above in this blog post, except solely for the direct interjection of God, and that as a judging consequence for a “National Apostasy”, as delineated in the SOP, and not to cause this prophesied event, as David Gates false preaches.
            Also, neither one of these Biblical deliverances were due to the fulfillment of a prophecy. Both were instead actually realized by last minute, indirect and direct, respectively, interpositions of God. In the story of Esther, not even the fact that she was in the palace as a Queen was considered as a sure ‘prophetic orchestration’ of God. Mordecai’s often quoted statement in Esther 4:14 was simply a reflexive “who knows” questioning pondering of ‘perhaps this is why you are in this position’; and that, not necessarily, for ‘this specific time’ but merely for “such a (=Heb. “if” particle) time as this”. Mordecai also clearly says that ‘if Esther did not act, God would provide deliverance from another source, at her lost.’

3. No Bible/SOP Mention/Warning, At All
01:08:41 [V 01:21:19] - David Gates, effectively through reversed-, guilting/blaming, psychology, impliedly says that ‘only a sleeping church could have missed the “sign” of the 9/11 attacks which indicated the start of Joseph’s fat years’, “their”, supposedly “way/means of escape out of this coming (2008-2015) crisis’, however given that (a) there are hundreds of similar matter-of-fact/narrative stories in Bible; (b) the SOP never hinted at such an, even typological, application of the Joseph story; (c) the SOP clearly speaks against using set time for eschatological prophecies and prophetic messages, on top of (d) the many incontrovertible factual points made here against Gates’ view and application, then, really, how could the Church be faulted at all for not seeing this realistically far-fetched speculative sensationalism!                

4. God’s Method and Purpose For Prophecy
01:13:09 [V 01:27:19] - David Gates, in his “fence posts” analogy effectively claims that this Joseph Story prophecy is deliberately being giving by God in a piece-meal fashion, (i.e., one fence post on 9/11/2001 (Terrorist Attacks); another one on 9/11/2008 (“Financial Crisis”); and now a third on 9/11/2010 (“Assets collapse). That is completely unbiblical, and also Theologically erroneous. There is absolute no example in the Bible of God giving prophecy in such, “present-time only”, piece-meal fashion. God always states His prophecies entirely, and long in advance. (David Gates himself just had said, (though through a false application) that God always forewarns His people of what is going to take place through prophesies.) Indeed God Himself is unequivocally against ‘this sly claiming of fulfilled present-day events suddenly as foreplanned prophetic fulfillment.’ In Isa 48:3-5 God challenges false gods to make known of future these things “long ago” in advance, as He does, so that when they occur in the future, they will not slyly take the credit for having “done them”. This is exactly the guileful and sly trickery that Gates is attributing to God, for, according to Gate’s view, it is only if/when an event timely occurs in the present that it is to be attributable to God as prophetic. As if, it is only if God is able to “plant” (i.e., realize) a “fence post” on a Sept 11 date, then will He claim a prophetic fulfillment. To support this false theology, Gates has to make up the false tenet that: “God is not trying to predict the future but is helping us to recognize that He is in control in the present”. Well passage like Isa 48:3-5 completely refute this view. Contrary to David Gates, as the Bible clearly shows, God can foreplan timely events from many years in advance. God also works solely on faith and His preferred and chosen modus operandi is to give prophecies in advance so that His people can believe and act upon them well in advance, especially so that they will be ready. The piece-meal view of Gates gives no opportunity either for this Faith, nor preparation, as clearly made evident by the fact that no one in the Church was able to make the needed prophetical ‘storage preparations’ during the supposed 7 fat years of 9/11/2001-9/11/2008 as no one, even David Gates himself, then knew that they were living in prophesied “fat years”.
            In fact, upon further observation, it seems that this whole piece-meal theory of Gates was construed by him to account for the fact that he did indeed completely miss these “fat years” which he says self-rationalizedly says were ‘“impossible” to recognize’ because only one fence post had been planted then.
            So now he can concretely see for himself, if he is at all honest, why God does not use this piece-meal approach for prophecy/revelations, especially with His own people.


C. Theologically
1. Contradicts God’s Own Bible/SOP Statements
-David Gates’ entire time prophecy scheme here would be depicting God as either being senile or an outright liar because He had directly/clearly, repeatedly stated (i.e., “shown”) before in the SOP that ‘eschatological messages would not involve definite time,’ so then why would He now be using definite time???

2. Fraudulent Main “Gains” during 2001-2008 Mal-Attributed to God
-The Bible is clear that the “great abundance” that was to occur in Egypt during the “fat years” was to be expressedly brought about by God’s doing (Gen 41:25, 28). I.e., it was not a natural occurrence. God was going to cause these to be overabundant years. David Gates claims that the equivalence of these “fat years” occurred from September 11, 2001-September 11, 2008. Apart from this claimed parallel being factually, historically and economically spurious and false as shown in these thematic sections in this note, if these were supposed to be ‘“fat years” of God-caused economic overabundance, then as stock market historical data shows, much of the economic gains (and actually not “overabundance”) during these years occurred during the fraudulent, sub-prime and toxic assets mortgage economic bubble of 2004-2006, then this most fraudulently scheme to increase U.S. and Global wealth has to be attributed to God, just like He had caused Egypt’s overabundance by supernaturally increasing their agricultural output. This is then actually like saying that God had caused weeds/darnel instead of wheat to flourish in the fields of Egypt during their “fat years.” Just like a harvest of weeds/darnel would be unproductive and detrimental to Egypt, i.e., even causing losses in genuine wheat crops, these toxic-assets schemes and gains effectively did absolutely nothing to economic prosperity, nor the building up savings and wealth, but actually caused genuine growth and assets to also become at risk. Gates cannot whimsically, selectively choose what he wants to be applicable and “prophetical” from the Joseph story, because in this way anything can be said to be “prophetical” when you only pick and choose certain elements of a story, particularly ignoring their qualifying context which helps to understand a typological, (and not necessarily prophetically) application, and that simply for exemplary and instructional purposes.

3. 9/11 Terrorist Attacks Attributed to God
-Since, as mentioned above, the “fat years” of Joseph were directly caused by God Himself, saying that prophetical “fat years” today were precisely begun on September 11, 2001, by those terrorist attacks, would be to attribute these events to God Himself, with the 19 Al-Quaeda operatives acting as His commissioned agents!?! Especially since these intuitively destructive and economically detrimental events were suppose to launch economic overabundance according to Gates’s view. While God does allow various calamities to occur, (mainly, according to my theological understanding, of His self-imposed restriction in this GC to only a certain sampling number of direct intervention in human affairs, interventions which are also allowed to be reciprocated by the Devil), He certainly did not cause, nor use, these events to (illogically) propel the U.S. and the World into a period of national prosperity.

4. Wrong Theology of God and Future
01:13:33 [V 01:27:48] - David Gates literally “wowed” his audience with the, actually empty statement of: ‘God,’ according to his view, ‘erecting a “fencepost” with the 9/11/2001 attacks, and then another one with the supposed 9/11/2008 potential total collapse crash, and now with “probably” a 9/11/2010 assets crash, God in this way was not trying to predict the future, but showing that He is in control in the present’!?! Contrary to the manifest awed response, that does not even begin to make any theological, nor logical, sense. If God knows for certain what the future will be then why does He need to “control it” when it becomes the present. This statement is the perfect example of the non-sensicalness that is glibbly and mindlessly regurgitated by people who have an unbiblical understanding of God and the future. (See this post for the actual Biblical “Foreplanning” View.) According to Gates’ view, God then has already concretely set the future, so whatever man may do, they actual have not done it out of free will, but because God made them do it.


D. Topically
1. 9/11 Terrorist Attack Did Not Launch A Prosperity Era
-David Gates prophetic rational is topically purely whimsical. How does the terrorist attack of 9/11 suddenly serve to propulse the U.S. and the world into a period of economic overabundance. I.e., God did not begin the 7 fat years in Egypt by: reducing some of their pyramids to rubbles (9/11 attacks); torching some of their farmlands (immediate pan economic impact), and then annually sending a swarm of locust to eat part of the grown crops (ballooning ‘War on Terror’ debt since then). So that “precise” event that Gates wants to begin a period of prophetic “fat years” does absolutely nothing of the sort. Quite to the contrary.

2. Money in Egypt “ran out” Not (Economically) “failed”
01:15:19 [V 01:30:10] - David Gates claims, uncritically following the KJV/NJKV mis-translation, that the “money failed” in Egypt, and that this is prophetic of what is soon to occur the economy today. That is false and eisogetical by both these Bible translators and further by David Gates. They, and particularly Gates, indeed only “reads this into the text” to try to validate his present-day “money failing” theory. Exegetically, the Hebrew word here (Strongs #8852) speaking of ‘coming to a due/normative’ end. So the Biblical story is just saying that the Egyptians “spent” all of the money they had on buying grain from the Pharaoh. This “money running out by being spent” vs. ‘money failing in value’ are two completely distinct things. When money “fails” in a economy there is still plenty of currency available and in normative circulation. The only problem is that this money is worth virtually nothing. So one can have billions of dollars in the bank and it may then only be worth e.g., $10,000. So no aspect of a “money/financial failure” occurred in the Egyptian economy. It was just that the people no longer had any normative currency and monetary funds with which to buy grain, hence then the institution of currency in the form of livestock, their “bucks” so to speak. Evidently, prior to these famine years, the Egyptian people did not need to spend money to buy grain because they could grow their own.

3. Gains of 2001-2008 Did Not Last for ‘“7 lean years” (i.e., 2008-2015)’
-Since most of the gains that were made in the economy were completely lost by the toxic assets  bubble burst starting in mid-late 2008, then how were 2001-2008 ‘“fat years” of overabundance sufficient to entirely provide for lean years from 2008-2015.’ Whatever was gained, and that mostly fraudulently, during the previous 7 years did not provide for more than 1 month in the supposed “prophetic lean years.”, if that much. That sudden and immediate complete loss was also greatly felt in the Church.

