The Irvingites were led by a Henry Drummond of England, a banker heavily involved in politics, also High Sheriff of Surrey, who in 1826 brought together an assembly of men into his 63-chimney mansion home (in Albury Park) to tackle the question of the end times, or so we are to believe. Not only did this gathering partake in the early Zionist movement, but it's leaders manufactured an elaborate scheme while convincing some in their midst to be the chosen of God to re-institute the Apostolic ministry. These were to produce prophecies toward that end, to gather the Church in unity, and to usher in the Millennial Kingdom.
They prophesied unto themselves 12 apostles (did Jesus truly ordain two sets of 12 Apostles?) wherein Henry Drummond himself took the high position, apostle of Scotland. Akin to the far-fetched doctrine of Anglo-Israelism, they proclaimed that the Christian Church was a European pie consisting of the 12 Tribes of Israel...to be ruled, of course, by their own 12 Apostles (Francis V. Woodhouse was the Apostle over America). To convince the world that they were truly a movement of God, they emphasized speaking in tongues and feigned other Heaven-sent gifts.
But feigning the visible return of Jesus, and rapture, would prove impossible, and this problem goes far in explaining another new claim: that Jesus would come invisibly. Not that they planned to feign the disappearance of millions of Christians worldwide (at least I hope not), but the teaching of an invisible coming was to be coupled with a re-definition of the rapture itself, as a transformation process into Godhood while we are yet here in our earthly bodies. To convince of such an illusion, false-miracle workings and other transformation-like activities were spun. But this idea was Rosicrucianism all over i.e. spiritual alchemy, and is now the so-called "Manifest Sons of God" doctrine, typically found in ultra-charismatic circles.
Others besides the Irvingites latched onto pre-tribulationism (e.g. John Darby), and took it seriously as Gospel-truth; they even took credit for the false doctrine away from the Irvingites, unto themselves. But from the beginning, pre-tribulationism was, I believe, a first-degree scam to introduce new ideas about the rapture that could better coincide with the setting up of a counterfeit Millennial kingdom than the visible coming and literal translation of saints into the sky.
Consider James Hatley Frere, involved with Drummond long before the Albury meetings. He is known for his strong influence on Edward Irving: "James Hatley Frere...a man of incisive mind and strong individuality, who seems to have deliberately selected Irving to be the popular mouthpiece of his Apocalyptic speculations" (http://christianbeliefs.org/books/cm/cm-irving.html).
Robert Compton, in "Counting the Days to Armageddon," had this to say:
"Of particular note...was James Hately Frere who, in 1815, had published A Combined View of the Prophecies of Daniel, Esdras, and St. John, in which he expressed the belief that the second coming would be not a literal event but a spiritual one and would take place in 1822-3..." (http://www.premier1.net/~raines/offshoot.html).
General internet information on Hatley Frere is scarce, let alone on his belief above. But it sounds as though he was the propaganda machine, perhaps on behalf of Drummond, for the invisible coming, which at that time (1815 and prior to) was not tied to pre-tribulationism because the idea of a pre-trib' coming would not enter the picture until about 1830. In fact, a pre-trib' coming may not have been a planned part of the counterfeit-Millennium scheme, but was rather a late addition created and infused into the propaganda by others, namely by some in the Irving church.
When a pre-tribulation coming of Jesus first popped up in the mind of someone in Irvingite circles, who had misunderstood the prophecies, that erroneous timing of the coming came to be fused with the other false doctrine of an invisible coming. After all, the invisible coming was being simultaneously promoted by Irving and other Drummond/Frere propaganda machines. Then, at the objections of those who could prove that Jesus comes visibly and after the tribulation, a two-stage coming of Jesus was created as a compromise (one coming before, and one after, the tribulation period), what is taught to this day by pre-tribulationists.
While the Compton quote above has Hatley Frere predicting the Return for 1822-23, another website (http://www.spurgeon.org/notes.htm) has him predicting, in the same book quoted above, that Jesus would return in 1866. I don't know what to make of that apparent discrepancy. Perhaps he predicted for two dates, akin to Charles Russell who, while claiming that Jesus returned invisibly in 1874, also claimed that the Kingdom of God would not be set up until 1914...with Jesus yet remaining invisible after that.
