..................
.
 

 

THE OVERALL MISSION OF THE MARRED SERVANT

AS SEEN AND UNDERSTOOD BY

DR DALE LIVINGSTON, DLC, JD, JYD, tms, HIMSELF
 
Owing to the many possible false conclusions some may make or come to about me in this proclamation pertaining to the "marred servant" issue that I have made heretofore, I have become disposed to explain things as I see them, if they are in fact different from things as they are.

I did not look to "become the marred servant" or anything of the like; it was the farthest thing from my mind.  I was only trying to do a work, that I am still to this day engaged in, the saving of the Constitution for the United States of America, and extending that same Constitution to the nations of the world wherein our God in Heaven has willed it to go, not simply by preserving it in its place, but saving it toward the end of literally restoring it to its fullness as it was, and was meant to be, back in 1787, and as I believe that God our Savior meant it to be when He inspired the same into the hearts and minds of our Founding Fathers.

It was during that time that I was preparing and giving seminars to people in general who would attend my seminars that I was caused to consider the issue sovereignty as discussed by the late Ezra Taft Benson, former president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, in his book titled "The Constitution ... A Heavenly Banner."  In review of the issue of sovereignty as president Benson explained it in his book, I began to contemplate the issue of how sovereignty was received by anybody in the first place, particularly the kings themselves who it was well known and understood must have it in order to be considered as or called "kings."

As a part of my seminars, I often referred people to Corpus Juris Secundum, Volume 17, Section 43, pages 106 through 119, wherein it sets forth things pertinent to the issue of "contempt," where it, contempt, as a principle in law, came from, and how it came to be.  On page 108 therein, it indicates that the power of contempt began to be used by the courts as having arisen under the sovereignty of the King of England in the early 1700's.  I became curious as to how such a critical power could have arisen exclusively from that single point in history alone, and became even more curious as to how the power of sovereignty came to exist, since it seemed that the power of contempt and the power of sovereignty were synonymous with each other as to where they must have arisen or had their original source.

 
Thus, I began to explore in my mind and in my studies the issue as to where the principle of sovereignty, which is the very power and existence of government itself, got its start.  Being the logical person that I am, I quickly came to realize that sovereignty could only come by some sort of descent, and only from those who had it already, for it seemed to me to stand to reason that you cannot obtain sovereignty from where sovereignty is not.

In a vision in my mind, I could see the very first group of people who got together and established their first "king," and realized immediately that before that king existed, the powers of sovereignty must have been held by the people themselves, the very people who were engaged in that act of electing and proclaiming that very first king in all the world.  That would mean, I reasoned, that before that king was established as any kind of sovereign, that such sovereignty as a power, authority, and right must have (been) laid in the hands of the people themselves.

And of course, tracing it on back from there could only lead back to Adam and Eve, and from there back to God the Father Himself, for I do believe in the existence of God, as a scientist, as well as a person of great spiritual faith, for as an intelligent being I am able to direct my faith toward things wherein I have found wisdom to believe in, even in the midst of great adversity.

I wrote a simple one page statement one day, in preparation to my next seminar on saving the Constitution, as I mentioned,  just one page, wherein I had traced the issue of sovereignty back past all of the kings to that first group of people who had established that first king, and from there on back to Adam and Even, and from there on back to God our Father.

 
It was not an in-depth work such as it has become since that time, and there were many things I had not yet discovered at that time, which I now know and understand more fully.  Nevertheless, I read it before the audience that day, and thought no more about it until two days later when I got a call from a friend and fairly new acquaintance and supporter of my work at that time.  At the time of that call, this supporter, whose name was David, directed me to turn to the scriptures, such as may be found in Isaiah 52: 7, then 11 - 15.  These scriptures compare to 3rd Nephi, Chapter 20, Verse 40, for those who may be aware of this ancient script believed in by many, and  he, this man named David, David Bailey, told me to "read slowly," and to note where and when the events were taking place as referenced thereby, and that there were around at the time those very learned scholars who believed that these specific scriptures did not make reference to any prophet or other servant of God as had yet been revealed.  This was told to me by this David, just two days after I had made my presentment to the people about there being a Celestial Constitution, traced back to through all of the kings, and on back to Adam and Eve, and to the angels of God, where God was, before time began, and this did not come from me myself as though I thought I should be any servant of the Lord in particular.

As I read these passages referring to this marred servant, I was somewhat astonished to see that some of things mentioned therein were things that might come about if I were able to complete, in any righteous way, several of the works that I had already been struggling toward to bring forth unto mankind, my work, The Sunday Plan, my treasured understanding of how to forever bring about great economic relief and prosperity to the people around the world being among those.

I noticed that there were many other similarities as to things purported to be brought about and things I had already been working on and toward, things of major consequence and import as pertains to things in government, corruption, and the damages that these things have caused and are continuing to cause in people's lives.