4. No Applicable “Prophetic Parallels” From Joseph Story
-Since God raised up, forewarned, and prepared Joseph before the fat years started in order to take full advantage of what He was going to do in the coming 7 years, then where is the equivalent “heads up” fulfillment starting in 2001, especially in the Church, if not also the world, to warn them to save for an upcoming prolonged economic crisis, which Gates adamantly claims is/will be irreversible, starting in 2008. Gates probably believes that his “9/11 Wake-up Call” sermons during that time fulfills this, however he evidently was not given Joseph-like instructions for God’s people to take full advantage of supposedly upcoming fat years. Furthermore, the raising of Joseph was quite purposeful for God and that solely to be able to provide a quasi-free home for the growing nation of Israel during that time and subsequent future years. Similarly today, such a fulfillment would be to help God’s Remnant people to occupy a favorable societal and economical position in the light of a coming economic crisis. However no such geo-political development has transpired during Gates’ supposed “prophetic fulfillment”.

5. “Lean Years” Damage Itself Should Be Instantaneous, Not “Gradual”
-According to Gates own ‘prophetic template here,’ today we should be in absolutely no position to be able to prepare for the suppose-to-be present crisis. In Joseph’s story, the famine did not get worse in time as Gates is hoping that an economic crisis today will get worse and worse. The famine was bad from the very first day of the start of the 7 lean years. The land from that first day instantly, by God’s doing, ceased to be productive and people had to live off whatever grain reserves they had. The only thing that got worse was the people’s means of being able to procure grain that was amply available in the government storages of Egypt. So for an event today to actually be according to a ‘Joseph story template’ the economy would have to have already completely collapse i.e., on September 11, 2008, as an economy actually can as great single day market losses show (i.e, the Crash on “Black Tuesday” = October 29, 1929 shows) and people, including non-SDA’s would now be living off the necessities-of -life reserves they had been able to make during supposed booming years of 2001-2008, and that at the inspired direction of SDA’s. Nothing to the sort has happened, not even with Gates himself who would the most specifically the Joseph type in this prophecy. So there clearly is really no ‘template fulfillement’ contrary to Gates’ claims.
           
E. Prophetically
1. No Use of Definite Time in End Time Prophecies
-As stated and detailed above in this blog post, the SOP is clear that there would not be an eschatological use of definite time.

2. 2008 Financial Crisis not SOP “National Ruin”
- Also as explained above in this blog post, the Financial Crisis of 2008 was not in any form the Bible and SOP prophesied “National Ruin”.

3. No Need of “Mercy Fulfillments” With Divine Predictions
01:07:45 [V 01:19:48] - David Gates claims that his prophetic prediction of, as he was saying then, a “total economic collapse of the U.S. Economy” in September of 2008, could have occurred in October or November of 2008 and he would have still been right on target, however ‘God in his mercy caused the economic crisis to occur in September of 2008, with the banks starting to  fail.’ He even speaks of ‘asking for forgiveness for potentially dishonoring God’. Talk about a most blatant “Freudian Slip” here, even if it was for a prior (i.e., pre-August 2010) belief: “Divine Mercy” for what??? David Gates could only claim that mercy was used here solely because he fully knew and realized that he was going against clear SOP counsel against time setting. Furthermore this implies that it is God who has to “kow tow” to whatever blunder David Gates can make?!? (This view of Gates is evidently derived from his belief that ‘he is God’s Model Man of Faith for the Final Days in the SDA Church’, so God certainly cannot afford for him to lose face before his Adventist brethren??!) Not even bona fide Biblical prophets (e.g., Nathan, 2 Sam 7:3-5ff); or even Jesus, for that pointed matter (Matt 10:23b) had that luxury. If they made a prophetic statement in the name of God, in genuine “good faith” and all honesty, yet that did not pan out as they had said, for previously temporally unknown or divinely unrevealed reasons, they were Divinely corrected and/or it was applicably fulfilled if necessary (e.g Matt 16:28 & 17:1ff). [I believe that Jesus’ “good faith” statement in Mat 10:23b will be made to have an eschatological application. Cf. 6T 478]. David Gates, on the other hand, was defiantly going against direct and clear Divine revelations, bolstered by his obliviously shoddy, ignoring and preferentially selective Biblical exegesis, as shown above. Furthermore, as also detailed above, the “total, irreversible collapse” that David Gates was predicting to the very end certainly did not occur, so God would not have even fulfilled his prophecy here, as Gates now needs people to believe. And if anything was fulfilled here, then it was the GEAB prognosis (see above in Note #7) which had specified this Sept 2008 date, which Gates simply was repeating.     

4. Gates’ Litany of Past Failed Eschatological Time Prophecies & Predictions
-As related in this blog, David Gates has already tried to make a time prophecy out of a Bible Story with his “timed Lazarus Experience”, an attempt which clearly, completely failed. So he has not proof, nor credibility to seek to now make another such unbiblical application with the Joseph Story.


F. Factually
1. U.S. Presently Is Paying Interest on National Debt
-As discussed above in this blog in Note #8, Gates claim that the U.S. presently cannot pay the interest of its debt is completely untrue. Indeed as seen on this page, the annually due debt payment is ca. $200 Billion and is included in the budgetary outlays.

2. No 9/11/2008 $550B Market Withdrawal (at all) from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
01:12:33 [V 01:26:33] - Gates’ claims that ‘Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae caused a $550 Billion dollar loss in the Stock Markets on precisely September 11, 2008’ is completely untrue. These companies were completely Federally taken over and bailed out by September 9, 2008 and their stock value, (See Fannie’s  (dataand Freddie’s (data)) which had plummeted from Sept. 5-7, was then halted and began to reverse. Gates sees his “to-the day” fulfillment as the clear indication that this is a prophetic action of God and parallels the Joseph story, however there was no 9/11/2008 fulfillment. Contrary to what he slyly claims, you can ‘look up this 9/11/2008 event on the internet’ and you will find absolutely nothing of the sort. Yet another “Gateism”.
            In further complete contradiction to Gates’s unfounded belief here, the historical stock data of Fannie ($0.77-$0.78  = +$0.01 @ 1.07 billion shares = +$10.7M) and Freddie ($0.64-$0.59 = -$0.06 @ 647 million shares = -$32.4M (See here for these 2008 shares # info) shows that, combined, they actually only had a net market value loss of $21.7M on the trading day of September 11. So definitely not the apocalyptical -$550 Billions of Gates’ Gateism. In fact during the actual market free fall period, both Freddie and Fannie from Sep 5-8 shows that these two companies combined to only lose $10.1B [Fannie ($7.04-$0.73  = -$6.91 = -$7.39B) and Freddie ($5.10-$0.88 = -$4.22 = -$2.73B)] Again far from the fictitious -$550B of Gates, $540B less to be exact. Indeed a 54-fold increase is even way beyond the accepted realm of “exaggeration” for exaggeration slightly increases what actually is, and not, as in this case literally “makes up” facts that are in a whole other sphere. Even a single day $55B loss would still be in the sphere of a recession, however $550B is in the greater sphere of total economic collapse. As clearly no factual news source would make such an astronomical mistake, and given Gates’ educated business background, one has to wonder if Gates just simply “manufactured” these numbers. Perhaps from now on, David Gates should just focus on submitting his data and citing his sources, if any, and let people come to their own factual conclusions... at least for their own sake. 

3. Gates Switches and Now, Hypocritically, Is Fully For “Out of the Cities” Movement
01:24:03 [V 01:41:45] - Back in a June 2010 sermon, ([f4v] [mov] [flv] [mp3]) at [f4v = 19:01-27:00] David Gates had, though ambivalently, denounced, as “being on a different frequency” and basic/elementary(?!?) an "Out of Cities" movement (from Dave Westbrook’s ministry - cf. Westbrook’s comments on Gate’s 9/11/2010 prediction here [video].), as not necessary, and a hindrance to needed evangelistic work, even ultimately, speaking against Adventist moving out of cities despite SOP counsels. (How is counsel to move out of the cities in the end “elementary” to supposed end time events??) In fact, he says that he plans to air the “Out of Cities” messages he was sent so that non-Adventists can be warned to leave the cities. Obviously solely in the light of his “superior” imminent economic doom prophetic scenario!??  However now, in the present August 28, 2010 sermon, he obliviously and hypocritically, intransigently scolds SDAs for not heeding these SOP counsels. Quite evidently his determination of what is truth, or present truth, is pridefully, solely determined by what he himself thinks, and what fulfills his views(!?!), and, tellingly enough, not even by what the Bible/SOP actually says especially when properly studied out. So, evidently, ‘if God has not led him in a certain way, then it must not be important.’ Talk about Balaam-like opportunism.
            It must be emphasized that David Gates is not here being cited for rightly conforming to a correct Biblical view, but for now hypocritically acting as if this was always his view, when his previous adamant preaching against this SOP counsel clearly shows the contrary.            
            Incidently, and contrary to the previous reason that David Gates gave, like other SDAs, not having a self-reliant home in the country as counselled by the SOP, would actually not be ‘detrimental to City Evangelism,’ for it would not preclude, during days of peace working in the cities, attending school there, and also worshipping in Churches located in these cities. Indeed we are counselled to work the world’s cities as “outpost”. So the only “witnessing” that would be adversely affected by living in the country would be towards immediate neighbors; (yet this area of witnessing is still one of the most SDA city-dwellers difficult for one to do.) In fact living in a self-reliant home in the country would come to provide for tremendous household savings (e.g., in terms of real estate, food, utilities, etc), which could be invested in the (city) Evangelism work. So the Church really has no excuse for not heeding this SOP counsel, but for their base attraction to the allure and glamour of living in current world urban areas. Indeed by not heeding this counsel, Church members are only concretely proving that they really do not believe in an imminent (i.e., ‘at any time’) return of Christ as claimed, but instead have unbiblically put off this counsel, and look for a time in the future when they will begin to notice supposed “Final Events before they begin to heed it.
            So I therefore understand that this SOP counsel for country living is actually directly related to still seeking to thoroughly complete the Gospel Commission. And when this is rightly/truly  done, as seen in this quite (technologically and economically) feasible project, it will simultaneously allow for even more significant global evangelism and also provide for the thriving survival of God’s Remnant even if economic measures are taken against for not accepting the Mark of the Beast which, as seen in this blog post, involves the spurious and evil economic system of Capitalism which directly opposes God’s pervasive (i.e., also socio-economic) Sabbatical ways. Indeed this location is more “remote” and variously protective and defensible than current country-living, which. Indeed what was considered country in the 19th century, are city/urban sectors today.