The www.premier1 website above says that the invisible-coming doctrine "was picked up later by [Joseph] Seiss and Jonsson concludes Russell probably 'plagiarized' the works of Seiss in his 'invisible presence' doctrine." Joseph Seiss was an advocate of pyramidology and Christian astrology and therefore he rated as a Rosicrucian. This in itself doesn't prove that the elite on the Drummond team were Rosicrucians, but when the Drummond invisible-coming scheme continues through Seiss to the Christian pyramidologist, Charles Russell, a Freemason working as the propaganda machine for the Rothschilds, suddenly a suspicion arises in my mind. That suspicion is this, that Nathan Rothschild may have played a/the leadership role in the Drummond attempt at world rule, for Nathan was living in London at the time, as was Henry Drummond. Apparently, feigning Armageddon was a part of the Rothschild hoax, for Russell had predicted the setting up of God's Kingdom on the first year of the war (1914).
By the time that the last of the 12 apostles (Francis Woodhouse) had died, in 1901, the Irvingite hoax crumbled for good, for an Irvingite prophecy had been made previous stating that Jesus would return before the last of these apostles would die. But someone else (John Dowie) picked up the Irving torch and started the hoax all over again, this time in the United States, and several others who got onto his wagon gave us the Manifest-Sons-of-God "rapture."
Merely some modest research, admittedly restricted to the internet, leads me to conclude confidently that the early Rothschild Illuminati was connected to the Drummond Apostolic cult, and that the two groups worked well together with the Anglican Church and other European powers to springboard Zionism. As the Drummond cult faded into the background after the mid 1800s, the Rothschilds would hold tenaciously to the British power structures; together, they would become instrumental in creating the state of Israel. By then (1948), the official commencement of the Golden-Dawn Paradise had definitely been scheduled for the year 2000.
As the world hardly appeared as a Utopia or a Paradise as that year drew near, the best the Illuminatists could do was to call it a "New World Order," but the less often they mentioned that phrase, the better, for the world hardly seemed as though it were renewing itself. And it hasn't. Same old conflicts, problems, and grief. The Illuminatists perhaps don't realize that a world controlled by the force of their money and selfish ambitions can never be a Utopia. Therein is their greatest problem: themselves! For in a Utopia, the people must willingly serve their masters. No one is going to willingly serve the Illuminatists once it becomes known how wicked they have treated the people of the past. It is God's will to expose them, and the demons behind their work, that the world might willingly serve Him who, by the ministry of Jesus Christ, has proven Himself to be Honorable.
I first learned of a possible tie between the first Rothschild (Mayer) and two Drummond bankers upon stumbling across an official internet document of the Royal Bank of Scotland. Learning therein that the Drummonds had been one of the foremost banking families helped to solidify my theory that some of them were tied to the Rothschild Illuminati...which was itself led by world-scope bankers. But the document also led me to discover that, almost-certainly, Drummond bankers had been involved with the first Rothschild of Germany and his Illuminati boss. I then strongly suspected that the Drummond clan was tied to the early Scottish Hungarians...whom I had suspected were proto-Rosicrucians. It was a long shot, but worth a little effort in internet research. What I found was beyond my wildest expectations: some very elite Drummond individuals of long ago made the claim, in writing, that there was a "Maurice" who had sailed the ship that brought Margaret and the other Hungarians to Britain. And Maurice was said to be a progenitor of the Drummond clan!!! Like I said, "beyond my wildest expectations." But others write that this story of Drummond roots is a complete fabrication, at best a legend, exactly what we would expect from those who don't want a secret popped.
In further research, it was high on my list of priorities to find evidence showing that Henry Drummond was also in acceptance of the Maurice story. I soon found a most amazing fact: Henry Drummond himself had written a book, called "Histories of British Noble Families," wherein he not only claimed that the Drummond clan issued forth from Maurice, but that Maurice's bloodline was by a marriage between the Magyar-Hun blood of king Andrew (of Hungary) and his wife, a Russian woman, daughter of a Varangian-Rus king! Although there is more to it, it is due to the Russian side of Maurice that I started to view the Drummond clan as a(nother) Ros(e) Line.