 
I also understood the severity with which the adversary, Lucifer or Satan, had used in dealing with me in my life, all of my life, and the fact that I should have never survived many of the spiritual attacks that he had wrought upon me, certainly least of all that I have any ability or potential even desire to do the things I was doing in bringing forth the things that I have been trying my utmost to accomplish, that time to this.
 
As I continued to move forward with conviction, I also realized that at no time had it ever been revealed to me that I was in fact this "marred servant" referred to, and I even had some people tell me that I was not, that I was the last person on earth that God would choose for such a task.  So as for me claiming that I am "the prophet" or even that I actually qualify as "a prophet" of any sort, I cannot say that, and have not, for it has never been revealed to me that such is the case, so I will not assume such a thing, and you, reader, should not either.

Nevertheless, I must surely be considered as intelligent to some extent, and it is upon this I must rely to forward this, my cause, as the marred servant, even if the same shall be regarded as only an internet identification name.  In either case, it is the same.

But this, to me, is not all that there is to the "marred servant" issue, for I believe that the mission of the "marred servant" is much different that that of the Church itself, or the gospel of Jesus Christ, overall, as presented by any ministry of any church.  It is not my job to direct the spiritual affairs of any man except to the extent that it comes under the certain law, and to that extent, how it has affected or has been affected by those things which comes in contact with the people and society in regard to that law.

On the one hand we might suspect that part of the mission of the "marred" servant would be to orchestrate and help bring about the saving of the United States Constitution as a precious document for the world itself to look to for its temporal, "legal salvation," but that would hardly describe the conditions described in Isaiah 52: 15.  No, I have come to believe that the work of this servant is something much different from the ordinary, and is not the work of any of the "prophets" at all.  Not a prophet whatsoever, but a servant nevertheless, is what this particular servant would be.
 
One of the things that directs me to believe this is that Jesus himself, in the book of Matthew 24: 14, stated that the gospel, which derives its origin from the Church itself, would be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations, and then would the end come.  The last time I checked, the word "all" means "a fullness," including or involving everything that pertains to a thing," "leaving nothing or none out," and so forth.  All means ALL, and nothing less.

On the other hand, the work of this "marred servant" does not go out to all nations as does the direct gospel of the Church itself, but only to "many nations."  And the last time I checked again, "many" and "all" are not the same thing.

What then could the work of the "marred servant" actually be, if other than the spreading of the gospel itself?   That which would only require that such work go out to many nations, but not all?  To this end, I will now devote the remainder of my explanation and witness, as I understand it now and believe it to be.

 
I would like for you to turn to the issue of the "beast" as referred to in the Thirteenth Chapter of the Book of Revelation in the Holy Bible.  As a matter of common use, I will call upon the King James version.

This is a chapter of the Bible from which Hollywood movies have been done, allegedly great analysis books have been written by equally regarded great men, and has brought about much speculation among many as to its meaning, and has caused much confusion, concern, and even grief and suffering.

I believe that you will find here that my own regard to this chapter, and its true meanings, will be found to be considerably different, unique and penetrating, as are my other works.

 
First of all, I would like to point out to all that there are two (2) beasts mentioned in this chapter, not one, a fact that seems all to easy to forget when speculating as to "who" or "what" "the Beast" is.   Partly this is because people who try to analyze these things without help have a hard enough time just trying to figure out the meaning of one beast, let alone two of them, although there have been a few erroneous attempts to do so, but those attempts at best have gone nowhere, but have amounted to little more than political suspicions of things believed to be happening in these last days, but with no real substance thereto.

I will tell you first off that I believe that the first Beast was to be dealt with by a specific servant called specifically as a prophet of God, whose work has begun the bringing down of that "beast," but whose work has not yet been completed in its entirety because of the existence of the "second Beast," whose work I believe that the "marred servant" may have been brought forth into this world to accomplish the "beginning of the bringing down of."  There; there it is in a nutshell.  The "first Beast" is to begin to be brought down by one servant, also a "marred servant," and a prophet, and the "second Beast" is to be began to be brought down by another servant, also a "marred servant," but not a prophet.  Understand?  Not a prophet.  But still a servant, nonetheless.  Their roles and callings are different as servants, however marred they might be respectively, because the two Beasts themselves are likewise different.  Bear in mind that a King, as is the Lord God, even the Savior, is likely to have more than one servant, even if those servants happen to be marred in some way.
 
Only an intelligent God, as is our Heavenly Father, would think logically, high enough to figure this kind of thing out, for mankind never would, although mankind might be, in a general sense, inspired to understand it, but only through a servant with sufficient intelligence to understand it also, for I tell you now, Intelligence communicates with Intelligence, and Intelligence can never communicate with Ignorance, or low intelligence, except on a lower scale or basis.  Just as spirit speaks to spirit, intelligence also can communicate with intelligence.  This is just a fact, and all intelligent beings can understand it and accept it, for true intelligence is not a still thing, but grows continually, and will, if continuing to so grow, find the day when the same shall be talked to by God as a friend talks to a friend.
 