G. Economically
1. Economy Would Not Have ‘Surely Crashed on 9/11’
01:12:46 [V 01:26:52] -To further try to emphasize the specific and timely prophetical importance of the date of September 11, 2008, David Gates claims that ‘the entire economy would have collapsed on that very same day if the government had not done its bailouts. Well the factual truth is that while the main culprits of this financial crisis were adequately dealt with by September 9, 2008, the damaged caused by their sudden market devaluation had significant ripple effects in the economy and caused many other financial institution to become at risk, to the point where it was fear on the days leading up to Thursday, September 18, (thus a week after 9/11/2008), that if further government bailout action were not taken, it was assumed that the entire economy may collapse by Monday the 22nd. So then the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) was tabled and subsequently passed on October 3, 2008. Yet out of the $700B, and then increased to $1.3 Trillion promised by that bailout act, only $158.56 needed to be disbursed by November 17, 2008. Some may try to vindicate Gates here with the professed belief that the entire economy could and would collapse due to this economic crisis, however, this (a) was, at best, merely an opinionated belief and not a factual finding, (b) surely the economy could have survived the $158.56 that were needed to prop it up by Nov. 17, 2008; and (c) the economy was indeed saved from any possibility of total collapse, which is a scenario that was entirely impossible, even with bailouts, according to both the 2006 GEAB prognosis and David Gates who fully subscribed to it.
            Even most banks took a while to be concretely affected by this economic crisis. FDIC bank failure listings (cf. here) show that only 3 banks failed in September 2008, 2 were after September 19. And, relatively, only 12 went on to fail in the remaining 3 months of 2008, while 140 (on average 12/month) failed in 2009 with another 118 (15/month) having failed in 2010 through August 20. While this may seem alarmingly indicative of a coming doom, it is factually only the delayed, inevitable normative, consequential result of the housing bubble burst in back 2007. In other words these banks now have to revert to operating as they should have been prior to this fraudulently unreal economic boom in ca. 2004-2006 however most of these, effectively, financially overextended banks are not in a position to do so. Indeed there were no bank failures in either 2005 or 2006, which were the peak years of this housing-led economic bubble.* Also the markets (e.g., the NASDAQ, DOW, NYSE) have generally recovered from the recession of 2008 with most of them increasingly trading close to the level they were at on e.g. Sept 1, 2008. It must also be stated that Canada, which already had strong banking and financial regulatory policies in place before the 2008 crisis was not greatly affected by the U.S.-caused global economic meltdown, as it did not have to bailout any financial institutions. So it can be seen that the issue was not a maxed out economic failure, per se, as David Gates apocalyptic speculation would have it, but pointedly the result of bad economic and financial/lending policies and practices in the affected countries.

*(I personally experienced first hand this sudden debacle seeing family real estate investment values drop from over $1 million in total value to just a little over half that value now. Yet, due to God guidance at the time of purchasing, these assets are still abundantly solvent.)

2. Even Lehman Brothers’ Bankruptcy Does Not Corroborate Gates’s ‘9/11 $550B Loss’ Claim
-The only scenario that comes anything remotely, and that factually, manufacturedly, close to Gates’ 9/11 major stock market slide and a shift of hundred of billions of dollars, (solely here (mindlessly) assuming that Gates misspoke and named 2 companies instead of one (?!?)), is the downfall of the Lehman Brothers Investment Bank. However the details of its demise do not at all corroborate any of Gates’ claims. On Sep. 5, 2008 the Lehman Brothers’ stock value (cf. here) closed at $16.20, its last closing high. Starting from then its stock closed at new lows of: 9/8 - $14.15; 9/9 - $7.79; 9/10 - $7.25; 9/11 - $4.22 thus a 75% loss of value between Sep 5-11. Since the Lehman’s stock opened at $4.47 and closed at $4.22 on September 11, then it only experienced a 5.6% loss on that date itself. Then in the following days, its downslide continued with the stock dropping to:
$3.65 on 9/12 and $0.21 at the time of its bankruptcy filing on 9/15. (The stock went on to dip to a low of $0.05 by 9/18.). So by the time of its bankruptcy filing the Lehman Brothers stock had lost 98.6% of its value since 9/5. With Lehman having ca. 687M shares, this total stock market loss by September 11, 2008 was around $8.23 Billion. Then on September 15, after the Federal Government, which had just takenover Freddie and Fannie the week before and was now refusing to also bailout Lehman Brothers, it filed for a record bankruptcy. However, although it had ca. $600B in debts, this was offset by the ca. $613B in assets that it possessed, thus making it still solvent. Finally starting on September 20, after days of trying to figure out what to do with this mega-firm, and that through non-governmental, private-sector options, it was agreed to break up Lehman Brothers, (i.e., redistribute its debts and assets) among other still standing Wall Street banking institutions.
            So it can be seen that none of the claims of Gates could have been fulfilled in even Lehman Brothers’ demise because it did not have a $550B loss, and not even in its incurred Sept 11, 2008 losses (which were actually less than the Sept 9 ones); and with it filing of a solvent bankruptcy, and in it being broken up and re-apportioned in Wall Street firms, it really never pulled neither its debts nor assets out from the Stock Market or American Economy, thus no net market change here.
            It seems that David Gates came to his claim by simply hearing of a ca. 90% loss of a Wall Street firm having $613B in assets, with also losses occurring on Sept 11 and somehow convolutely applied this +90% total losses to these assets, resulting in this ca. $550B figure. However these percentage losses actually strictly applied to the trading stock value, and not to the assets value. That’s “Gatesian” Economics I guess. And Church members are strongly recommended to make major financial and assets decision based on this economical information and analysis heightened to a spiritual level!?! Where and/or how in the world did he get his Masters in Business???
            So as he slyly recommends, do “Google It” (i.e., ((“Freudianly”) “Find it” = ‘produce the documentation for what he has just claimed’), however you will actually not “find it” but instead “find” that nothing of what he has claimed was actually true.

3. False Basis For Gates Imminent and Irreversible Total Collapse
01:26:01 [V 01:44:43] - Gates claims that ‘there is absolutely no evidence that we will recover from the Sept 11+, 2010 crisis.’ Of course he really cannot prove this with anything. He does suggest that the supposed incapability of the government to pay even the interest on the national debt is a proof of this, however this is completely untrue and only the calculative result of his flawed economics.

4. Gates’ False ‘Parabolic Debt Projection Chart
01:26:12 [V 01:44:55] - Gates claims that the same bank president told him that the U.S. National debt increased by 30% in the last 18 months, (i.e., From February 2009-August 2010), apparently since Barack Obama’s presidency, while this in itself is factually true i.e., (ca. 01/2009- $9.985T to 09/2010 - $13.442T = +35%), it was mostly due to the outstanding circumstance of the government having to take on private sector losses and make bailouts. However his “off the charts,” parabolic (more like hyperbolic) curve graphing demonstration which is based upon the guilefully fictitious assumption that the government currently cannot pay the interest on its debt is effectively nothing more than sensationalistic “voodoo” economics (i.e., ‘trying to scare people by “guilefulness”’ = lying = the “father of lies” (John 8:44 vs. Titus 1:2 & Heb 6:8)). Projection through 2014 show that the Debt will increase by at a average normative rate of ca. 9.75% per year, which will be offset a little projected GDP increases (thus higher tax revenues). Furthermore only ca. 35% of the Gross Debt is held by non-US citizens and institutions, which is really the only part of the debt that can be forcefully collected by these foreign powers, however which can be repaid in trading advantages which would then pass on the cost to the U.S. held public debt (e.g., building aircraft carriers/nuclear-powered submarines in U.S. shipyards as a repayments to a collecting foreign power, reducing U.S. import tariffs, etc).
           
           
H. Historically (including Economic History)
1. 2001-2008 Not Years of ‘Economic Overabundance’
01:16:15 [V 01:31:29] - Contrary to Gates’ belief, (‘so concretely bolstered by the books of a one “bank president”’), the socio-economic period starting with the attacks of 9/11 were not the start of overabundance for the U.S. and the World, but a period when economic prosperity became more restrained. Case in point the U.S. National Debt alone rose by $4.2 Trillion from 2001-2008 while the GDP only increased by $3.84T over that time. So where was the corresponding “overabundant prosperity.” The whole era was generally a loss. (Unless, of course, God has now also become a capitalist and cares little about debt, especially money that you yourself won’t have to tangibly repay.)
            Also most people during this time did not suddenly increase their savings (“for a rainy (or famine) days”) by an equivalent 20%. There was also a significant economic crisis right after the attacks, which really did not begin to turn around until the 2004-2006 fraudulent mortgage bubble began to be inflated with “hot air”. The pervasive, related $40+ billion losses due to the terrorist attacks themselves were also a significant economic damage. Following 9/11 there also came a sudden and mandatory financial overhead for added security in virtually all aspects of society and trillions have been literally blown up in smoke in the resulting, ongoing, “War on Terror”. These are all costs that tangibly affected everyone (especially wage earners/tax payers).
            There was also a severely crippling and financially draining increase in commodity prices, due mainly to an increase in gas prices over this time from, i.e., ca. $1.50 U.S. per gallon around 9/11/2001 to $3.75 around 9/11/2008, with a high of $4.12 in between (= +250% - GDP/capita only increased 35% over this same period $35,343-$47,988) which consumed an even larger part of the average household’s income and potential savings.
            So the world and U.S. Economy did not increase beyond what is normative during that time, so these were not “fat years” at all, but at best, “bulimic years” because most people were spending just as much as they were making and not storing up these economic gains and also having to spend for what cost more on close to the same income levels. 

