When “the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us” He provided the foundation for two religions – the Christian and the Antichristian. The first of these set forth the highest of ideals for His followers, to perfect them in every good word and work; the second did pretty much the exact opposite, often arousing the basest of human inclinations toward heinous crime. The ideal of the true Christian is to attain equality in character and vision with their Leader, an ambition which none of the human race has ever achieved. Had any of them ever been able to do this, the ideal would then be largely dissipated – no more hills to climb, no more conquests to accomplish. Thus, throughout the writings of the Apostles the ideal of “Christ and Him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2) is ever prominently in their writings, “Christ” being the ransom price for our justification, and “Him crucified” being the narrow way in which “He set us an example that we should follow in His steps.” All of this is summarized in perfect love for the Lord, the Truth and the brethren, which, when properly comprehended and practiced, delights in doing good unto all men as we have opportunity, but especially to them which are of the Household of Faith.
Thus, St. Paul counsels “Husbands, love your wives, even as the Anointed One loved the congregation, and delivered Himself up on her behalf.” (Eph. 5:25, Dia.) And among the last of the Lord’s thoughts on the night before His death was toward those who would cleave to Him in spirit and in truth – “That they all may be one..... that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast loved them as Thou hast loved Me.” (John 17:21-23)
All who know anything at all about Christianity admit that its fundamental precepts are good; but, they say, no one lives up to it. And, while it is true that the vast majority of those calling themselves Christians deserve such criticism, yet it is equally true that there have been some outstanding “examples of the believers” throughout the Age. Aside from the twelve Apostles, mention may be made of John Wesley, founder of what is now the Methodist Church. The focal point of all his teaching was that disinterested good will toward all men is the ideal for Christians; and there is little doubt that he practiced what he preached. Much the same may be said for George Fox, founder of what is now the Quaker Church. Similar appraisal may be made of Balthasar Hubmaier, founder of the Baptist Church. And the preaching of these three men, along with others throughout the Age, was potent and magnetic enough to cause many of their adherents to exemplify true Christian principles in their daily lives.
But alongside the few throughout the Age there have been great multitudes who did otherwise, many of the latter with such wealth, education and mental brilliance that they have almost completely eclipsed those faithful few who held “the testimony of Jesus, and the spirit of His Prophecy.” (Rev. 19:10, Dia.) This deplorable situation was already making its first glimmering appearance in the early Church, so that St. Paul was prompted to write: “The secret of lawlessness is already working.... then will be revealed the lawless one... whose coming is according to the energy of the Adversary, with all power, and signs, and wonders because they admitted not the love of the Truth (true Christianity) in order that they might be saved.” (2 Thes. 2:7, Dia.)
Here is an excellent description of the Antichrist that would appear after the Apostles had left this earth; and, while we stated in the first sentence of this treatise that our Lord had laid the foundation for this monstrous apostasy, it should be kept in mind that such was not His design; it was merely that He provided the opportunity for “evil men and seducers” to join a good cause for their own selfish purposes – much the same as the Bible itself has also provided a very convenient conveyance for those to enhance and enthrone themselves who in fact were really motivated by most selfish and unholy ambitions.
It is well for us to keep in mind here that Antichrist not only means opponent, but it also means “in the place of” Christ. St. Paul had warned in 2 Thes. 2:3-5 that Jesus would not come again until “there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God... so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.” The attempts to interpret St. Paul’s words here are legion, quite a few would-be interpreters – being very emphatic that this refers to an individual. During the 1914-1918 war there was quite some agitation to the effect that St. Paul’s words were just another description of the “Beast” of Rev. 13:2-5: “The beast which I saw was like a leopard, and his feet as a bear’s, and his mouth as lion’s mouth... and they worshipped the beast. saying Who is like the beast, and who is able to make war with him? And there was given to him a mouth speaking great and blasphemous things (note the close similarity to St. Paul’s words); and authority was given him to act forty–two months.” The theory gained quite some followers back there that this was a prophecy of the German Kaiser, which meant that the war would end in forty–two months. But when the war went on for nine months more than the forty–two, and the Kaiser suffered complete defeat, was forced to abdicate and flee to Holland, that theory died as quickly as it had been born. Their mistake, of course, lay in their failure rightly to comprehend one of the basic rules for the understanding of The Revelation; namely, that the numerals in that book are literal, but almost all the common nouns are symbolic. Those months are 30-day months, making a total of 1260 days, as can be readily seen from Rev. 11:2,3: but, applying the principle of “a day for a year” (Num. 14:34; Ezek. 4:6), the period of time then involved would be 1260 literal years.