The two Beasts of scripture, or Revelations, Chapter 13, represent two overall organizations; the first organization, represented by the first Beast, is the corrupt or fallen Church, or churches, of the world; the second organization, represented by the second Beast, is the corrupt or "fallen" Government, or governments, of the world also.

I once wrote a book called "The Betrayal of Peter" which I had to write under an assumed name for fear of certain religious factions that would surely hate me, maybe enough to rise up to kill me, but also because the truthfulness of it all is so direct, that it might cause hurt of innocent people, people who are merely trying to survive spiritually, and might find it difficult to continue in spirituality if they came to believe that they had been so cleverly deceived by the work of the first Beast accordingly.  I have tried to defer to the Lord in these matters, for I am sure that He knows best after all, and have not released this work in its entirety, for its understanding would cause possible contention among many, and this is certainly not the Lord's way.

Still, I am troubled as to some of the things that I believe and feel need to be disclosed or brought about, and I have petitioned the Lord in my heart as to how I might be able to make them known without, hopefully, creating an undue unrest in the lives upon whom the voice of the Lord still calls to, to come into His fold ere it is too late.

 
Therefore, as best as I can, I will proceed to expose to you a few of my findings, although I look forward with hope of my own to the day when all of these things can be made known without restraint, that all things might be fulfilled as has been spoken by the mouths of all the holy prophets since the world began.

"The Betrayal of Peter" deals with a very odd historical issue; the factual betrayal of someone who walked daily with Jesus Christ, was taught by Him personally, and was ordained by Him to lead His Church, as an Apostle among Apostles.  He who three times denied even Christ, but became His biggest and most loyal defender supporter and continuous and unfailing defender thereafter.

It is more than curious to realize that we know exactly who betrayed Jesus as to His death, but in contrast to that certain knowledge, know literally nothing, historically or otherwise, as to who betrayed Peter to his own death.  We, as a historical or gospel fact, know little more about Peter's death than that he, when it became evident that he was going to be killed, crucified in fact, that he asked to be be crucified upside-down (according to the greatly learned Origen 250 A.D.), because he, Peter, did not feel worthy to be crucified rightside-up as had been the Savior.  We also understand, from history but not from actual scripture, that Peter had requested at some time of the Savior that he, Peter, as a fulfillment of his own wish, be allowed to "die like his Lord."  This supposedly is why Peter received the ultimate fate that he did; as the granting of his wish of the Lord that he, Peter, be allowed to die like him also.  Little more than these things do we know about the issues surrounding the death of Peter, but there certainly must have been more.  Much more.

 
For example, to die like his Lord would have to have involved more than mere crucifixion, for many were indeed crucified, but none quite like the Lord, Jesus Christ.  One of the things that existed surrounding the Lord's own death was the issue of "betrayal" which had been foretold by prophets centuries before.  Another thing that was involved in the death of Jesus was that His betrayal came from somebody high up in the Church, somebody that Jesus should have been able to trust, somebody that was close to Him and called Him friend.

Were these elements also present in Peter's own death, his crucifixion, even though upside down?  Judge for yourselves.

 
There was a person who, according to history, was a friend of Peter, who eventually became considered to be an "Assistant to the Apostles" themselves, who after his death was proclaimed to have suffered martyrdom, an error which history has never borne out as true, who was originally the Bishop of Rome, and (because a bishop was then as now known to be the "Father of his own Ward, or charge, or congregation,") came thereafter to be called "Pope," in defiance of the Lord's or God's own warning that no man, in any official capacity, was to be called "Pope" which Pope means "Father" in Italian, as related to the word Pa, or Pop.  The Lord's own warning to "call no man father," then, was not just a warning, but rather a prophetic statement, prophesying of things soon to come thereafter, which would signal the corruption or the falling as setting in upon the Church of Jesus Christ.

Who then is this man who did these things, and why have we not uncovered his identify before now?   It may interest you to know that the man of whom I speak is mentioned in the scriptures by name.  He was the Bishop of Rome at the time, an alleged friend of Peter, and an Assistant to the Apostles themselves.  Being the Bishop of Rome, and Rome being the most powerful of political cities at that time, he was inherently, or naturally, the most powerful Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ at that time.  He was not a Jew by birth or descent, but was an Italian, or Roman, by birth, which made him all the more powerful and respected when it came to getting things done in Rome, such as seeing to the betrayal and crucifixion of Peter, who also happened to have been crucified in Rome.

 
He is mentioned in 2nd Timothy, 4: 21 and his and was "Linus."  Yes, just like the name of the cartoon character of today by the same name, except that this more ancient Linus was a far more sinister person, as I shall now attempt to expose.