2. 1930's Great Depression Not “Caused by Sudden 90-day Banks Closure”
01:22:37 [V 01:39:55] - David Gates claims that the 1930's Great Depression ‘was caused by the closing of the banks for 90 days.’ I have not found any mention of this in historical accounts of the Great Depression. Most historians agree that the Great Depression officially began, after ca. 2 months of a deepening economic recession, with the Crash of the Stock Market on October 29, 1929. Banks themselves did not even begin to get into insolvency troubles until a year later, and it was not until March 1933 that a 4-day Bank Holiday was imposed by the Federal Government. David Gates need to make this alarmist exaggeration in order to further scare people into seriously considering preparing for his collapse scenario.


I. Logically
1. No Prophetic Authority Validation For Gates’ Joseph Prophecy Source
01:08:17 [V 01:20:33] - David Gates claims that his ‘Joseph Prophecy’ message has ‘serious credibility because God always tells things to His prophets (Amos 3:7).’ So that means that the person from which he got this message (from their DVD’s) was a prophet of God??? So now Gates is the one to, by fiat, decide who is or is not a true prophet of God??? That claim and mentality is nothing more than obliviously (if not, delusionally) mindless, “loopingly” circular reasoning.

2. No Divine Instruction, Nor Warning, For Supposed “Fat Years” of 2001-2008
01:08:24 [V 01:20:46] - Gates further claims that this Joseph Story must be a prophecy because God never catches His people by surprise. Well since we are only now learning in August 2010 that the Joseph Story was also a prophecy of the 2008 Economic crisis, and also over the “fat years” time period “inagurated” by the multi-trillion dollar losses initiated by the 9/11 attacks, then I guess God reneged here, and chose to catch the SDA Church fully by surprise. Especially since the supposed “heads up” time period of 2001-2008 to save for the coming “lean/famine years” of 2008-2015 has not only already completely past by then, but whatever (non-net) “gains” it had produced, were completely wiped out in 2008! If this was indeed to be an injunctive heads up from God then I think He would have made it abundantly clear in sufficient time in advance as He clearly does in Bible.

3. Obfuscation About His Actual and Deliberate Date-Setting
01:14:18 [V 01:28:56] - David Gates, as it is slyly quite common of his, duplicitly claims that ‘he is not saying that something is going to happen on Sep. 11, 2010, but because he is beginning to see the (or probably ‘that 9/11/2010’) fence post, then he is sharing this observation with us.’ Well according to his “most definite and precise” theory, he then should be seeing that all money is going to finish losing its value by September 11, 2010, and then all assets are going to strikingly begin to devaluate exactly on that date. Also, if his message is from God, as any biblically sound message really is, then not sharing it in full detail is actually unbiblical and dangerously wrongful for him, the “divinely enlightened one” (Ezek 33:1-20). Clearly Gates has absolutely no light on this, actually wholly fictitious, matter (Isa 8:20).        
            Gates similarly at 01:14:50 guilefully claims that ‘what he is about to share is definitely not an attempt to forecast a date.’ What happened to the definite (i.e., Sept 11) “fence posts” theory??? Then what to make of his ensuing Joseph’s 7+2-2-3 year delineation theory all supposedly beginning Sept. 11's??? As heard in his guilty pause there, (which is visually observable in the video at 01:29:33), he himself realized the guileful illogicality of that spurious and false statement.
            It is indeed inevitable that once someone engages and persists in a lie, they have to invent a plethora and panoply of other lies in order solely to maintain the “believability” of the initial one. Well this is exactly what Gates is having to do here, all to maintain his foundational biblical stance of eschatological time-setting.

4. Red-Herring Rational For Preparedness
01:14:28 [V 01:29:06] -To say that: ‘it does not matter, if one has chosen not to prepare for something in advance, for whether or not it occurs immediately or sometime in the future, they will not be prepared for it’ really, when pondered upon for a logical handle, makes absolutely no contributive sense and proves absolutely nothing. I.e., if someone does not prepare for something, then they indeed will not be prepared for that thing. So it is unequivocally moot whether or not that thing occurs “immediately or sometime in the future’. This convoluted defensive statement was only said in this way by Gates to try to justify his time-setting approach. It is nothing more than a mindless “red-herring”, defensive, reverse-psychology, subconscious reaction. Indeed it is not even a “tactic”, which implies deliberate forethought. One has to be living in complete fantasaical obliviousness to believe that such a statement supported Gates in his pre-Sept 11, 2010 warnings.

5. No Socio-Economic Peace During 2001-2008 for Proper Economic Growth
-National peace and personal peace of mind is quite crucial to the prosperity of a capitalistic economy. However America and the world certainly did not have this needed psychological edge in none of the years since September 11, 2001. Indeed they did not have enough prosperity to store and hoard as they should have in those supposed “fat years”.

6. No 9/11/2010 Fulfillment = Gates’ Completely False (Set-Time) Prophecy
[September 12, 2010] - So now since nothing applicable to Gates’ crisis scenario occurred, at all, on “specifically” September 11, 2010, then Gates’ theorizing is again proven to be merely pure fabricated conjecture and also no longer has any validity as it did not result in a fence post on this date.. Indeed this is as nothing had happened as David Gates had claim for September 11, 2008, and especially not even on that specific date, and also as Sept 11, 2001 was not ‘the signal start of 7 “fat, prosperous years”,’ but the complete antithesis of it.


J. Contextually
1. Gates’ Warning Time Not Adequate nor Sufficient
01:14:27 [V 01:29:06] - The “Preparation Advantage” of “a couple of weeks or a month or two” notice that Gates claims his ‘early warning messages’ such as this one, give, do not actually fit the scenario that he is warning against. If an escalating total collapse, of now tangible assets is going to happen, then his warning is actually way too short of a notice. One cannot, e.g., sell their property and liquidate their assets, buy another choice property somewhere in the remote country, develop it, and also personal skills to live off the land, etc, in even 2 months, let alone 2 weeks. So that disculpating rational was, as usual, quite vacuous and contextually incoherent.
            If someone wanted to heed to Gates warning, they would have to now franctically liquidate most of their assets. That is why for such major events, God gives His preparation messages to His people way in advance, so that, if they are in tune to them, even in their normative initial actions, e.g., buying a home, they will do so in the light of that long ago warning, and not scurry around as with Gates “two weeks” warning for some now suddenly conjectured prophecies.

2. The Only Meaning of An “Economic Crash”
01:20:32 [V 01:37:08] - Gates’ attempt to “teflonize” his prediction by saying that: ‘the expected prophetic fulfillment on Sept 11, 2010 will ‘be a very deep non-crash, but it could be a very deep crash’ is laugh out loud ludicrous and really need no further explanation. Contextually, how is ‘all money failing by Sept 11, 2010, ala the first 2 lean years of Egypt, ever “not a crash”. Finance/money and cash flow (i.e., economic liquidity) is literally the fuel of a capitalistic economy. So if it is suppose to “completely fail” by Sept 11, 2010, then the economy would most definitely “crash,” in the only “deep” sense of that economic term (i.e., vs. a recession). However if tangible assets remain and people are fully capable of being productive then the liquidity of the economy can easily be rebuilt.


K. Practically
1. Economic Collapse = Price Hyper Inflation, Not ‘scarcity of small bills’
01:21:38 [V 01:38:33] - In a “pastoral” attempt to try to help “Prepare” his audience for the inevitable upcoming major, “Final Events” economically-actuated, crisis, (all unBiblical theories), David Gates goes on to make a few recommendation which he immediately also “teflonizes” as not actually being “the Gospel”. (It is spiritually, and literally, oxymoronic and deceptive that a “Gospel Worker” does not, nor wants to, nor cares to, speak “Gospel Truths”!?!). So he follows with a bunch of actually mindless and worthless counsels on how to supposedly prepare for this soon irreversible total collapse. Among the most spurious are the recommendation to keep “small cash” on hand (i.e., tenders less than $20), because, according to him, if money fails, people will probably not have change for $100 bills. Uhhhh....!???? How does that even begin to apply here? If money actually fails, i.e., it is worth nothing, than there will still be plenty of cash around, in any denomination. It just will not be worth very much. So taking his “tomato vendor” example who will have to keep the change for the $100 bill you give him because he does not have small bills/change for it, the actual case would be, in this supposed ‘total collapse and distinct food shortage irreversible crisis’ that he will take your $100 bill and give you a quarter of a slice of the tomato, and you’ll shockingly, delightfully exclaim: “Wow, what a deal!!! You’re having a sale today??”, because that will be the “proper”, even if hyper-inflated, market price for it then. Moreoverly, “big bills” will be in the utmost demand in such a collapse scenario, so that one does not have to lug their money in a wheelbarrow when e.g., going grocery shopping!
            Also his related vacuous ‘not asking God when to brush your teeth’ again proves absolutely nothing. Why does God have to dictate to anyone when they should brush their teeth? Where is the Biblical implication in that vs. taking concrete and virtually irreversible preparative actions for prophesied “Final Events”!?! Another sly “red-herring” of his. You can seem to prove the validity of anything with such an ‘apples and oranges’ comparison. I guess such conjured up “Biblically void/deficiency” then gives Gates the green light to insert his speculation-derived counsels.
            If anyone is capable of living of their land in a time of total economic collapse and food shortage, they’ll have to hire a private army to retain possession and control of that property. (cf. EW 56.2*) Where is this scenario of total global collapse in the Bible and SOP??! The Biblical prophecies only speak of economic privations upon God’s people due to them not having accepted to take the Mark of the Beast and not all of society needing to find a way to live off the land because of a past total economic collapse, and that for 7+ years. That is why the time of trouble for God’s people will be short, and it will not be in any way because of a global economic meltdown. That is solely advanced by Gates because of his actually, effectively, obsessed and worshipful view of money and the economy, which he effectively considers to be greater than God, thus reinterpreting the Bible and SOP according to it daily ups and downs. (See more on this growing SDA Pseudo-eschatology, and actually prophetic in itself, development (i.e., =TM 409.2-3) here.). 