That the foregoing Scriptures could not possibly refer to an individual will, we believe, be apparent from certain considerations, one of which is that no individual has ever survived for 1260 years. Also, the Antichrist, the Man of Sin, The Beast, all simply portray different characteristics of the same thing: Antichrist being “in the place of” Christ – Man of Sin (in place of “Son of Man” – Mark 2:10), the degrading disposition and influence – The Beast, the vicious destructive and inhuman qualities. The beast “was like unto a leopard.” A leopard is black and white spotted, indicating that in some places the beast would be black as night, but in others appearing lily white in hypocritical manner – professedly Christian!
This latter has been outstandingly true of the Papacy; e.g., Spain, Mexico, Italy, tolerance has been foreign to their teachings. Not long back they tried to chase the YMCA out of Italy – revealing the black spots of the leopard. But in America, where they are much in the minority, they are very outspoken for tolerance – for them, that is – manifesting the white spots of the leopard.
In 2 Thes. 2:1–5 St. Paul states that the Lord would not return to earth again “except there come a falling away first.” Certainly, this would not mean just one individual; the very construction of Paul’s expression shows he was meaning many individuals a great apostasy – that would be influenced, deceived, and overawed by “the man of sin” – “the son of perdition” (destruction) – yet professedly Christian. The only entity in Gospel-Age history that properly fits this description is the Papacy; it meets all the requirements perfectly – its own record is enough – we need not go to its opponents or critics for argument to sustain this conclusion. But, in coming to this conclusion we do not wish to convey the impression that every Roman Catholic is included in this opinion – any more than every Protestant should be held accountable for the vagaries of the various protesting systems. There have been, and still are, many noble and magnanimous individuals among Protestant and Catholic churches, who for various reasons have failed to recognize the true situation; but this does not alter the fact that the Lord Himself referred to certain features of the Roman Church as “the abomination of desolation.” (Matt. 24:15)
Giant oaks from little acorns grow; so also the Roman Church came to its present prominence from a very small beginning – at first meekly bowing to the powers that be, but gradually, very subtly, telling them what to do, until from 799 to 1799, the Papacy “as God sitteth in the temple of God (“Ye (the true church) are the temple of God” – 1 Cor. 3:16), showing himself that he is God.” Said Pope Innocent III: “The pope holds the place of the true God.” Innocent and Jacobatius state “the pope can do nearly all that God can do – none dare say to him any more than to God, Lord, what doest thou?” We here present a mere fragment of what has been written about this subject – enough, we hope, to establish a firm base for our position.
In our No. 7 tract we offered quite some detail about Luther’s problems and wars with papal error and intrigue – a member of antitypical Elijah against antitypical Jezebel; and we now offer some of his statements about Antichrist as taken from the book of Roland H. Bainton, first published in 1955:
“The faith and the Church are at stake, I rejoice to suffer in so noble a cause. I am not worthy of so holy a trial. I feel much freer now that I am certain the pope is Antichrist.” (p. 124) “If he is inviting me to my death, then I will come. I hope none but the papists will stain their hands in my blood. Antichrist reigns. The Lord’s will be done.” (p. 139) “I was wrong. I retract the statement that certain articles of John Huss are evangelical. I say now, ‘Not some, but all the articles of John Huss were condemned by Antichrist and his apostles in the synagogue of Satan. I say freely that all the condemned articles of John Huss are evangelical and Christian, and yours are downright impious and diabolical.” (p. 128) And on page 120 is a print showing “On the left Christ is washing the disciples’ feet. On the right Antichrist, the pope, is having his toes kissed by monarchs.”