First of all, there is the issue of his, Linus', taking upon himself the title of "Pope" or "Father" as though an official title of the gospel, in utter defiance of Jesus' own warning - a commandment - that no one should call another by such a title as being over any other person in the Gospel upon this earth  (see Matthew 23: 9).   It would seem to stand to reason then that if a person was warned not to call another person "father," then that other person should likewise not refer to his own self as "father" so that others might call him so, otherwise the Lord's commandment is made a mockery of, and constitutes blasphemy.

And then there is the issue of the timing of Peter's death as of its latest year, being about the year of 65 A. D., combined with the time of Linus' "ascension to the papal throne" which, according to historical Roman Catholic Church records, took place in about the year of [67 A.D.?], for in the records that I myself have seen, it is written with a question mark thereafter.
 
Now, let us approach this from two different standpoints, the philosophical and the pragmatic.  From the philosophical standpoint, we add the numbers 65 and 67, then divide the answer of 132 by 2, to obtain the average thereof, and arrive at the number "66."  This can be thrown off as being merely speculative, which it is, although it may still be inspired, which it also is.

But it is an entirely different story to believe that Peter would be crucified in 65 A.D., at the latest, and Linus take over as the leader of the Church over a year later, meaning that for more than a year the Church of Jesus Christ would have gone without its utmost leadership, at a time when there would have been the most critical need for it -such Church- to have it, particular in this era of the Roman Empire, for it was about the time of Nero when the activities by Rome against the saints or members of the Church had reached their all time worst.  Doesn't say much for God on behalf of His Church, does it?  But that would only be true if it was in fact His Church that was still on the earth, officially, having to deal with these grave Roman issues.

 
A much more plausible and solid idea would be that sometime shortly after Peter's death by Crucifixion in Rome, complements of some unknown betrayer, Linus, even if he had actually been acting in the right "Christian" spirit as some would have us believe, would still have begun his role of leading and guiding the Church sometime in the following year of 66 A.D., and not the year thereafter, not more than a year later, for supposedly the election of a pope at that time no longer required the vote of a single member of the original Apostles - who had all either been killed or else driven so far out of known existence that they were reasonably believed to have been dead.  That considered, it would have been a "walk in the park" for someone as powerful and well known as was Father Linus to have himself simply elected to the new, so-called "following papal throne" (presumed to have followed Peter's ascendency to the "throne") as the actual "first pope," later to be falsely claimed to be the "second pope" of what would actually have been - the church of Linus.

No, Linus did not ascend to the "papal throne" in 67 A.D.?, but rather in 66 A.D.! instead, less than a year, or a year at the most, from the latest known year of the death of Peter, the Apostle - Peter, who was not ever proclaimed in any scriptures as either "pope" or "father."
 
There are those who look to, and point to, the name "Peter," and say proudly to themselves that his name means "stone," and that makes him the "rock" upon which Jesus referred to as the Church being founded upon, as referred to in Matthew 16: 18.  But there is a part of the story that has not yet been told, and that part is the part that I am about to tell now.
 
I was studying at the University of West Florida, under a Dr. Elaine Hardin, historian, I believe, and it was during this time that I became acquainted with a number of things in history totally outside of the knowledge that one gets simply by reading the Bible alone.  One of those things that I learned, I learned strictly by accident.  To this day I don't recall why one day I happened to be reading in a name dictionary, or some kind of dictionary, at the University's library, and found therein something that enlightened me from that day to this about the whole affair.  I even made a copy of the page in the dictionary, and kept it for many, many years thereafter, but one day lost it - my only copy, and I don't happen to know the name of the dictionary that it came from (maybe someone else out there can come across it).  In that dictionary, it contained the most interesting definition of the world linus, just below where it mentioned the name of St. Linus, or the Linus as mentioned by Paul in 2nd Timothy, but therein as the Catholic Pope, regarded as the second Pope of the Catholic Church.  The name of the simple word "linus" was quite illuminating indeed.
 
Now, if we look to the meaning of the word "Peter" as being "stone," then it should be equally significant as to the meaning of the name of the second "Pope" to the Catholic Church, but being instead the first "Pope" to the rest of the world.  This would also be true considering that the Bible does not actually contain any reference that establishes Peter himself as ever having been a "Pope" as has been claimed.

These then, are the words, as a definition, that faced me, and that I read, that day in that old dictionary when I first gleaned the true meaning of the name "Linus" in contrast to some more softened versions offered by some of the modern dictionaries of today, for they burned indelibly into my mind, and I still remember them, word for word, as clearly today as when I first read them back in 1979.  They read as follows:
 
Linus.  "Woe to us.  Song of mourning.  Song of Lamentation.  Killer of the Vineyard.  Killer of the Vine."
 