That there were at least two Ros Lines is evidenced by the War of the Roses, where the red rose of Lancaster went to war against the white rose of York. The House of York somehow became the "baby" of the Drummonds, exposed as such in that James III, king of Scotland with Drummond blood, made Sir John Drummond his Ambassador to England...whose job it was to marry the king and the king's sons to daughters of the kings of the House of York (http://www.electricscotland.com/webclans/dtog/drummon2.html).
Did Henry Drummond see his ancestry in the savage Huns? Was he, in his Histories, leaking information that Drummond elitists/Illuminatists didn't want leaked, that their secrets are bound, not only in Attila, but in the Huns previous to him? The Huns are traced back to a union between a Scythian and a Sumerian (i.e. a Magogite and Nimrod)--the mortal enemies of the Biblical God...the God which the Drummonds professed to serve?
In a Hungarian myth, Nimrod (the engineer of the Tower of Babel) begot two sons, Hunor and Magor, who migrated north to Caucasia/Magog and lived there. Modern Hungarians still freely claim descent from both Huns and Magyars. After Attila settled Hungary temporarily, he was followed a century later by the Avar Huns and, finally, a century after the Avar empire came to a close (in 796), the Magyar king, Arpad, became the patriarch of the modern Hungarians. Remember that name, "Arpad," for his family line was considered gravely important.
In a Hungarian myth-like legend, a Magogite by the name of "Ugyek" had a son, "Almos," who is destined to be a great conqueror toward the west [i.e. into Europe]...i.e. so as to finish the world-conquest job that Attila started but failed to complete. The reality (i.e. not in the legend) is that an Almos did exist in Hungarian history, and he was the father of Arpad, the founder of modern Hungary. Thus the legend was concocted after the facts to record and express some realities, while disguising others. What's interesting is that Ugyek is said to be a descendant of "king Magog" of Ezekiel's time, and from that tidbit we are urged into thinking that the myth's author(s) was connecting the Hungarians to the Biblical Gog.
Hun legend emphasizes a "Sword of God" by which Attila would slay the world, as well as the coming of Attila's son from the sky. Both pictures evoke the Revelation-19 coming of Jesus from the sky with a sword by which to slay the nations. In fact, Hun legend includes the thunder, lightning and a shaking of the earth that will accompany the return of Jesus. Here's a snippet of the legend:
The king of the Huns took hold of [the magical Sword of God] and struck with it toward the four corners of the earth. His strokes were followed by thunder and lightning that began to shake the whole world. Attila was now certain that the ancient [Revelation] prophecy would be fulfilled. He was convinced that he would conquer much of the world and would create an empire that would surpass all other empires before him. He was also sure that he was indeed the Scourge of God who had been chosen by the heavens to inflict punishment upon the sinful people of this earth" (http://www.worldandi.com/newhome/wwft/1988/4_July/Html/page8.htm).
This smacks of the (counterfeit) Biblical Millennium promoted by Illuminatists. While Almos and Arpad did conquer Hungary, the world conquest never came about...yet, anyway. It is not inconceivable that Maurice, of the Arpad bloodline, carried the Attila dream/scheme to Scotland and/or England. Henry Drummond re-attempted the huge task, apparently, when he built what he hoped would become a world-governing structure through his Catholic (i.e. "Universal") Apostolic Church.
Is it not for us to ask a question when we learn that Maurice was, according to Henry Drummond, the grandson of king Andrew, while the Scottish flag soon after became known as "Andrew's Cross"? Andrew was of the Arpad bloodline, and he (Andrew) was to follow and fulfill a Blood Oath made by several Hungarian rulers on behalf of Arpad blood. The Oath promised to fulfill Attila's "holy" global quest. It is well understood that Scotland has for almost a thousand years been synonymous with Freemasonry, but how does it change our perspective to view the country as a remote camp for Hun world conspiracy?
Britannica's best shot at defining "Varangian" is to derive it from the Scandanavian word, "Vaeringjar," meaning "men under oath." I don't agree, but the idea brings me to an important point. Magogians (i.e. Scythians), when swearing oaths or making blood-brother pacts, had made it a custom to slit their wrists, to pour some blood into a cup of wine, and to seal the oaths by drinking the blood together.