In their efforts now to embrace Martin Luther, to praise his teachings and work, are the Roman Catholics also accepting what he taught about the pope being Antichrist, sitting in the synagogue of Satan? Let us not forget that Catholics banned the very book from which we quote above shortly after it appeared just twelve years ago (written in 1968 – now in 1979 – 23 years ago), and many stores were intimidated from further sale of it. And those who continue to pay homage and worship at the feet of Antichrist are in truth also “sitting in the synagogue of Satan” so long as they assemble in the same company with Antichrist. No sane human being would logically do this, of course; but the eyes of many are being opened, and they forsake such company. And we have the “sure word of prophecy” that many others will shortly do likewise. Thus, this writing is no indictment of Roman Catholics as individuals; and we urge all our readers to follow St. Paul’s counsel: “A servant of the Lord must not be contentious, but be gentle towards all, fit to teach, patient under evil; in meekness correcting the opposers; perhaps God may give them a change of mind in order to a knowledge of the Truth; and that they may be recovered from the snare of the enemy, who have been entrapped by him for his pleasure.” (2 Tim. 2:24-26, Dia.)
Psalms 75 carries fitting application to our subject matter – the true Christ and to Antichrist. Verses 6 and 7: “Promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west, nor from the south. But God is the judge; He putteth down one, and setteth up another.” Here is veiled reference to Baal, the sun God of the nations round about Israel.
Almost from the beginning of Israel’s conquest of Palestine, after their deliverance from Egypt, there was constant conflict between the Lord God of Israel and the false Baal of the Heathen round about. In our paper on The Great Reformer we gave some detail of Elijah’s engagement with the Prophets of Baal, who received equal recognition in Israel because of Queen Jezebel, the wife of Ahab; and Elijah’s complete victory over them forecast the complete victory during this Gospel Age of antitypical Elijah (the true Church attempting to reform this “present evil world”), over antitypical Jezebel (the Roman Church) before this Age comes to a close.
The Heathen Baal was typical of power-graspers in the Christian Church during this Age; and those who “bow the knee to Baal” refers to all who do obeisance to that Antichristian system. Thus, an identical conflict has transpired during this Age to the one that raged in Israel in the centuries preceding the Christian era. And those on the side of Baal have received no “promotion” – no lasting recognition – from the God of Heaven. In fact, in almost every instance when the Pope asks special blessing upon some event or locality or populace, the very reverse occurs: Great calamity is often the result. We instance just one example: We detailed in The Great Reformer (copy free upon request) how King Philip II of Spain is said to have laughed for the first time in his life over the horrible massacre in France on St. Bartholomew’s Day. It was this same King Philip who a few years later prepared the Invincible Armada to annihilate Protestant England for rejecting the papal domination. And that Armada received the very special blessing of the Pope for its mission – a mission which culminated in complete failure and the destruction of a major part of the ships and men in that expedition.
Thus, the warning is given in Psa. 75:5: “Lift not up your horn on high; speak not with a stiff neck.” The “horn” in the Bible is often used to symbolize power (see Psa. 18:2): “The Lord... the horn – power – of my salvation”; also Mic. 4:13, “I will make thine horn (power) iron.” This exhortation is companion to St. Peter’s words: “God resisteth the proud” (1 Pet. 5:5); and then the Psalmist warns: “for promotion cometh neither from the east, nor from the west” nor from following the course of Baal and his devotees; but God will exalt whom He will exalt – those who resist the power-grasping system of Baal.
Inasmuch as the Psalmist is here contrasting “the horns (powers) of the wicked” and the “horns (powers) of the righteous” (v. 10), it is certainly no strain on the imagination to conclude the “promotions” of the righteous must come from the north, since they do not come from the east, west or south. This is quite clearly confirmed in Isa. 14:12-14, where the power-grasping course of Lucifer is described – identical twin to the course of the Papacy. Note the very similar language of v. 14: “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High,” to that of 2 Thes. 2:4: “Who (the Papacy) exalteth himself above all that is called God... he as God sitteth in the temple (congregation) of God (“ye are the temple of God” – l Cor. 3:16,17), showing himself that he is God.” And Lucifer would make his attempts “upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north” (his abode would rival that of the Most High).