WOW!  And what was it that Christ said about He himself having been "the true Vine?"  And doesn't the "Vineyard" represent, scripturally, the Church itself?  The Church of Jesus Christ, Himself?  Yes it does, and Yes it does.  Then, that means that this man, this Linus, by that very definition, was the death of that very same Church!  And the death of Jesus Christ, or all that He, the Son of God, stood for in righteousness.  And all that Peter may have established for the Lord and for His Church, or "Vineyard," that same Linus, even "Pope" Linus, killed or destroyed.   . . .  !

And there is still more.  "Who . . . sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God."  2nd Thessalonians, 2: 4.   A prophet is a person who can reveal things kept secret, and is therefore a "revelator."  A prophet is also a person who can see visions, when inside the walls of a holy temple, and is thus called a "seer."  Where this person, this "son of perdition" (a son of perdition, like unto Cain, is a murderer, especially against the light of the gospel itself) that the Apostle Paul described might sit in order to be able to see a vision might be better determined when we realize a few things about prophets, seers, and revelators.  It should be understood that a holy temple of the Church of Jesus Christ must have existed at the time that the Apostle spoke of these things, for he, Paul, had alluded to this very idea in 1st Corinthians, 15: 29, and referred to a temple again in 2nd Thessalonians, but this time in its corrupted state.
 
One of the errors that many have made in this regard is to automatically assume that the time of the corruption alluded to was to be at some time far off in the future, but there is nothing in the scripture itself that would so indicate that as being true.

What is true about this whole thing is that Linus, Bishop Linus, originally, commonly referred to as a "father of his charge of congregation," or ward, went from Bishop to "Pope," alleged as the new head of the Church of Jesus Christ, without so much as either a reference in the scriptures to such an allowance, or any recorded ordination to such a title by any known member of the Twelve Apostles themselves, and in absolute and utter defiance to the foreboding and commandment by no less than Jesus Christ, who happens to have been, legally, even as a matter of Church, over any of the Apostles to begin with, as well as the rest of the entire Church.

So no matter who, or how many of the other members of the Church at that time might have voted for or told Bishop Linus that it was okay for him to discard the Bishop's mantle and call himself "pope," they would not be sufficient in authority, power or right to overturn or usurp the authority, power and right of a Christ, being God The Son, over-all, or place any person at the head of the church who could be proclaimed to be the Substitute For The Son of God.
 
I do not believe that it is any small coincidence that the world "seer" which denotes a specific and holy power of vision, found to exist in the holy temples of God, also contains within it the word "see" or "See," as in the "Holy See" of Rome.  Do you suppose it is possible, that if this most ancient of Roman buildings were excavated even a little bit below the surface, that traces of an ancient true Christian Temple might be found therein, akin to some of the traces found on the ancient temple of Solomon?  After all, what more logical place for the Church at that time to have located the temple referred to by Paul in 2nd Corinthians that at the all powerful Rome, the one place where the government would have certainly been on the side of the Church in not persecuting its members, if the government could be convinced that this particular Church was harmless enough that it could be provided the grant to build one of its own "temples of worship" there (in Rome)?

The first Beast, when it was to be conceived and brought forth, was to reign with unchecked power for 42 months.  Because of this rather short time span, many have been lead to believe that the 42 months talked about must somehow take place in the very last days, and could not have possibly referred to having been started at any other time prior.  But a certain man that I learned about many years ago came up with a different possibility to this mystery, in part, but was ultimately not correct as to the overall issue that he proposed, nevertheless his insight added to my own, and I believe that I have found something which requires, necessarily, that a person stop and think.

The man took the number 42, and then went back into the Old Testament where the Lord foretold of the time that He would give Israel a year for a day in exile.  The Church of Jesus Christ was sometime referred to as "Israel."  He then multiplied the 42 months by 30 days in the month, and came out with the number of 1,260 years that Israel, or the Church of Jesus Christ, would remain without the correct authority or truth.  He then tried to attach that number to a year somewhere in about the 3rd century to which he thought that the priesthood or authority directly from God might have survived to, in order to find a year when supposedly the Church of Jesus Christ would be restored unto the earth, and the first Beast would finally began to be destroyed or brought down by its coming.  However, the time references that he chose had no logical, historical, or scriptural basis for their foundation, and so those to whom he offered his postulations rejected them as being inadequate to explain the 42 months that the first Beast was to reign upon the earth over many nations.
 
In looking at this man's work, however, I could see that there was a certain strength to his studies, if only the right enumerations could be found to more precisely explain it.  What he started, I worked on to finish.

As a scientist, my first scientific thought was, "Why did he assume 30 days?  There are more days in some months than 30, and some calendars may not be in exact agreement either with the number of days that we might choose as the number of days being proposed by the scripture.  And it would seem that the number of days would be of critical importance, for if translated into a number of years, it would mean the difference between coming up with the right historical dates when these things were supposed to happen, or not.

I immediately began to conduct a search for other types of calendars, but could not find one that seem to have any uniformity as to the number of days being involved in each and all of its months.
 