* That EW 56.2 SOP statement would seem to be in contradiction to what EGW would later say in LDE 99.4 (2SM 141.1 [1904]), when she counselled that SDAs should move to the country in order to be able to provide for themselves during the buying and selling crisis (Rev 13:17). However the two counsels, with EW 56.2 evidently being out of a direct revelation, nonetheless are reconciled when it is understood that their will be two times of trouble a “Little” and a “Great” one. It appears that EW 56.2 is speaking of the Great Time of Trouble, and as stated there: “when sword [=persecution], famine [=disaster], and pestilence [=7 Plagues] are in the land”. On the other hand LDE 99.4 speaks of a time of trouble before those extreme conditions develop. And Gates’ pseudo-eschatology scenario still does not fit with the Biblical revelation here as the SOP states that it will be God-allowed, pre-plagues, super-natural disasters (and not an economic crisis) which will begin the agitations causing the Little Time of Trouble, and then when resulting populous clamors for legislated worship and “Sunday Laws” are heeded, and the Mark of the Beast is established, the Great Time of Trouble will start.
            So EGW herself may have slightly erred in allusively mentioning the Rev 13:17 stipulations in what will, based on her prior EW 56.2 direct revelation, be the Little Time of Trouble.
            Interestingly enough, it is only in my Eschatological, refulfilling View of End time prophecies (see the related statements in here), that the SOP’s “God-allowed natural disasters” can be spiritually fulfilled by such man-made waywardness as an Economic Crisis, but since SDA have the partial understanding of Final Events, and thus can only rightly claim the literal fulfilment of SOP Final Events, i.e., just as they are stated in the SOP, then they cannot explicitly or implicitly genuinely claim replacing spiritual fulfillments. And still, the actual (=Biblically correct) spiritual fulfillments are neither as literalistic in regards to its Economic implications as SDAs now “worshipfully” believe and preach, nor are they actually a fulfilment of an Ultimate End, but rather only one which interimly fulfills the present ‘prolonged time developments’ (cf. the sample prophetic exposition in this post and also this post of that prophesied Socio-Economic Babylon Power.
            And I have said “worshipfully in regards to the nature of the SDA view because their view inherently involves that: ‘the impelling problem is that the Capitalistic Economy has come to failed and collapsed’; while my view Biblical is/shows that the crux of the problem is that unbiblical Capitalistic Economy itself, i.e., especially when it has not collapsed, but “working” according to its ruthless and amoral: ‘live-and-let-die’, ‘dog-eat-dog’/‘eat of be eaten’ “principles”. This here may seem like a slight, and thus inconsequential, even “semantical” distinctions, but, as with the Saturday vs. Sunday issue also in regards to God True Sabbath, it is a most pivotal one. Indeed Satan has managed effectuate his planned deception revealed in EW 266-269 by: ‘making SDAs variously/subtly “covetously” care more about money, wealth and material things, than about other people, especially those in various need.’ And this comes to make those SDAs unfit for Heaven as that Gospel work is what would have prepared their character for Heaven. So these SDA are pointedly acting out the typologically related/similar, heightened and culminating parts prophetically depicted in Ezek 8:14, 16 of: (1) women weeping for Tammuz; and (2) the elders with their backs to the Temple, worshipping the Sun (=the Economy).


L. Miscellaneous
1. Timely and Fully Giving God’s True Warning Message Is Never ‘an act of stupidity’
01:06:16 [V 01:18:06] - David Gates considered, and call himself “stupid” for having warned of a total economic collapse in September 2008, starting with a sermon he preached on April 12, 2008 at his 30th Academy Alumni Weekend. However he did not feel “stupid” when that sermon was immediately gladly being received that day, and evidently not six days later when he preached the same sermon, with more specificity, at Southwestern Adventist University. Nor did he evidently consider it “stupid” when this “warning” sermon quickly propagated throughout, mainly the Adventist World. As he says, he only felt “stupid” (actually a mis-self-diagnosis of Jonahish “wounded pride”, as made also “Freudianly” self-evidence by his moaning the resulting damage to his reputation) when the backlash of rightly denounced “sensationalism” came later that summer. How can Gates feel that the carrying out of such a supposedly, soon to be fulfilled, major and divine warning, and that led by God’s guidance, providence and promptings for that reunion, as he claims, be an exercise in stupidity. If one warns an oblivious child who has just popped up in front of my car in the street while chasing a ball, how can s/he begin to feel “stupid” if the child reacts angrily to this warning and begins to menacingly gesticulate in response. At best that driver will feel sorry for this obliviously mindless child, but definitely not “stupid.” The only way that this driver could feel “stupid” is if some degree of wrongdoing, and resulting guilt, was involved in that warning act, i.e., they chose to “warn” the child of the dangers of not looking before crossing a street by deliberately speeding up and then braking a few inches before striking the child. Then both the child’s reaction, and also the feeling of “stupidity” would be normative and right, when it is seen that they could have unnecessarily hurt, even quite seriously, the child and also caused great judicial/penal problems to themselves.
            Gates “Freudianly” rightly recognizes that ‘his “reputation” was indeed damaged by that sermon’ however solely for the unbiblical and contra-SOP, date setting, sensationalism he used in it. As he says, he purposely chose to be more “solid”, “straight” and “right to the point” (which he factually accomplished none as that specific message was, respectively, ‘factually erroneous’ “spiritually misleading’ and ‘used a fictitious “point”’) in his 4/12/08 sermon and thus resorted to so heightening his previous more general warnings of economic collapse, to now “total collapse in precisely September of 2008.” Indeed it was for these unbiblical means of making this warning, however unbiblical it also is in its content, that rightly maligned whatever reputation he may have had before then, because his time-setting as 12, 24, 36 months until the Second Coming were already quite well-known by then.
            Indeed God does not begin to fault someone for profusely and clearly making known a warning message that He has burdened them with. (See Ezek 33:1-20). At worst one can feel personally frustrated by the incomprehensible mercy of God, as Jonah did (Jon 4:1-4); at best one can feel as if having been “deceived”, “overcomed”, and “prevailed upon” by God as with Jeremiah (Jer 20:7), yet in neither extreme scenario does the guilty feeling of “stupidity” begin to apply. Indeed even if, “at best,” God has actually ‘fooled/forced’ you, then how can you feel “stupid” for, effectively, having either fully believed and trusted him in the first place or been inescapably compelled by Him?!! So even if Gates used the statement of Jeremiah (20:7-10) to make this statement it thematically does not involve any “stupidity”. Furthermore it has been Gates predictions, i.e., “National Ruin Total Collapse”, that have “utterly failed” (cf. Jer 20:11, 12) and not God’s prophetic word as seen in the Bible and SOP.

2. A Divine, Final Events Message Should be Applicable To Whole Church, Not ‘just friends’
01:05:05|01:06:18 [V 01:16:43|01:18:10] - Gates defensively, spuriously and with  related claim that he had ‘only intended this “September 2008 total collapse” warning to have been solely intended ‘for his friends and former classmates’ but unfortunately it went around the world’ is ridiculously laugh-out-loud-able, to say the least. As if these supposed “Final Events” and “Return of Christ” messages should, or would, be only applicable to the people at that Academy Reunion!?? By April 2008, Gates was well aware that his sermon were being distributed and widely accessed throughout the world, especially via the internet, so he could not have possibly thought that such a startling message, of Denominational implication, would only remain within this immediate audience. He makes the sanctimonious claim that it was so widespread because “there must have been a hunger,... I must have touched a sensitive point,... people wanted something...” well yeah... they wanted “something” like the base “definite time-setting” (Matt 16:4)!! He makes a similar claim for his Joseph Story prophecy prediction which he had first sent out as a email message to people at his ministry. Evidently Gates makes these sly claims of ‘unintentional wider publication’ solely to try to disclaimedly convince impressionable people (i.e., “fools”) that he thus cannot be blamed if these predictions do not come true and/or they are adversely affected by having acted upon them. Such an excuse for making speculative and false statement from a Church pulpit do not hold up in the Heavenly Courts. In fact, according to Ezek 33:1-20, Gates would have been at fault for not having made this message of Denominational implication not adequately known. So he can only be thankful that it was widely redistributed.
            All of these “Freudian” incoherences of Gates all prove that his message was never actually from God. As far as I can, both theologically/prophetically and observably see, God’s actual message through Gates was to encourage the Church to more actively engage in faith based, Gospel Works, following his example, and not at all to try to compel them into action by repeatedly setting a time for the end or for a “National Ruin” economic collapse, when, as he claims, ‘it will then be too late to do this work.’ Can’t be surprised if the Spirit of God cannot even work His work of conviction with such a wrongly contextualized and prepared message.