THE DARKNESS HATETH THE LIGHT
It needs little argument that throughout the Age true Christians have been much in the minority. The Lord had promised, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the Truth” (John 8:31, 32); but this promise “to know the Truth” would not apply to the vast majority who did not “continue” to keep it. To such came the “strong delusions” – also promised to those who “received not the love of the Truth.” (2 Thes. 2:10) But it is a sad commentary concerning the many that they were not content to lose the truth, they must also persecute those who did faithfully retain it. Thus developed the monstrous crimes, the heinous tortures by the Antichrist against those who “protested” against their errors. Some of this was given in our No. 7 tract, so we need not repeat it here. However, the Antichrist was not the only system that resorted to the persecution of those who retained Present Truth; and we now catalog some of these:
Michael Servetus was one of those true Christians who accepted, and defended the truth that there is but one God. This aroused the ire of John Calvin (strong advocate of, and chief organizer of, the Presbyterian Church), so he tricked Servetus into Geneva, had him arrested for ‘heresy.’ The trial lasted about 2½ months, with Servetus thoroughly defeating Calvin on the Truth that there is but one God. But the judges, being also in error as was Calvin, found Servetus guilty, sentenced him to be burned at the stake. The next day, October 27, 1553, Servetus was taken from the city, made to sit on a block. Instead of using dry wood, green timber was used, placed some distance from him, which subjected him to a slow roasting of over a half hour duration. Also, in mockery – like the crown of thorns that was placed on the brow of Jesus at His crucifixion by the errorists of His day – a chaplet of straw and green twigs, besprinkled with brimstone, was made to encircle his head. This ‘crown’ was ignited first, and produced such a cry of anguish that it struck terror into the hearts of the spectators. That was his only expression of pain.
Perhaps the saddest part of the above recital is that John Calvin himself had strongly denounced the persecuting spirit of Antichrist in France; had addressed a noble publication to the King of France in defense of religious tolerance – tolerance for him, that is. But he readily forgot all about tolerance when he could not meet the Truth that came from Servetus, and blackened his memory with one of the worst examples of cruel intolerance ever to be recorded. This is indeed a sad record against Calvin, who was considered one of the most brilliant religious minds of the entire Gospel Age, and a zealous champion of his idea of Christianity.
“Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against their parents. and shall cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake; but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.” (Mark 13:12-13) And, “Who is sufficient for these things?” (2 Cor. 2:16) “He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.” (Psa. 24:4)
Coming a little further along in history, there is the case of the Pilgrim Fathers who left England because of religious persecution; but, hardly had they landed in New England in 1620, when they began to heap much the same abuses upon those who disagreed with them. But let us keep in mind that, while Wesley and his adherents were sorely persecuted in England, he himself and those who fully embraced his teachings, never persecuted, or recommended persecution of those who disagreed with them. The same could be said of George Fox and the Quakers; the same for Balthasar Hubmaier and the Baptists. And this is definitely our own position now.
By the time the Parousia had arrived the physical manhandling of dissenters had pretty much become out of date, but those who embraced the Harvest Truth were subjected to considerable verbal abuse and vilification, with considerable vicious slander heaped upon That Servant. This increased in severity as the 1914 war began, during which time some of the Truth people did incur actual physical violence, with even a few of them dying from that abuse. During that time those in “present truth” were a unit in advocating religious tolerance; and it would seem the lessons of the past, plus their own untoward experiences, should have taught them thoroughly the quality of tolerance. But, sad to say, hardly had That Servant died than quite a few of them took up the very unchristian weapons against their former brethren that had been previously used against them. Were we not personally witness to this; it would be difficult to believe.
And from 1916 on those brethren who were being defamed by the Society also were loud in their acclaim of tolerance, the Executive Trustee of the LHMM being one of the foremost in denouncing intolerance; and he did an excellent job of declaring the evils of intolerance. It was easy enough for him to do that, too, because he had the Truth as his ‘shield and buckler’: and it was no problem to prove that it was once more error persecuting truth.
But scarcely had the Epiphany Messenger left us until the Executive Trustee began to cudgel his opponents with the same weapons that had formerly been used against him and others – with the situation now reversed: The former champion of the Truth on tolerance was now forced to intolerance by the Truth which appeared against his error – just as was true of those intolerant ones in the Society after 1917. Here is a sad illustration indeed of human frailty – the accumulated experience of the Age, coupled with extreme brilliance of Harvest Truth, availed them little as those who still retained Parousia Truth began to expose their decline into error. The formerly excommunicated became the excommunicators in very pronounced fashion: “Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name’s sake, said, Let the Lord be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.” (Isa. 66:5)
In so many instances the founders of present-day religious organizations – John Wesley, Martin Luther, William Miller, Thomas Cranmer, Robert Brown, George Fox, Balthazar Hubmaier, Michael Servetus, Zwingli, Charles T. Russell, et al – were mercilessly opposed because of the truth they presented; a number of them were actually burned at the stake. Yet, quite often those who were outraged witnesses to such abuses, adopted the tools of the persecutors when the situation became reversed. However, the underlying cause of such conduct was largely due to the fact that they themselves had departed in whole or in part – from the teachings of those they claimed to follow. All during the Age it seems it never took long until the examples of the respective reformers were forgotten, and much of the truth they presented was perverted or lost completely; and, as the truth was lost, so also was lost the spirit of true Christianity which had actuated their leaders. “Strong delusion” (2 Thes. 2:11) regarding the truth usually inculcates “strong delusion” in conduct also, which in turn develops fanaticism in those who fall prey to it. It is certainly sound appraisal that religious fanaticism is the deepest, wickedest and most conscienceless of hatreds.