Of course, cups of wine remind us of the Cup of Jesus, called the "holy grail." And when we speak of oaths and the holy grail, Freemasons and their secret rituals come to mind. In Freemasonry, the idea of the grail goes beyond the drinking of wine at the Last Supper, to the myth wherein some blood was caught in a cup that spilled from Jesus' body while he hung on the Cross. Everything related to the grail has a magical connotation to it. With all this in mind, note the following concerning the founding of Hungary:
"Soon after Arpad's birth, the seven princes of the Magyars elected Almos as their ruler. They sealed this election with an oath, called the "Blood Oath,' so called because the princes all drank from a single cup in which their blood had been intermingled. They swore to accept Almos and all his descendants as their rulers...'If any of the descendants should be disloyal to the ruler and cause discord among the ruler and his relatives, then shall their blood pour out as ours does now as we make the bond of blood with you'...[and] 'If anyone of the descendants breaks this oath should he be forever cursed.'"
What we have in the "Blood Oath" above is a life-long brotherhood pact to protect a bloodline for world rule, smacking of the sort made by Freemasons and Illuminatists to the same ends. Might the infamous "Rose Line" be referring to this very Arpad bloodline? Not if the Rose Line is a Rus bloodline...unless the Arpad bloodline married into a Rus bloodline! Here's the Almos bloodline starting with his son, Arpad:
Arpad fathered Zoltán, prince of Hungary;
Zolton fathered Taksony, prince of Hungary;
Taksony fathered duke Mihály (Michael);
Michael fathered duke Vazul (Basil) and duke László (Ladislas "the Bald") [not king Ladislav];
and either Basil or Ladislav fathered king Andras I (Andrew I)...
the royal line ends a couple of centuries later in 1301.
Because duke Ladislav (or Lazslo) modifies to "Leslie," he figures prominently in this story in that he is suspected to be Bartholomew's father; while I don't know the reasoning behind this possibility, it is supported by some internet sites that show Bart's full name as "Bartholemew Ladislaus Leslie." King Ladislav was born too late to be Bartholemew's father, by the way. Bartholemew came from Hungary with Margaret, and while she married the king of Scotland, he married that king's sister! I should add here that, in time, the Leslie clan of Scotland (that came forth from Bartholemew) furnished the chiefs (i.e. Earls) of Ross and of Rothes. The 21st Earl of Rothes is alive today and is head of the Clan Leslie Society.
Andrew/Andras (whether the son of duke Ladislav, or of Basil) theoretically becomes the progenitor of a Ros Line simply because there arose a Clann Aindrea (alternative, "Clan Andras") which evolved into, and was alternatively called, the "Ross" clan of Scotland. In this paragraph, you are at, or near, the climax of this chapter, so please don't fail to understand: there was no Ross family. Rather, there was an Andras family that was given the title of "Ros." Why? That's the huge question. In my opinion, and apparently in mine alone, the Andras family descended not only from Andrew, but from the Varangian Rus. The initial family title would therefore have been "Andras de Ros," or something similar.
For one year I had suspected as merely a wild but pressing theory that the so-called "Rose" line had to do with early Russians--especially the Biblical Rosh--and so for long periods at a time I researched to find a connection between Clann Andras and the Rosh/Rus/Russians. I found nothing until I discovered to my shock that the mother of George, son of king Andrew, was a Russian. Who was George? Just the father of Maurice and therefore the father of the Drummond clan!!
Let me spell this theory out to you in case you are confused: the Drummond clan is the Rose Line, a mix of Arpad, Rus and Russian blood, for George was the son of Andrew of Arpad blood, as well as the son of Anastasia, who was herself the daughter of a Rus father and a Russian mother (the Russians of that time were Rusyn/Ruthene Slavs, unlike the Varangian Rus).
I came across this line in Britannica: "[Yaroslav, king of the Rus] gave another daughter to Andrew I of Hungary." Who was she? In the Arpad Genealogy, I found that Andrew's second wife was "Anastasia Yaroslavna of Kiev" (i.e. Anastasia daughter of Yaroslav). These findings were my first requirements to connect the Drummonds to a Rus/Ros Line, but was this Anastasia truly the mother of George??? In the genealogy above, the identity of George's mother is not revealed, and moreover we read that he had been born "illegitimate." But in the genealogy of Henry Drummond (where we first see that duke Ladislaus is his father), we read:
Andrew I, King of Hungary...m[arried] 1) Anastasia of Russia (mother of George..."