3. Transparently Verifiable Factualness Does Not Require One to be an Academic-type
01:07:25 [V 01:19:27]- Through the means of a “red-herring” tactic, Gates tries to make it seem that he has received much of his criticism because he, not being an ‘academic type’, has not properly documented his statements when preaching them. I have never heard a person with at least 8 years of University education, including graduate studies, and a double major, “not being an academic type.” Why did he bother going to University, and why then should anyone subscribed to his, effectively, preferably willful and oblivious blindness.
            The actual truth to the matter here is that when you check Gates’ sources out, if valid, or even existent, and also his supposedly corroborating facts, they rarely, if ever, check out. Also just citing a source does not make a message true, particularly if you are making a leap from a secular realm for a spiritual application, as the prophesied “National Ruin” will be. It would be like quoting Dr. Suess to prove that a green, talking cat must exists in real life. Indeed Gates, by his own confession, ‘does not worry about the details’. Well then it is no surprise that ‘his sum is never greater than its parts,’ and thus that his prognosis/predictions always fail. Clearly he tries to avoid details because they always end up debunking his theories and predictions.
            Since ‘graduating from University with a double major and masters’ is by definition what an “academic” is, then the issue here is indeed not in: ‘his not being an academic type’, but in his opting to continue for this education as a carelessly indifferent and slothful “(non-)professional.” Indeed Gates did have to the “academic work” in order to obtain his degrees, but now he has set all of this instruction aside in order to live the ignorantly blissful life. Indeed why should he bother with being an “academic type” now if he is not even going to be paid for this effort, nor as one?!?
            To correctly use his mentioned “gun unloading” illustration, he has indeed been faulted and charged for having ‘unlawfully discharged his gun in public’! Talk about shooting first, and not even bothering to ask any questions after!! Even going back to his spuriously intended meaning of this supposedly disculpating “gun-discharging” excuse: he only ran out of ammunition with which to “shoot down” the objections of his opposers, because he had chosen not to pack on him, more than what can fit in the gun at once.

4. Joseph Story Not “A More Sure Word...” (2 Pet 1:19)           
01:13:54 [V 01:28:08]- By Gates claiming here that his experiences are corresponsive, though lesser than, prophetic utterances in the Bible, especially end time prophecies, he clearly shows that he considers whatever happens to him to be of prophetic significance. So here, in the light of the supposed Joseph Story prophecy, he now ‘suddenly has a “more sure word” of prophecy (2 Pet 1:19), greater than his own testimony/story, upon which to now preach his imminent total collapse and end message.’ I supposed with such an exalted and grandiose view of himself, it is no wonder why he believes that he can do no wrong, and that whatever he may do, even out of his preferred willful blindness, God will still kow tow to it and uncritically/unquestionably bless it?!! In the light of what has been understood of David Gates, his ministry and specifically his still purposeful, though failed, “Lazarus Experience”, this is like a student getting a 60% mark on an exam and then claiming to be more knowledgeable than the teacher who formulated the exam questions, i.e., theoretically possible, however, realistically, rather highly unlikely, and quite foolish to assume so. How much more on a Divine level.

5. Gates Indeed Does Not Know The Future, Nor Is Predicting It In Any Biblical Way
01:14:00 [V 01:28:34]- David Gates explicitly (incoherently) says, with “appropriate” scolding tonal inflection and condescending demeanor (see also in the video), that he will ‘refrain from’ (i.e., “I’m am not going to...”) ‘telling his audience what will happen in the (near) future, (i.e., ca. Sept 11, 2010) because he does not know.’(?!?) The actual, unguileful truth is that, as most people are not foolish enough to assume that he could and should know this: ‘because he indeed does not know what will happen in any part of the future, especially with his manufactured, definite time story-prophecy, he simply and outrightly cannot foretell what will happen.’ In fact Gates again “Freudianly” manifest that he recognizes this utter impossibility as he goes on to rhetorically begin the next sentence by: “Can I tell you, what nebulous, what things might... be about to happen?” Sure you “can.” In fact just about anyone “can” make ‘“nebulous” future speculations!’ This speculative sensationalism is indeed a quite common hobby-horse of such whimsical, Jack Van Impe-type, preachers as David Gates insists on being.
            Perhaps Doug Batchelor’s 1997 & 1999 coining of the term “Storacles (= (Bible) Story Oracle) for his Evangelistic series was deemed a “license”/“inspiration” for this, however, Batchelor only used his chosen stories mainly for the instructional principles they brought out and, when mentioned in a prophetic context, how they “illustrated”, not specifically defined/delineated, a prophetic scenario that the Bible clearly reveals elsewhere in a prophecy and/or what the SOP, under inspiration had prophetically applied. They were definitely not used to set definite times for future fulfillment.

6. Matt 25:1-13 - All 10 Virgins (= Whole Church) Asleep, No Applicable “Outsider”
01:10:37 [V 01:23:48] - David Gates says, and not out of misspeaking but out of his customary “Gateism,” that ‘only the sleeping virgins in the parable of Matt 25:1-13, were surprised by the arrival of the Bridegroom. Well our prescient God clearly says that all of the ten virgins were equally sleeping (vs.5). Gates elsewhere (this November 19, 2010 sermon at 20:13-21:25ff [video]) also decidedly and resolutely, with a deceptively appeasing “trust me” smile of self-confidence, declares that ‘he no longer believes that ‘the ten virgins represent the entire (SDA) Church,’ preferring instead a ‘majority of the Church’ view. However the systematic treatment of this story in e.g. COL 405-21 which rightly applies Biblical symbology, not to mention the comprehensive completeness in the number 10 vs. the perfect representation in 7 (see here), makes this an unequivocal understanding of these virgins as the whole Church. (The equal splitting of this group as 5 and 5 is probably symbolic of a perfectly offsetting condition that results in this church as a whole, as seen in the “lukewarm” (i.e., as equally hot as cold) description of the Remnant Church, Laodicea (Rev 3:15, 16)). As EGW points out the symbolism here shows that: “The two classes of watchers represent the two classes who profess to be waiting for their Lord. They are called virgins because they profess a pure faith. By the lamps is represented the word of God.” The ultimate problem with these “watchers” is actually not that they not watching for the coming of the Bridegroom, nor even that they have fallen asleep due to the delay in the arrival of the Bridegroom, but that they had not procured in advance a reserve of oil (= the Holy Spirit) so that when the announcement was made that the Bridegroom was arriving, they were not able to provide light with their lamps (= the Word of God). Thus, in application, ‘such were/will not be able to distinguish truth from error, and have fallen/will fall under the masterful temptations of Satan.’ (COL 410, 411).
            (Apparently, as seen in this related letter, David Gates also considered, that since there was someone who made the call to the sleeping virgins that the Bridegroom, was coming,’ then this represents someone outside of the sleeping Church giving that announcement. (Presumably him). The actual truth is that such a ‘solely heard, but unseen’ messenger has always been, and still is specific statement on Christ’s Coming in “the (didactic and prophetic) Word of God”, thus when it is rightly understood and heeded (cf. e.g., John 1:1; Rev 22:12, 13, 16, 20; cf. 1:1, 2; 19:13). These further are waking messages that have been re-echoed in “The Testimony of Jesus” as seen in as the messages of the SOP during the prophetic ministry of Ellen White (cf. Rev 19:10). As Gates’ teachings, including this one here, are riddled with fundamental false understandings, (especially prophetically), theology and practices, then he manifestly, squarely fits into this category of sleeping virgins, and on the side of the “moronic/foolish virgins” who have not made this procurement of the Holy Spirit to light their lamp of the word of God. (1 Cor 10:12). It is one thing to be asleep however it is another thing to then brand a false torch of prophecy, and not actual or sufficient Biblical light. As typically done elsewhere, here Gates goes also against the clear teaching of the Bible and the SOP solely because of his private experiences eisogetically imposed upon the Word of God. Added to this inherent “foolishness” of Gates’ is the oblivious indifferent attitude of his that he does not need to better (more deeply)  prepare/correct his sermons, both factually, truthfully and exegetically, thus sustaining his false, even no, (Biblical) light campaign. Really it is only blinding pride that prevents him from making the necessary corrections here.

7. Gates’, Despite Masters, Gross and Factual Mistakes and Actual Economics Ignorance
01:20:06 [V 01:36:38]- In this August 20, 2010 sermon (Audio) [44:30-46:01] David Gates, trying to convince people of the rightness of his total collapse prediction in September 2008, states his qualifying credentials by saying that He has a masters in business and taught graduate studies in business for Andrews University its School of Business in the Caribbean University. So based on this he (impliedly humbly) claims ‘he surely knows something about business/economics’. Based on this, he goes on to deride the 2008 Federal Government Stimulus Package as the “Accelerate-the-Crash Package” and claims that these people (evidently knowingly) did all they could to crash the economy (i.e., by printing more money), but supposedly since God did not want this to happen, because his Church was not ready and had not fulfilled its mission, He overruled these detrimental actions and prevented this wished-for and endeavored total crash(?!?) I guess the only way a Believer can disagree with this “ploying Gateism” is if they accept to become a heretical infidel and deny the “spiritually ratifying claim” that God was supernaturally acting against the suicidal wish and will of these world leaders.
            The facts actually are that although a $700B-$1.3T TARP fund was agreed upon it was only gradually and slowly injected in the economy as the most vital needs came to the point where by, as stated above, by Nov. 17, 2008 only $158.6B had been spent from that fund. So the Federal Government did not ‘fire up the money presses’ on the day when TARP was passed, so there never was a single, total injection of that promisedfund, which actually would have been better for the crucial immediate psyche of the economy. Indeed this fund was most importantly a mental, safety net reassurance for the economy. So since, by now, most of the TARP fund has been spent, and thus concretely monetized, then if this printing of money should have caused a total economic collapse it should be doing so now, when it has actually be tangibly spent! More failed Gatesian Economic theory.
            So call me a “heretic”, but I do not believe at all that God actually did anything for, or against, the various developments in this 2008 crisis, and like in many other situations, simply let man suffer the natural/normative consequences of their (economic) mis-actions, and then figure out for themselves how to resolve it.
            Now in a sermon the following week (August 28, 2010), namely this “Prepared For the Crisis”, Joseph Story Prophecy sermon, Gates, after restating early on (01:05:10 [V 01:16:48]) that he came to the specific belief in, especially an (earlier) September 2008 total collapse due to his graduate business studies and profession (he actually believed in the specific September 2008 date solely based upon the GEAB economic think tank forecasts (See above in Note #7)), then suddenly, conversely claims that although he has masters in business and has taught in the field, he really is not an expert in economics or finance!?!. He obviously is now using this as a rationalizing excuse as to why he has made many mistakes in his past economic analysis and theorizing, (as also seen in this current one). (I guess I should also believe, solely for Gates’ face-saving sake, that Andrews University does not even teach the basics in finance and economics in their Undergraduate and Graduate business programs). So which one is it David Gates??? Are you an “Economics Expert” (Aug 21) or an “Economics Ignoramus” (Aug 28). I guess, as the guileful custom of David Gates is, it all depends on what he is trying to convince people of at that very time. On Aug 21, he was trying to convince people that he unquestionably right on target in his (usurped) September 2008 predictions, so he then was an “Economic Expert” who also then knew exactly why the economy had not crashed as predicted. The next weekend, he was then trying to get people to buy into his new Joseph Story Prophecy and had to explain how he had actually made many factual mistakes in his previous wave of economic predictions, so he now passes as someone who really does not know anything about the supposed ‘completely foreign and distinct field of finance.’ Whatever!! Try doing business without knowing anything about finance or basic economics.
            David Gates only excuse here is that he has not done the proper and deeper exegetical and economic research work for his views.

8. Assets Management and The End
01:06:41 [V 01:18:33] - Here David Gates, approvingly commends people who, in response to his April 12, 2008 Approaching Storm sermon, ‘settled their financial situation’ (i.e., sold homes, paid off mortgages and other debts, etc). This is completely different to the previous view that Gates had (specific reference not presently relocated) in regards to the use of assets by SDAs in the end where he preached that we should ‘mortgage them the max’ and invest the money into finishing the work. (Gates had also suggested this for Church/Denominational assets, however he may have abandoned this view because, this may not be legally feasible with tax-exempt institutions.) He claimed that in the end, since these things are either going to be destroyed, or even seized prior to the end, then it is really not theft. However now Gates evidently believes the contrary. I personally believe, that the Biblically correct view all depends on the actual intent of the person. If the intent is to hopefully, effectively, ‘steal this borrowed money’ then that in itself is sinful even if the borrowing of that money actually is not. On the other hand, if the intent is to speed up the Gospel Work combined with the fact that no one knows when the end will actually occur, then it is Biblical and could be seen as fulfilling the work of the righteous servants in the parable of the Talents (Matt 25:14-30) who also would indeed have ‘(literally) ‘been pragmatic until their master returned’ (Luke 19:13).

9. Knowing Procrastination = Sinful Willfully, Rebellious State
-David Gates, and many others, claim that if we knew of the day and hour of Christ’s return, we would procrastinate until the very end to get ready and even engage in a last hour repentance and rightful/Biblical living then. That may surfacely sound perfectly logical, however it hold absolutely no water when contextually, theologically thought out. For this rational to be valid, it would have to be believed that God is not only not omniscient (e.g., can also read minds), but also physically blind and cannot at all see one’s dishonest and willful sinful and rebellious living and that a last day conversion would be somehow be defaultly deemed genuine and acceptable by Him. Putting off living for God until the last possible hour, (I guess one hour before the known hour of Christ’s return), would only guarantee that one will concretely prove to be unworthy and not trustworthy of forgiveness and salvation.

            Much, much, more can be written here to refute this message of David Gates because virtually, if not really, literally, (I stopped noting (at least for now...)), every statement he made in this message contained elements of calculated guilefulness, sly deceptions, obfuscating falsehoods, circular self-justifying, indifferent self-contradictions and errors, “Gatesian” economics; sanctimonious smokescreens, revisionist and fictitious history, mindless incoherences, calculated, double-talking, “if indeed” duplicities, guilt-tripping reverse psychology, among many such others. Unbelievable! What is only more unbelievable is that people are indeed “moronically” saying “Amen” to this! Talk about “the blind leading the blind.” 

[44] Manifestly David Gates is basing this resolution on the counsel in 1T 349.1 from the ‘Vision of the Two Crown’ (1T 347.1ff); however as also stated there in 1T 353.2, the ones who are counselled to ‘ignore “reproachful falsehoods”’ (which indeed are actually completely different from criticism): “should take the greatest care to live a blameless life, and abstain from all appearance of evil.” Holding David Gates accountable to the high standard of Truth and Lawfulness vs. his preferred, faithless recourse to guilefulness and law violating deeds, does not qualify as those decried acts.

18 comments:

  1. Our denomination's name is Seventh-day Adventist and NOT Seventh-Day Adventist nor 7th Day Adventist.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If it really is that significant, the denominational name has now been written "correctly". I guess it is important to get the name right here so that there will be no confusion as to exactly which denomination is being referred to in these posts!?! Surely another denomination would not want to be misidentified here through this slight misspelling!
    (By the way, where exactly was "7th Day Adventist" written in this blog? I didn't find it!)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wow I really enjoyed David Gates stuff but after reading this I can see the mainline thought is almost doom and gloom to the point of manipulation. It is one thing to preach present truth in light of current events it is another thing entirely to preach a message of fear and committ acts of lying to get what you want. It appears Brother Gates has pulled an Abraham on us and continues to lie to pharoah in order to get what he wants. He should read (perhaps all of us study) Galatians 3! Indeed I pray we all do not try to finish in the flesh what was started by the spirit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That is a quite pertinent example from the Bible that you give in comparison to the “guileful” methods that David Gates has chosen to utilize. Like Abraham, David Gates was given a promise that was eventually overtly ratified by God, however like Abraham, only unwavering faith in what God had promised would bring its promised fulfillment about, and not man-made/manipulated ways.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We were missionaries with his organization. It's worse than what is written here. If you hear of ANYONE wanting to go with one of his missions, please discourage them and redirect them to AFM!!! Don't make them learn the truth!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Some people need to see the detailed/documented truth to (relatively speaking) “set them free.”

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you so much for this excellently researched and written post. I cannot say how much I have been searching for some truth in all of the fear mongering happening these days.

    Perhaps some may disagree, but I also did not appreciate Pastor Gates' nearly blasphemous claim in a sermon in Montreal that he was an authority on what "Godly" music was as compared those in the church he was preaching in who were, "honoring Satan" because they were not playing the 19th-century Christian hymns that are so readily labeled as the "only Godly music" that we will hear emanating from heaven. The Bible says, "no eye has seen nor ear has heard..."

    ReplyDelete
  8. You’re quite welcome! Fear, in any form, is indeed not the motivation for God’s end time work. As you can see in some of the other Forums and blogs referenced in this post (see near the beginning, 6 paragraphs down), many people also disagree with David Gates views and his “fear-mongering methods”.

    Interesting comment of David Gates’ view of music. I know I personally would not be in Christian Ministry if it was not for the life changing Christian witness and passion I saw in many CCM and Gospel music ministers. (Perhaps I’ll post something on this later). The Bible teaches that a song is representative of an experience, and if one cannot “sing a new song’ before the Lord, their overall Christian Experience may be lacking. I am always amused by Christians, even Pastors, who speak disparagingly of Contemporary Christian Music/Gospel, yet they publicly promote and love secular music and artists, even the claimed “innocent ones”. I rather hear e.g., a love song from a converted Christian Artist’s perspective, than any secular/secular-minded performer.

    Interestingly enough, in this sermon [1:07:20-01:16:30], David Gates had been urged to demonstrate what he considered “Heavenly Music”. So he played a sampling, but some of his songs, as he himself recognizes, also have a contemporary rhythm and tune. So clearly in this area, truth is to also be determined by what David Gates thinks it should be. Indeed even in the intro and background music for this David Gates’ ministry promotional video [00:00-01:05ff], one can hear a contemporary, if not worldly, tune, rhythm and cadence. So is his “Heavenly music” criteria only applicable to music with words???

    cont’d

    ReplyDelete
  9. cont’d
    In regards to Christian Music, I go by the principles of Rom 14:22, 23, and if someone is not actually worshipping God in whatever Christian music they are listening to, but e.g., solely pleasing the flesh, and not like David, even ‘“dancing” before the Lord,’ then indeed this is sin to them. Granted not everything produced by a CCM/Gospel artist is acceptable, at least to me, however it may pointedly minister to different people in different ways. God has a place in ministry for all of his Children. And perhaps SDA’s and other Christians do indeed have a different responsibility, even is primarily to “balance things out”. Yet that does not preclude expressing a contemporary and new experience in song by SDA artists, instead of merely, and blandly in terms of variety, singing the same song. In my view, the Lord can also be dishonored by this, effectively experiential lackadaisicalness.

    The Bible also shows that the Lord appreciates a genuinely candid and honest relationship with and from His children, and this is indeed what I see and find in many Christian musical productions. If music was put to many of David’s Psalms, just gauging by his words and expressions (e.g., Psa 94), many of us today probably would be shocked by the corresponding melody/tune. One day we will experience the Perfect, and in the mean time, I personally am glad that God raised up godly artists through which one’s everyday Christian experience, both the highs and the lows, could genuinely praise and/or confess these emotions to God through such actually and personally, pertinent, and truly soul-moving songs.