Consequentially to this problem, I began to look more carefully at the specific scriptures there in Revelation 13: 5 itself, to see if maybe the Lord hadn't left us some sort of a clue as to the number of days to be involved in each of those months, to be translated into years therefrom, that this false and corrupt organization would reign in its blasphemy, for I did not believe that the Lord would provide us the statement and not provide us with a solution or a clue as to how many days should be involved in this question.  There must be some clue contained therein, I reasoned, as to the number of days to be considered to be in each and every month of the 42 months, and it had to be the same number of days for each month.

I looked and I looked and I looked at that scripture, but the only number that I could see therein was the number 42 itself.  Suddenly I thought, what about the number 42?  I know it sounds kind of crazy, but what about using that number as the number of days in each proposed month instead of 30?  After all, isn't God's days, in length, supposed to be different from man's?  Longer, much longer, in fact?  Maybe His months, as I believed or suspected them to be, like His days (each of his days being a thousand of our years), are longer, much longer also.

So I took this idea to heart for that moment, and multiplied the number 42 (for the number of days in the month) times 42 months (that the first Beast was to reign, unchecked).  The result is 1,764 years.  Then I added that number to the number 66 A.D., which I had come to believe was the year that old "Killer of the Vineyard" / "Killer of the Vine" Linus had actually taken over as the new, corrupt, presiding "official" of the "Church" of that time, not actually being even the "Catholic Church" by its name, but being instead the alleged "Christian" Church (of Linus).  And upon adding this number, 1,764 years, to the number of 66 A.D., it came to the precise number of the year of 1830.
 
The year of 1830.  For those of you who may not be aware of it, this was the precise year that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints was officially organized, on April 6th of that year in fact.  I was astonished, for I had never actually expected anything to be so precise as was what I was now beholding before my very eyes.  True, I had no scientific or scriptural reference to establish that God has anywhere in his chronological system a period of 42 days by which to rest a claim of "days per month" upon.
 
On the other hand, this particular issue was contained in the 13th Chapter of Revelation, and the number 13 is comprised of the two numbers, 6, which is considered to be the number of man (see Genesis chapter 1), and 7, which is considered to be the number of God (ditto), and the numbers 6 and 7, in addition to making up the number 13, also when multiplied, came to the number 42, the number of months, or days, being considered here.

I also knew that I was born on the Seventh Month (July) and the 13th day of that month also, and that I was born in the year of 1950, 50 being the number of the Year of Jubilee of the ancient Jews, which also coincided with my very first work, The Sunday Plan, that miraculous economic plan for the much healing or salvation of mankind, upon which I began to first build all of my other works, from that day to this.

 
As I indicated above, I believed, or suspected, that the 42 days month that I had proposed must be God's month, not one that could be related to any earthly calendar, which would have meant that the overall time span of His months, day for 1,000 year day, would be 42,000 years long - by mankind's standards.
 
This I believed in 1979, when this whole discovery first came about, but it was not until 2006 that I finally found any scientific evidence to support my faith that this was in fact the truth, not mere speculation on my part, but an inspiration, by way of Highest Intelligence communicating to High Intelligence, that this thing was so, and could be relied upon, as a matter of final and irrefutable truth, from the God of Heaven Himself.
 
Reasoning well before 2006 that IF such were the case, that this number 42 also referred to the Lord's own month period of days, for a total of 42,000 years, then, like our own months it would have to involve some sort of cycle, as with the Lunar Cycle that describes how and why our own months are determined for their times, and that such cycle of 42,000 years would have to exist somewhere within our own relative space system, as within or related to our own sun and solar system, and not in some far away galaxy or part of the universe with which we have nothing to do; just as the Lunar Cycle is close and familiar to us, so must this 42,000 years cycle also be close and familiar to us.  This was my reasoning up to the time of my discovery of this mystery, in the year of 2006, and thereafter.
 
I found it, being the servant that I am, here on the Internet, and as you are to see below, it is quite real, and relevant, to our existence, and goes by a named cycle involving an orbit, of the "Sun," not the moon, showing it to be relevant to God Himself, for God's own months purposes.
 
And Here It Is, in the different website address reports that I found it to exist, and it fits precisely the concept that the Lord's months, different in scope of time than "man's" months, at 42 days per month, each day being a thousand years to "man," is 42,000 years long, in "man's" time.
 
It's called - The Milankovich Cycle – as discovered and described by Milutin Milankovich in 1920:
 
"The earth's rotational axis is tilted with respect to the sun. This is called obliquity and is defined as the angle between the earth's orbit and the plane of the earth's equator. The tilt is toward the sun in the summer hemisphere and away from the sun in the winter hemisphere. The tilt of the earth changes cyclically between 21 3/4 degrees and 24 1/4 degrees. The period of cyclicity is 42,000 years.  A large tilt warms the poles and causes smaller temperature differences in the summer hemisphere. The current tilt is 23 1/2 degrees."

       http://www.dnr.mo.gov/energy/cc/cc7.htm
    This above web site is still there, so far.
Milankovich Cycles
Variations in the amount of solar radiation the Earth receives that are due to cyclical changes in the orbit of the Earth about the Sun and in the rotation of the Earth on its axis. Most climatologists accept that these changes affect the climate, in particular by triggering the onset and ending of ice ages.

There are three such cycles, with different periods. Each has only a minor effect in itself, but their influence is significant when all three coincide. They were first described in 1920, by Milutin Milankovich.

The first cycle involves changes in the Earth's orbit. This describes an ellipse with the Sun at one focus, so the distance between the Earth and Sun varies through the year that it takes to complete one orbit (see aphelion and perihelion). Because the Sun is not at the center of the path described by the Earth's orbit, the orbit is said to be eccentric. The shape of the ellipse is not constant, however. Gradually its eccentricity increases and then decreases, changing over a cycle with a period of about 100,000 years, the time it takes to return to any point in the cycle. At its most eccentric the Earth is farther from the Sun at both aphelion and perihelion than it is when the orbit is less elliptical. At maximum eccentricity there is a difference of 30 percent between the distance between the Earth and Sun at perihelion an aphelion.

The second and third cycles affect the rotation of the Earth about its own axis. This axis is not at right angles to the plane of the ecliptic—it is oblique. If it were at right angles (normal to the ecliptic), the Sun would be directly overhead at the equator at noon on every day in the year and there would be no seasons.. At present the angle between the rotational axis and the plane of the ecliptic is about 23.45°, but this is not constant. Over a cycle of about 42,000 years its obliquity moves from 22.1° to 24.5° and back again. This does not alter the amount of radiation Earth receives from the Sun, but it does affect the way it is distributed. The greater the obliquity the more warmth high latitudes receive in summer, and the less they receive in winter."

http://www.fofweb.com/subscription/science/Helicon.asp?SID=2&iPin=enweath2146
 
NOTE.  While the above website address, if clicked on, appears to be a defunct website, by entering in the first part of it, or http://www.fofweb.com, you will see it render http://www.fofweb.com/Subscription/Default.asp?BID=7, which is now a subscription website titled "Facts On File - Online Databases," to which you must be a subscribing member.  Also, by clicking the original one above, you will note that it refers to the issue of the subscription/science/Helicon followed by "line 690," which would not be the case if it were merely a defunct web site that had never approached that subject before this time.  This validates the information that I originally obtained from this web site.  CONTINUING, NEXT BELOW -
 
"Obliquity or tilt of the earth's axis (from the vertical of the plane of ecliptic, remember that?) shifts from about 21 3/2 degrees to nearly 24 1/2 degrees -- we're now at 23 1/2 degrees This takes about 42,000 years."

http://www.csulb.edu/~rodrigue/geog140/exam2studyguide.txt
 
NOTE.  This above address also appears at this time to lack the above information, but the web site itself is that of the California State University at Long Beach, and the full address exists, ongoing and so, ever changing, as a study guide for students, whose present study information is different (obviously) than it was in 2006.  It is however reasonable to conclude that the text information, as stated, exists somewhere within the text books or else professors' papers at California State University, from whence it was taken and published abroad via the Internet in 2006.
 
 
Question.  How could I have known about this - in 1979?   This Truth, as to the existence of any such cycle, connecting to the exact number of years that would have to be represented by the number 42, in the 13th chapter of the Book of Revelations, except it have been made known to me by the Power of the Intelligence of God Himself?
 
There would have been no other way that I could have known it but by His own direct desire and design that I should know it, for Satan's power does not extend that far across the span of time in years (nor was I ever a friend to that creature, but his sworn enemy), and never leads one to an actual truth that is fact that could reveal any other truth about that which would bring about the end of his, Satan's, unchecked power, which is what it was up to that point.
 
So for those who might contend that the 1764 years (42 X 42 = 1764), added from the year of 66 A.D. to the year of 1830, was merely a coincident, even though the numbers of scientific probabilities of that being the case would be staggering, let them try to make the second claim that the 42,000 years, required to be a orbital cycle if representing the Lord's months, with its identified cycle name, was a like, joining coincident, and it will drive the probabilities calculation of that being the case absolutely mad, to such an extent that we will lose all reason if doing so.
 
So, the time period of the first Beast of scripture, contained in the mystery of the 42 months, multiplied times itself, as representing the number of days of God's months, leads us to conclude, without possibility of escape, that the loss of the Lord's Church's untainted existence, starting in 66 A.D., reached down to the year of 1830, not a year that can deny meaning  by those who actually do love the truth, the real truth, and not that which is contrived by the wiles of men and women, bent on serving the other side, in any and all matters that confront them on this subject.
 
