.JESUIT & ADVENTIST DOCTRINES
Written by Swavak Gromadzki
There are numerous testimonies delivered by members of SDA Church who encountered Jesuits as well as brave testimonies of ex-Jesuit priests such as Dr. Alberto Rivera whose life was in constant peril for his revelations of secret plotting within the Vatican to take over the world.
Dr. Alberto Rivera became a Jesuit priest, worked in the Vatican and eventually assigned the deceptive job of infiltrating US Christian Churches (including SDA Church) with the intent to influence leaders, theologians and ministers and alter or modify our contrary to Catholicism doctrines making them favourable to Rome.
Dr. Alberto Rivera stated he personally trained many Jesuits how to become Baptists, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, Methodists or Adventists to infiltrate these denominations as the key goal of the papal Rome was to influence all the areas of life where the Roman Catholic Church can have religious and political control for the coming world government.
During one of the interviews Dr Rivera confessed that also the Seventh Day Adventist Church had been placed under the great setup during the entire history of the denomination, and suggested that the best currant evidence of Jesuit infiltration is the fact that Church leadership introduced doctrinal modification in the SDA Church in favour of Rome and after many decades church leaders haven’t done anything to restore the previously accepted doctrine.
Also the non-Catholic Christian Charismatic Movement, according to Dr Rivera, was established by Jesuits in the protestant evangelical denominations to be a “front” for the Catholic Church.
The unexpected death of Dr Rivera which took place in June 20, 1997, according to his widowed wife Nury Rivera was caused by Jesuit Order. She repeatedly stated her husband was persecuted and killed for trying to tell Vatican secrets about how they infiltrate churches and the U.S. government. She also explained that after her “husband found Jesus and decided to tell the world about Vatican deception, the Jesuits did everything to keep him quiet and discredit him.” She herself had been also harassed, threatened and her house broken into on many occasions in order to steal her husband’s documents and artefacts.
Find out more about Dr Rivera and Jesuit infiltration >
One of the most interesting evidences of Jesuit infiltration in the SDA Church is found in the video interview recorded by Danny Vierra. The video includes information about certain catholic lady who was invited to one of the SDA sanatoriums where she saw the two SDA leaders Leroy Edwin Froom and Roy Allen Anderson (who were responsible for the infamous apostasy of altering the truth about Christ incarnation) and recognised both of them as former catholic (Jesuit) priests she saw many times celebrating masses in her catholic church!
Below I included the link to the video which proves Leroy Edwin Froom and Roy Allen Anderson, who were also among the authors of the deceptive book Questions on Doctrine that sold Adventism to the Evangelical Apostate Ministers like W.R. Martin, were both Jesuit implants! They were there to destroy the previously widely accepted in the Seventh Day Adventist Church belief according to which Jesus took our sinful human nature and reducing it to the catholic doctrine promoting the immaculate conception of Mary.
Read also chapter 10 of Prof. Zurcher’s book which tells about the HISTORY OF THE CHANGED POSITION ON CHRIST’S HUMANITY IN THE SDA CHURCH >
The fact that Jesus took our representative corporate sinful nature, including its key part – the law of sin, which is constantly pooling us toward sin and selfishness, is very closely connected with the truth according to which by taking our sinful nature Christ was qualified to became humanity, we all were in Him, and He actually carried our representative sin in His flesh to the cross where it was condemned by God in Christ’s flesh and destroyed for ever (Romans 8:3).
But when in 1950s Christ’s human nature was degraded in Adventist theology to the sinless one it meant Christ could no longer carry our representative law of sin in the flesh and therefore according to that new theology He mysteriously took our sinful nature only vicariously (substitutionary, imaginary, unrealistic), and died only instead of us and not as us! Our sinful nature (including the law of sin and selfishness we have to cope with every day) was never a part of Him. It was outward, not inward. Jesus bore our weaknesses, our temptations and our sinful nature only vicariously. Jesus took them not as something innately His, but somehow He bore them as our substitute. He mysteriously bore our sins and weaknesses in His perfect, sinless nature. Whatever He took was not His intrinsically or innately, all was taken and borne vicariously.