Clearly, the man that brought the world the cult that brought Christianity pre-tribulationism knew that he was a descendant of the Arpad blood oath and of the royal Viking Rus. Andrew's father is shown elsewhere as Basil, but if it was duke Ladislav, who's wife was a Rus -- Premislavna, the daughter of the great Varangian pirate, Vladimir I -- then Andrew had both a Russian wife and a Russian mother. Both women were wives of Viking-Rus kings, Vladimir and his son, Yaroslav. Moreover, if Drummond was correct in claiming that Andrew was the son of duke Ladislav, then Andrew could have been the brother of Bartholemew.
While the Scottish flag that is an X-cross (i.e. a "saltire") was named, "Andrew's Cross," the English flag with the upright cross was named "George's" cross, or the "Cross of St. George." Just as the true Andrew (of Hungary) is disguised as a Christian saint, the apostle Andrew, so the true George, which appears to be king Andrew's son and progenitor of the Drummond clan, is disguised as a Christian saint. Now I can't prove to you that the English flag is derived from George of the Drummond clan, but if it's not, there's one amazing coincidence in these two names representing the two British flags. And see below that George was in fact in Britain:
"...(illegitimate) György [George], who, according to Europaeische Stammtafeln, went to Scotland in 1055 and became ancestor of the Drummond family. E.S. cites a 1959 work published in Warsaw as the source for this. I know that it has long been asserted that the Drummond family was founded by a Hungarian [Maurice] who returned to Britain with Edward Atheling, so this may be true"
http://genealogy.euweb.cz/arpad/arpad1.html" (if not found, see here).
The page has George marrying "Agatha, dau. Gundolph Podiebradius, Grandduke of Bohemia."
As Andrew's son, George would have been the first person in Scotland belonging to Clann Andras, and in reference to the Ros Line of his mother, George and his early descendants probably went by "Andras de Ros" or even "Ros de Andras" before shortening it to "Ross" and/or "Rose." The Drummond clan was from the issue of Maurice, for we read everywhere that is to him that the term, "Drummond," is attributed. If it's true that the popularized Rose Line has origins in this way, then do we look for it in the Rosses, or the Drummonds?
The Drummonds became associated with the Scottish Highlands...where the Ross and Rose clans were also located eventually (not to mention the village of Rossal). The Drummonds took a major role in the Jacobite movement, the movement of the Highlanders to get would-be-king James III and IV on the throne of England ("James" in Latin is "Jacobus"). All the king James' were of Drummond blood, in fact. But my understanding is that most of the Rosses did not support the Scottish-based Jacobites, but rather favored the English royals.
Back in the reign of James VI of Scotland, because he also became king James I of England, England and Scotland were joined, wherefore the George Cross of England was superimposed upon the Andrew Cross of Scotland to form the Union Jack...and I think that we can guess where the term "Jack" originated since "Jacob" is a variation of "James." But is the British flag a representation of king Andrew and his son George? And is the British flag, in that way, so secretly a representation of the Ros(e) Line and/or of Rosicrucianism that even modern Freemasons do not know it?
When the Rosses were supporting the English royals, instead of the Jacobites, they were in effect supporting the Union, and this makes sense because the Rosses had been both the Andras clan and from George, those two entities being the very two entities represented on the Union flag.
Just days prior to learning that Andrew's Russian wife may have had everything to do with a Ros Line, I had come across this unique webpage title at a Ross-Clan website (http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/esclanross.shtml):
"Clan Rosich, Na Gille Andras"
No where else on the internet was the Ross clan so identified with what appears to be the ancient version of the name, "Rosich." The phrase in its entirety means, "Rosich Clan, Children of Andras." Unbelievable! When seeing this term, "Rosich," for the first time, it had special significance for me because, having previously theorized that the Rosicrucians have had nothing at all to do with the so-called "Rosi Cross," I noticed that "Rosicrucian" had possibly to do with "Rosic-Russian" in some way.