THE TOWER OF BABEL
Some years after the deluge, when the population had begun to increase, men said, “Let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto Heaven” (Gen. 11:4). They would have insurance against another flood (in spite of the promise that another flood would never be – Gen. 9:15); they would build Bab–El (Gateway to God). As retribution for this affront, the Lord confused their tongues; they could no longer understand each other. Thus, the effort became known as Babyl, meaning confusion, the same being typical of the Roman Church’s effort also to build a “Gateway to God”; that is, We are the one true church – no salvation outside of us – no other access to God – their popes are now the successors to St. Peter (despite the fact there is no evidence whatever that St. Peter ever once visited Rome). But their shibboleth over the centuries has been, “Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church.” (Matt. 16:18)
In further explanation, we quote this text from the Emphatic Diaglott: “I also say to thee, Thou art a rock, and on this rock I will build my Church.” Reference to Peter as ‘a rock’ is from the Greek Petros; and ‘this rock’ as the foundation for the Church is from the Greek Petra – the difference in meaning being Petros is a small stone, with Petra as a huge boulder. Once this is clearly understood, it is easily comprehended that Jesus was not referring at all to Peter as the rock upon which He would build His Church, but to the great indisputable Truth that Peter had just spoken: “Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God.” Indeed, in the words of the hymn, “My hope is built on nothing less, Than Jesus’ blood and righteousness.” He is truly the Christ; and “other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (1 Cor. 3:11) He is the Petra, the unlovable rock, upon which the Church has been built. “There is none other name (neither Peter, nor any other) under Heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12) But the Roman interpretation is TRULY ANTICHRIST – “in place of” Christ. And to them also God sent confusion of tongues – a “Babyl”; their teachings today are completely foreign to the truth given us by the Lord through St. Peter.
In identical manner, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have made similar pattern; they claim also to be the “Channel for present truth’“ no salvation apart from them – they, too, would build “Bab-El.” And to them also has come retribution: a confusion of teachings so far removed from that presented by their founder that there is almost no similarity now to their beliefs of fifty years ago. And they also – in true Roman spirit – would suppress the truth presented by us; they have actually seized our papers from the hands of their dedicated deluded devotees and trampled them in the street. Yet they still boast of their founder, just as the Catholics boast of St. Peter. Was such conduct ever in evidence by the Master, Apostles, or by those true reformers mentioned above? Indeed, “By their fruits ye shall know them.” (Matt. 7:20) The spirit of Antichrist readily reveals itself to all unbiased observers. The following excerpt from Reprints 5172 (Feb. 1, 1913) is most appropriate here:
“All down the Gospel Age, those who have been faithful to the truth of God have been put ‘out of the synagogue.’ The creeds of men have been barriers to keep out those who understood the word of God.”
And there is sound logic in explanation: The Truth always brings out the best in the faithful, but it often brings out the worst in the unfaithful or measurably faithful. “We (the faithful) are unto God a sweet savor of Christ in them that are saved, and in them that perish: To the one we are the savor of death unto death (as they go deeper and deeper into error); and to the other the savor of life unto life (as the Truth perfects them in every good word and work).” (2 Cor. 2:14,15) “The light (Truth) shineth in darkness (amid error); and the darkness (error) comprehended it not.” (John 1:5) It is an evidence of human frailty that physical force is usually applied when the intellect is not sufficient. Thus, for a thousand years the Antichrist resorted to the rack, boiling oil, hot lead in the ears, etc., against the ‘heretics’ whose truth they could not gainsay or resist. But there is no record of the fully faithful ever using such weapons against Antichrist. St. Paul also had counseled “Resist not evil with evil” – “the weapons of our warfare are not carnal.” He also wrote in 2 Cor. 3:17: “Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty (tolerance).” Conversely speaking, we may draw the ready conclusion that without liberty there is none of the Spirit of the Lord. And from such we are advised to turn away! Woe unto those who fall prey to the spirit of Antichrist!