In this way the word “vicariously” became a key term of the new Christology to enable Adventists to understand Christ’s sinless human nature. This expression was and still is indeed the magic formula contained in “the new milestone of Adventism.”
It is very interesting that also the truth about the universal legal justification and the in Christ motif, which is inseparably linked to the truth about Christ’s incarnation, is another hated by Vatican and Jesuits message. It is so because it is another most vital part of the unique fully restored Gospel and the Three Angel’s Message which makes true Adventism so distinct from the Catholic theology. And since the “infallible” papacy will never change its heretic theology the only way to take control over Adventism is by infiltration and alteration of our key and distinct doctrines.
Knowing this, we can expect that like the truth about Christ’s incarnation was attacked by Adventist leaders who were Jesuit implants also the second most vital for proper understanding and acceptance of the fully recovered gospel truth about universal legal justification in Christ should be either opposed by some leaders or kept unknown and unpopular in the Church.
And lo and behold I can point to at least one excellent candidate to be suggested as another possible modern Jesuit implant in the SDA Church. The very person who perfectly fits this model is former president of the Biblical Research Institute (BRI) Dr. Angel Manuel Rodriguez.
I started suspecting him many years ago after reading his articles opposing the truth about our corporate salvation in Christ but only recently I decided to express my concerns as for some reason it was constantly coming to my mind.
I was trying to find a detailed information about his background and education that would disclose some catholic connotations but there is no detailed biography of Rodriguez available online to find out whether he was attending any catholic schools before studying theology at Andrews. We only know he was Born in Puerto Rico (85% Catholic), and that he had served as president of Antillian College and academic vice president of Southwestern Adventist University.
There are, however, some articles and videos available online which suggest he might be another Jesuit implant in the SDA Church. So it seems I am not the only person who was inspired with the suspicious thoughts about him.
For instance, it is thought-provoking that Rodriguez is a member of the American Society of Biblical Literature of which president is Fernando F. Segovia a former president of the Academy of Catholic Hispanic Theologians in the United States. >
He is also a member of the American Academy of Religion established by Ismar J. Peritz author of A New American Catholic Translation of the New Testament.
But apart from the pro-ecumenical tendencies and the fact that he seems to be one of the Vatican’s favourite Adventist theologians there is another possible reason to assume Rodrigues has a potential to follow the example of Froom and Anderson. It is the fact that no other Adventist theologian opposes the most vital truth of the fully restored gospel as strongly as he does. Unfortunately, since most of our pastors and Church members today are effectively kept in darkness and are not acquainted with the most important aspects of the fully restored gospel, such as universal legal justification, they aren’t also able to recognise Rodriguez as the enemy of the Gospel. And few pastors who know the truth and accept it as biblical usually avoid preaching on it out of fear of getting into conflict with the leadership while members keep quiet as they are afraid of being regarded as troublemakers.
We know that by using Jesuit implants papal Rome has been attempting to eliminate or at least undermine in protestant churches certain doctrines and believes that separate them from Catholic Church. This effort is extremely important for the Vatican because without distinct theological and doctrinal differences it is easy for them to promote ecumenism to finally unite all churches under their supervision and control. In this way Vatican is hoping to achieve the final goal in the form of global spiritual and even political leadership and authority.
Unfortunately, Like Froom and Anderson, who were Jesuit implants used by papal Rome, also Rodriguez seems to be very successful in his efforts of making sure the most important biblical truths which were unique to the SDA Church are still being kept overboard. That is the reason why he so eagerly opposes the truth of legal justification of sinful human kind in Jesus, which is the very foundation of the Everlasting Gospel.