I therefore entertained "Rosic Ross," which appears to be cleverly disguised in "Rosi Cross." But I also entertained "Rosic Rus" due to an official Rosicrucian term, "Rosi Crucis," or other variations of "cross" that end with what sounds like "rus." Take another example, "Rose Croix," which modifies to "Rosic Roix," while "Rox," as historians know, is an alternative of "Ros," the roots of the Varangian Rus. But in the year-long period in which I theorized that Rosicrucian origins were in Russia, I could not determine what the "Rosic" might have stood for...until I came across the "Rosich" at the website above (December 2003). Either I am the victim of amazing coincidences, or else I have stumbled upon some dirt realities.
If "Rosich" has anything to do with Russians, we can perhaps read between the lines the following paraphrase:
"Clan Rosich of Yaroslav, Children of king Andrew of Hungary"?
I am convinced, YES! Here's what I found merely on the internet:
"How many armies are there in Russia?...The Internal Troops number over 200,000 servicemen and have light arms, light armored vehicles, and aviation (also light). And several special assignment units like the Vityaz regiment and Rus, Rosich, and Skif detachments" (http://www.cdi.org/russia/184-6.cfm).
There you have it, the Rus and Rosich detachments are Russian fighters, meaning that "Rosich" is a Russian term. At another Russian-military website, I found this: "Special Assignment Units of the Interior Ministry (Vityaz, Rus, Rosich, Skif, OMON, SOBR)" Once again, "Rus" is side-by-side with "Rosich."
At an ancient-Russian pagan/occult website (http://www.holynature.ru/OKST/AncientEN.htm), "Rosich" is said to be the name of ancient pagan Russians. These pagans are there said to have been holy, clean, filled with some virtues...in contrast with barbarian Russians (e.g. Scythians). And, I quote, the "Rosiches considered themselves to be demigods." Also: "In the history of Ancient (Pre-Christianity) Russia there was not the slightest hint that incoming tribes could win a battle over the Rosiches."
Apparently, modern Russians call some of their military units by the name of the old Rosich peoples...because they had never lost a battle to any opposing tribe (that's an obvious stretch, but we get the idea). If true that the Rosich peoples date back to pre-Christian times, then they were very likely the Biblical Rosh? Certainly, "Rosh" is not a far cry from "Rosich." In my research, I traced the Rosh to a branch of Cimmerians, and lo and behold, the Cimmerians worshipped their leaders as gods.
Take a look at the name of the legendary man, Ugyek, the Magogite who, in the 9th century AD, gave the world the brother tribes, the Huns and Magyars. See that "Ugyek" evokes "Gug" when "yek" (synonymous with "iek") is treated the same as the suffix "ich" (as in "Rosich" or "Halich"). That is, the root of "Ugyek" is "Ug" or "Ugy," and if a reason can be provided for dropping a capital "G," then the original root word was "Gug" or "Gugi" (a "y" commonly interchanges with an "i" as in "Halych" versus "Halich"). In fact, the Assyrians used the word "Mat-Gugi" in referring to Magog.
Just as "Galli" is a variation of "Halli" that can moreover modify to "Alli," so "Ugi" may have had the variation, "Hugi." Therefore, "Hugh" could be rooted in "Gug" i.e. "Gog." Did you know that all the first-born of the Ross clan were to be named "Hugh," and that this tradition is continued to this day? Recall the Hugh Ross mentioned in an earlier chapter, for example, the Big-Bang Creationist. But what am I suggesting, that the Ross clan was a special bloodline of Gog? But how could that be if the Rosses were from a bloodline of the Rosh? Again, the Rosh side is from the Varangian Rus, while the Gogi side is from the Arpad line. You might believe me a little easier if I were to inform that, according to historians, the Huns were at first Scythians proper.
When the Rosicrucians arrived to Britain, it could be that they used the rose to depict (and disguise) themselves because "Ros" in Gaelic means "rose" (the flower). However, also note that "Rosh" means "chief" in Hebrew, and that "Ros" and "Ross" in Celtic likewise mean "head." I don't know the significance, but "Rosh" is also defined as "red poppy" in Strong's Concordance.
In case you're doing a study on these matters, the Ross clan started in Ayrshire due west of Roslin, while the Drummonds started off in Stirlingshire not far west of Roslin (Roslin is at Edinburgh). The Ross and Rose clans then moved far to the north-east to Ross-shire/Cromarty, and Rossal was still further north in Sutherlandshire. The Drummonds also moved north to Perthshire, near to the Leslies in Aberdeenshire. (see map, compliments of http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Esctayr/counties.jpg).