The man who had understanding, before me, of the issue of the Lord, from the Old Testament, giving Israel a Year for a Day in Exile, while not being correct on his original assertion of just when the Lord's Church survived to, nevertheless had a gripping understanding of something else that defines the nature of the origin of the first Beast of Scripture, which can be viewed HERE at this time, to put aside any question or speculation that "the Beast is yet to come" kind of theological theory, for it has already come, long before, virtually 2000 years ago did it arise, and raised its murderous head in the name of he that was called Linus, according to the rest of the world - the 1st (not 2nd) Pope, the Killer of the Church ("vineyard") and the Killer of the Lord ("vine") by Killing (by Betrayal to his, Peter's, Crucifixion) His, the Lord's, called, appointed, and ordained servant, Peter, as prophet, seer, and revelator, Himself.
 
And there was yet more than this, much more, which I had learned from Dr. Hardin and others that correlate as to this issue, which I will share with you another time, but for now, suffice it to say that the first Beast, or the corrupt and fallen Church, began to be brought down by the work of a young boy named Joseph Smith (plain name that it is), and much was done thereafter by him to bring great understanding to many beyond that which they already had.  And his work in restoring the truth unto the earth of the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ continues forth to this day, as it must, except that it continues to be restrained by the second Beast, or the corrupt and fallen government(s) of the world, who continues to heal the first beast when and where it can, so that the Church is not yet able to serve the Lord in all of the ways that the Lord Jesus Christ might otherwise direct, nor can it until the second Beast is first brought down into the dust, ground under the heals of the saints, or the righteous people of this earth, forevermore.
 
It should now be noted, and I have tried repeatedly to point this out, that although the number or span of time for which the first Beast was to reign was given in the scriptures, the specific span of time for the reign of the second Beast was not so written in the scriptures, nor is there any clue given, for the issue of the second Beast, being the corrupt and fallen government, is more complicated in its being brought down than is the first Beast.
 
There was an attempt by the Lord to establish upon the earth the pure inspired form of His own intended government, in 1787, but that never actually took place due to the Second Session held immediately after the Constitution's Framers signed that great document, September 17, 1787, by which such Second Session Satan or Lucifer was able to blindside the proposed Constitution's further lawful development, so that from that time forward, and commencing with the claimed convening of the proposed Congress, March 4, 1789, there has never been an actual lawful and legal existence of the government of the proposed United States, to this day.  I say "proposed," because, agreeing with Mr. Founder James Madison on the subject, it is the actual state that both the Constitution and the United States as a nation are actually in; otherwise, as I have already asserted before courts of the proposed United States, this is a De facto Nation, an Imposter Nation, among nations, or as my work shows, invariably, The Nation That Never Was.
 
An there were further acts by the "Linus" to the Constitution of the United States, who bore the name of John Marshall, who seized power over the Constitution  in 1803 and thereby cracked it, or killed it, and since that time, he, Marshall, has been nicknamed the "God of the Attorneys."  As the true and original Church of Jesus Christ fell, but not under true and divine authority, so also did the true and original constitutional government inspired by Jesus Christ also fall, being corrupted, being corrupted by the Second Session of its Signing, and became subject to further and more severe and grievous corruptions thereafter.
 
The corruption of the "fallen" government under the Second Session, September 17, 1787, and the UnLawful acts commenced on March 4, 1789, and thereafter, and those under [Chief Justice] John Marshall, 1803, has spread throughout many nations upon the earth, for many nations have felt the corrupted influence of the United States government, and have further taken of the corrupted and bitter fruit thereof.
 
You are to understand that there are MANY THINGS that I, as one of the Lord's servants, being an actual one from the ancient scriptures themselves, but not a prophet, evangelist, etc., am doing to bring about an end to the evils of the world, that peace and salvation (or healing) may be proclaimed among its many nations, and that when my work is done here, I may rest in the glorious estate that He has preserved for me.  To this end, I am sincerely thankful that it is He that I serve rather than that betraying, false other.  Amen to that.
 
So the job, then - as I see it and have it to be - of the marred servant, and such other like servant as I may yet turn out to be, is not to do anything as pertaining to the administration of the gospel of Jesus Christ as a particular matter, but rather as a separate issue dealing with beginning the bringing down of the second Beast of scripture, the corrupt and "fallen" government(s), bringing it down to its everlasting destruction, that it no longer be able to continually heal the first Beast as it has hithertofore done up to now, that the Church might be set free again, and that the people of this earth might bask in the glory, the truth and the life and light thereof, to this end and cause I dedicate, and have dedicated my life, forever, and ever.  Amen.
 
        Sincerely, serving the Lord, with hope,
        in serving you, my brethren and sisters,

                In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

 
 

Dr. Dale Livingston, DLC, JD, JYD, tms
 

TO TOP OF PAGE