At the same time he uses very clever ways of keeping other most vital truths such as Christ’s humanity at bay. Although it is obvious he agrees with Froom’s and Anderson’s deceptive view He doesn’t seem to openly attack the post-Fall position because he knows that the Bible, Spirit of Prophecy and statements of Adventist theologians prior to the change which took place in 1950’s is so strong that it would be foolish to deny them. For this reason in his articles he attempts to discourage Adventists to study or discuss this most vital for the Gospel and our salvation truth of Christ’s incarnation by using taken out of context statements by Ellen White and presenting this issue as a mystery we will never be able to grasp. In this way he implies that any member or minister who tries to preach on this subject or discuss it in the Church might be considered unwise, fanatical, arrogant, disrespectful or presumptuous.
By his efforts to discourage Christ’s followers from increasing their knowledge about His human nature, however, he proves he must have been inspired by a different spirit than the one who prompted Sister White to encourage us to study the very same truth as deeply, prayerfully and carefully as we can:
“The humanity of the Son of God is everything to us. It is the golden chain that binds our souls to Christ, and through Christ to God. This is to be our study… We should come to this study with the humility of a learner, with a contrite heart. And the study of the incarnation of Christ is a fruitful field, which will repay the searcher who digs deep for hidden truth.” (Selected Messages Book 1, Page 244)
Next strong reason to suspect Angel M. Rodriguez of being a potential Jesuit implant is his attempt to modify another Adventist interpretation of the Word of God which makes us the “most protestant denomination”, according to one of the cCatholic theologians.
The following written by Dr. Alberto R. Treiyer passages from the review of the book “Reflections on the Number 666” (link >) explain how Rodriquez together with some other well-known Adventist theologians attempt to stop identifying the prophetic number 666 with the papal Rome:
“For as long as I can remember, Seventh-day Adventist evangelists have applied the number 666 to one of the Latin titles of the Pope, namely, Vicarius Filii Dei. They have claimed that this title (which means ‘Vicar of the Son of God’) is one of the official titles which have traditionally been used by the popes. Some of our evangelists have also affirmed that the title is (or has been) inscribed on the papal tiara or on his miter…
Recently, however, several of our ablest scholars have decided to oppose this very strongly established in Adventist theology interpretation. A new view has appeared on the horizon with defenders of the calibre of Dr. William G. Johnsson, Dr. Beatrice Neall, Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi, Dr. Jon Paulien, Dr. Ranko Stefanovic and Dr. Angel M. Rodriguez. These theologians have challenged the traditional view and have proposed a new one. The traditional view is very specific. It applies the name and number of the beast directly to a succession of Roman Catholic popes. The new view has removed this specific meaning from the Roman Catholic papacy and has applied it in general terms to an end-time alienation of man from God!
This new rather philosophical, conjectural, if not speculative definition of the number six has been picked up and simplified also by Dr. Angel M. Rodriguez:
“The Greek phrase translated ‘It is a man’s number’ (Revelation 13:18) could be also rendered ‘it is the number of humanity.’ In that case, it is not referring to a particular person (papacy) but to a characteristic of humanity separated from God. Since God created humans during the sixth day, it could stand as a symbol of humanity, but a humanity not yet at rest with God and without the joy of a harmonious relationship with God during the seventh day. The number reveals the rebellious nature of the enemies of God and His remnant. That seems to be the best available interpretation.” (Angel M. Rodriguez, Future Glory, p. 122.)
This change has upset some in the church who feel like the traditional view is more than adequate to explain the mystery of the number 666. Many feel that the new view has taken what is definite and clear and has made it indefinite and fuzzy. Others have gone so far as to believe that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has been infiltrated by Jesuits who have the hidden agenda of destroying our distinctive prophetic roots with a view to ultimately destroy the Seventh-day Adventist Church itself… The conspiracy flames have been further fanned when a medal was given to the pope by the religious liberty department of the General Conference and also when the flag of the Holy See was paraded on stage at the 2005 General Conference session in St. Louis during the March of Nations.
Professor de Kock’s volume of 874 pages had its origin in the shock he received when he read in the Sabbath School lesson quarterly for 8 June 2002, prepared by Dr. Angel M. Rodríguez, the negation of what our church has been teaching for a century and a half. When he started gathering materials to refute A. M. Rodríguez, former director of BRI, he discovered that many pastors and doctors of theology were also disgusted by the changes which Rodríguez had introduced.