    Having said that, when I attend worship in Church, and the “peace and joy” (Psa 122:1) that I find there, I personally prefer a “traditional” service. That is probably mainly due to my frame of mind where I seek to learn about the Bible through such Congregational Worship, much more than I go there for “entertainment.” So non-traditional music to me in that setting and with this frame of mind, can be somewhat of a distraction and hindrance. The same thing goes for me with the evangelistic tools of especially SDA’s through TV and Radio media. (I therefore can understand the experiences and warnings that David Gates relates in this area.) My own desire to hear Christian Artist produce fresh, new, creative and original music also causes me to be disappointed if they actually merely (i.e., lazily) just copy/mimick an existing worldly beat, melody or rhythm. It is perhaps also because I get all of my Christian Music/Worship “Entertainment” during the week through Christian music, that I do not go to Church looking for this experience and try to fill this Spiritual need. Perhaps some who insist on turning the worship service into mere entertainment should see if they themselves are similarly demanding in their own time during the week. Just a thought.

    God Bless!

    ReplyDelete
  10. As brought up in the above comment, the prominent and significant role that Gospel and Contemporary Christian Music have played in my calling, vision and motivation for SDA Christian Evangelistic Ministry has been related in the My First Vision post. See also the “You’re the Voice” testimony post.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://bible.cc/1_timothy/5-1.htm


    New International Version (©1984)
    Do not rebuke an older man harshly, but exhort him as if he were your father. Treat younger men as brothers,
    New Living Translation (©2007)
    Never speak harshly to an older man, but appeal to him respectfully as you would to your own father. Talk to younger men as you would to your own brothers.

    English Standard Version (©2001)
    Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father, younger men as brothers,

    New American Standard Bible (©1995)
    Do not sharply rebuke an older man, but rather appeal to him as a father, to the younger men as brothers,

    International Standard Version (©2008)
    Never speak harshly to an older man, but appeal to him as if he were your father. Treat younger men like brothers,

    GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
    Never use harsh words when you correct an older man, but talk to him as if he were your father. Talk to younger men as if they were your brothers,

    King James Bible
    Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;

    American King James Version
    Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brothers;

    American Standard Version
    Rebuke not an elder, but exhort him as a father; the younger men as brethren:

    Bible in Basic English
    Do not say sharp words to one who has authority in the church, but let your talk be as to a father, and to the younger men as to brothers:

    Douay-Rheims Bible
    An ancient man rebuke not, but entreat him as a father: young men, as brethren:

    Darby Bible Translation
    Rebuke not an elder sharply, but exhort him as a father, younger men as brethren,

    English Revised Version
    Rebuke not an elder, but exhort him as a father; the younger men as brethren:

    Webster's Bible Translation
    Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren;

    Weymouth New Testament
    Never administer a sharp reprimand to a man older than yourself; but entreat him as if he were your father, and the younger men as brothers;

    World English Bible
    Don't rebuke an older man, but exhort him as a father; the younger men as brothers;

    Young's Literal Translation
    An aged person thou mayest not rebuke, but be entreating as a father; younger persons as brethren;

    ReplyDelete
  12. Really Winelfred... you really think that this passage applies to David Gates.

    -First of all, just posting a plethora of readings from various Bible version does not actually prove anything here as they have key varying readings and thus only confuse things.

    -Secondly, the operative word here is the position of an elder (Greek Strong’s #4245) and not an “old man” (#4246 - e.g,. Luke 1:18), look it up!

    -Thirdly David Gates, for obvious disciplinary reasons, no longer has official position in the Church, let alone that of an “elder”, and is neither an “old man”.

    -Fourthly, the indeed rebukingly cited gross errors of David Gates in this blog post are judiciously all from the times when he deliberately, guilefully prefers to ignore actual facts, including Biblical/SOP ones in order to present his own concocted, spurious views, speculations and predictions. All which have only serve to mislead Church members and actually harden them in respective non-belief.

    -Thus, fifthly, passages like John 8:44 (cf. 45-47)-Mark 8:33-Rev 14:5 perfectly and most solemnly, warningly, applies here to the pertinent claims and stances of David Gates as indeed fittingly done in this post, as such deliberate and persistent Bible/SOP (i.e., EGW’s “I was shown” statements) deviant/defiant untruths is indeed the work of the Devil; -a message which he now (i.e., by June 2011 and forward) seems have begun to heed. Maybe you should, as commonly done, stop focusing on the externals of this message and pay much more attention to its Substance.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sorry but something is wrong with your post; and it is the spirit behind it, which shows in your lack of brotherly love and lack of a kind redemptive spirit. You are harsh and while you criticize Elder Gates, you are showing a worst spirit. Elder Gates might have had his own mistakes and perhaps some of the things you say here about him might be true, but we need to keep in mind that we are all humans with all that that means. But one thing is for sure, despite his own problems, he is being used by God and has done a missionary work that few can be hope for. But what is our record?...that is the question! We should help each other, uplift one another and talk to one another in a positive way. You are not helping Elder Gates by your criticism. Have you followed the instructions of how to address the problems with a brother in church? Which certainly start with a personal admonition. Sometimes we think we are better than a brother...but truth be told, most of the time we are not!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This knee-jerk and “human” commenting most pertinently sounds like the disciples of Jesus reacted when He cursed the “pretentious fig tree”. (DA 582.2-3ff) It all reflects both a lack of informational knowledge (i.e., the deeper spiritual reasons and implications why I have expressed these comments in that way) joined by a lack of spiritual discernment. In regards to information, you, as with the others who also presume to make such reproaching statements, you need to make sure you have all of your facts straight before you insinuate and/or make any claim of me ‘not following the proper Biblical procedure in engaging David Gates’. As I have already addressed such spurious and baseless claims, see this comment for the fact here. In regards to a lack of Spiritual understanding and discernment, you’ll need to keep all of the facts posted on this blog post in mind and the wider implications of the wanton harm that was being done by David Gates knowing and deliberate waywardness. Indeed you’ll need to use God’s judgement scale which weighs one according to ‘what could have (easily) been done’ and not merely ‘what one have managed to do’. (cf. LDE 59.3-60.2). Once you’ll understand all that is affected by such brash and indifferent ‘global church membership misleading’, you’ll understand and appreciate such corresponding resolute holding to account. Really the major problem in the SDA Church is an indifferent lack of stern discipline, all due to self-serving preferences.

      Lastly, and I just can’t seem to understand this common type of accusation: Why do you presume to speak for David Gates?? I.e., in regards to if/how this blog post has helped him. Why don’t you at least ask him first. If this blog post has not helped him, (which from what I have observed, it manifestly has), it is merely because he would prefer to adhere to his wayward ways. And in such a case, the Matt 18:17 treatment applies. While Gates was still daydreaming about his false time settings and prophecies, he just didn’t care to heed any such correcting of himself, and so that Matt 18:17 has long been in justified effect. So if Gates wants to be “helped” then let him help himself!

      Delete
  14. Ellen White would not employ anyone with whom there was a moral question. Not so with David Gates. He either doesn't check out who he is financing properly or turns a blind eye not following the example of Ellen White as he claims. We have seen this double standard often with men who preach we must follow dress or diet reform to the nth degree all while they are busy abandoning their marriage vows while seeking to have another woman.

    "I see not a particle of leniency in the Scriptures given either of you to contract marriage, although his wife is divorced. From the provocation he has given her, it was largely his own course of action that has brought this result, and I cannot see in any more favorable light his having a legal right to link his interest with yours or you to link your interest with his. One thing is settled. I could not connect with either of you if this step is taken, for I see this matter in a light that the Scriptures would condemn your connection. Therefore, I wish you both to understand that from the light God has given me regarding the past and the present, I could not think of employing either of you if you take this step." {TSB 208.3} - Ellen White

    Only time will tell if David Gates really follows the above author as he claims.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David Gates has significantly improved in regards to being more faithful to Spirit of Prophecy counsels. He has said in his Australia series of Nov-Dec 2015, that if he knew some of the things he knows now he would have acted differently before. However he still is lacking in certain areas of his message, especially, still, with trying to hang the Third Angel’s Message on a set time and season. His problem is that he does not properly handled the exposition of the Bible, especially Bible prophecy. So he does have more to learn and better heed.

      Delete
  15. I agree with "anonymous", that there is an unholy spirit inspiring your post. Shame on you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The path of Israel&Church History is strewn with people like you who, however sincere, resorted to, -but most wrongly so: (wishfully) trying to be “Spirit Diviners” when their cherished idols were being radically smashed before them, instead of focusing on the facts of the correcting truth set forth before them. (E.g. Matt 11:18; 9:34; Mark 2:21; John 7:20; 8:52; 10:20 :: Mark 2:28-30) Worry about that instead!! (Isa 65:12-16)

      (As already inferenced): It is people who, like David Gates (at least previously) had chosen to do: ignore the clear prophetic statements of the SOP and also indifferently engage in systematic guileful lying... who ‘have the wrong, and an unholy, spirit’... (~John 8:44)...but you all’s “(half)-prophets” are indeed supposed to represent your spirit/heart. (Ezek 14:1-5ff)....

      ...God’s (Prophetic) Word is not ‘merely/selectively composed of “sweet sayings”’... but also, when pertinent/needed/applicable/warranted: “rebukes and reproofs”!! (2 Tim 2:15; 4:1-5; e.g. Gal 2:11, 14; Neh 13:23-25ff)

      Delete

This blog aims to be factual and, at the very least, implicitly documented. Therefore if applicable, any comment which contains unsubstantiated/unsupportable ideas will not be allowed to be published on this blog. Therefore make the effort to be Biblical, truthful and factual.

-It typically takes 1-2 days for an accepted submitted comment to be posted and/or responded to.

[If you leave an "anonymous" comment and, if applicable, would like to know why it may not have been published, resend the comment via email (see profile) to receive the response.]