“For we are not like the many, trafficking the word of God; but really from sincerity, and as from God, in the presence of God, we speak concerning Christ.” (2 Cor. 2:17, Dia.)
Sincerely your brother, John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim
QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST
QUESTION: – How can we think of Satan as bound now, if he is instrumental in the destruction of the Great Company's flesh?
ANSWER: – To see daylight through this question we must realize that the binding of Satan, the individual, and the Satan system does not mean their inactivity, that it is not an instantaneous act, but that it is a progressive matter, going through several stages. The binding of the individual Satan respects the fallen angels and means that our Lord gave the fallen angels so much Truth between 1874 and 1878 that Satan from then (1878) onward could no more control them as he had been doing before; yet he has otherwise continued very active among them.
Again, the binding of the Satan system as respects the world is a progressive one, going through four stages, amid each one of which he displays great activities, as the following will show: The first stage was from 1874 to 1914 and thus preceded the World War. It gave the world so much Truth against the foundation errors of Satan's empire, the Divine right of kings, clergy and aristocracy, and against its supporting errors, eternal torment and the consciousness of the dead, as made it impossible for Satan longer to control mankind with those errors; yet he was very active while thus being bound. The second stage is now going on. It began at the end of the war and will be completed by Armageddon. It will give the world so much Truth as against dictatorships as will make it impossible for Satan to rule mankind by dictators, proven by the outbreak of Armageddon; yet during this stage of his binding Satan has been very active. The third stage of his binding will be between Armageddon and Anarchy, beginning at the end of the former and ending at the beginning of the latter. It will give the world so much Truth as will make it impossible for Satan to rule mankind by the Socialistic government that he will establish after Armageddon, which third stage of his binding as complete will be evident by the outbreak of Anarchy; yet Satan will be very active during that period. The fourth stage of Satan's binding will be during the reign of Anarchy, and will be active into its last phase, i.e., during the plundering expedition against the Jews of Palestine, which reign of Anarchy the Lord will destroy by overwhelming the plundering hosts of anarchists in Palestine through a mighty display of retributive justice. This stage of his binding will complete it from every standpoint, but amid each part of it Satan will be very active.
When Anarchy will have been overthrown, Satan will not only have been completely bound, but he will then be spirited away from this earth and imprisoned, unable for the rest of the 1,000 years to tempt the people or to learn what is going on among them. The above five features of Satan's binding, one as to the fallen angels, the other four as to mankind, prove that his binding is a progressive one, stretching through five stages over a period of more than 80 years, and that his binding process does not mean that he is rendered therein inactive, but it does mean that as each stage is completed he will no longer be able to control through the errors whereby he controlled before such stage of his binding set in. Hence during each stage he has activity and power enough to destroy the fleshly minds of Levites. (The Epiphany Messenger – The Present Truth, June 1, 1937, pp. 99,100)
LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST
I enjoy your papers very much. I always look forward to getting them. I have moved and am giving you my new address. Enclosed is a donation. I know your papers are free, but I would like to give something to help in the expense.
Thank you very much ------- (ARIZONA)
Your articles on Creation came at a very good time. The Christian Reformed Church were having a Synod meeting at Calvin College a couple of weeks ago. One of the things that came up at this meeting was creation and the time it took.
Mr. Leo Peters supported the 24‑hour‑day creation theory and wants Professor Howard Vantill to stop teaching something different in the Calvin College. The Synod is going to decide this question in the next five months.
So we sent each man our two copies of your articles on the length of the days of Creation. We hope they can see. Now it is up to the Lord. Does He want them to see?
Sincerely your brother, ------- (MICHIGAN)
I am writing to you to inform you of the death of my father, Stanley Fletcher. It seems that my father has been a student of your association for many years. My father had various beliefs through his life. I wonder if you would tell me what my father actually believed toward the end of his life. You seem to be the last religious organization my father was in contact with. My father died April 23, 1988 age 68. I would be obliged if you could let me know of your beliefs and aims.
I note from one of your letters that my father asked you about your views on his divorce with regard to forming another relationship. I wonder if you could comment on this subject.
Yours sincerely, ------- (ENGLAND)