Rodríguez took these changes, consciously or unconsciously, from Catholics, spiritualists, and Protestants who had tried to oppose the historicist interpretation adopted by the Adventist Church or who simply had lost the prophetic faith of earlier Protestants.
In the Sabbath School quarterly for 7 and 8 June 2002, Angel Manuel Rodríguez summarized the problems which he encountered in maintaining that which our church, through Uriah Smith, took from Protestantism in 1865 (p. 456). A. M. Rodríguez adopted the method which was used in Alexandria to resolve difficulties in the Word of God, i.e., allegory. Instead of a concrete name associated with the number 666, he decided that it would be better to spiritualize that term.
Before Angel Manuel Rodríguez a certain controversy had arisen in our church concerning the title Vicarius Filii Dei, due to Catholic criticism especially, but also due to other symbolic interpretations, both spiritualist and Protestant, which were being introduced. The conflict between liberals and conservatives began in our church long ago, and the liberal wing gained ground with the publication which the Biblical Research Institute of our church prepared on the subject at the end of the decade of the 80’s. But the main thing for Angel Manuel Rodríguez, who in general is considered a conservative, is that he was the first who set forth all those liberal arguments that had come from outside, in a Sabbath School quarterly which goes throughout the world. Although the , Seventh-day Adventist Church does not consider itself infallible (only God and His Word are infallible), when the Sabbath School quarterly goes through a special committee appointed to review it, and it is published, people interpret that as the official voice of the church.
The result was that, from then on, ministers and laymen all over the world drew on that testimony to stop identifying the Roman papacy by its most specific blasphemous name. It is appropriate, therefore, that this discussion should receive further attention in our church, from its origins, to note the result of not having published a well-documented official response which it gave at its moment, due to the dogmatic and close-minded attitude of the liberal wing.
At the beginning of XX century, Adventists were practically the only ones who continued identifying the Roman papacy by the name Vicarius Filii Dei, in fulfilment of the prophecy of Rev 13:18. Consequently, the attack now turned against them.
The Catholic author who most strongly attacked the interpretation of our church concerning Rev 13:18 was a Jew who had converted to Catholicism. He was named David Goldstein. His attacks on Judaism were especially strong after his conversion, and later he took a turn at our church. His aversion to the Adventist Church manifested itself especially after receiving police authorization to visit an inmate in a Texas prison, a convicted murderer who was awaiting the death penalty. To his surprise, Goldstein learned that Adventists had gathered him to their party, and that the prisoner had been approached by Adventists and that he had been converted to our faith. He saw there various pamphlets of our church with the papal title mentioned above, and drawings that our brother had been making of the papal crown with the inscription Vicarius Filii Dei. In vain our imprisoned brother tried to convince the Judeo-Catholic of that interpretation, who left the prison greatly annoyed. After that he dedicated himself to attacking the Adventist Church in articles and books, and even had an imprimatur from the archbishop of Boston for doing so.”
If you wish to read this entire very interesting review here is the LINK >
Well, these are the arguments against Angel M. Rodriguez I have discovered in only about one day of searching and analysing. I therefore believe it would be probably possible to find additional data if I sacrificed more time. But I think that although we still can’t proof he actually is another Adventist Jesuit yet the evidence presented above is sufficient to assume that like Froom and Anderson in 1950s also Angel Manuel Rodriguez has been trying for a long time to keep Adventists away from studying and accepting the most important aspects of the fully recovered Gospel and he also attempts to change or modify certain Adventist doctrines and teachings in favour of papal Rome.
Therefore, if this is true, the next simple conclusion is that we are not supposed to keep quiet about this fact but I am sure the Lord Himself expects from us to stand for the truth by sharing this as well as other articles from this website with as many Sisters and Brothers as possible, praying at the same time and asking the Lord to bless our efforts and stop the enemies from distorting His Truth and wounding His own Church.
In order to understand why Angel M. Rodriguez so strongly opposes the truth about the in Christ motif and the universal legal justification please read the following article: