NO. 167: THE LAST SAINT (PART I)

No. 167

(Reprint of No. 24 – with pertinent additions)

With erstwhile Epiphany brethren still tenaciously clinging to the belief that Brother Johnson was the last saint, and because of the many letters that still con­tinue to come to us on the subject, we believe it again opportune to offer further treatise of the topic. For a short while after Brother Johnson’s death, we adopted a generous view of the subject – so much so that, after Brother Alger returned to Detroit from the Chicago Convention that fall in 1950, we voted that he be allowed to present his views on the subject, which he did in two successive one-hour dis­courses. Then, when a member of the Detroit Class suggested that we offer a refu­tation of Brother Alger’s views, we declined to do so, saying at the time that we did not consider it vital to us personally or to the others there.

After we returned to Detroit in October 1950 from conducting Brother Johnson’s funeral, we said then that nothing we thought, or wished, could place any one in the body of Christ, or take any one out of it, because: “God hath set the members in the Body.” Therefore, we scrupulously avoided heaping any abuse upon those who held an opinion contrary to ours. That also is still our position. But we believe it now in order to state that we were overmuch and too easily influenced by the conclu­sions of R. G. Jolly on this subject, because we held him in high esteem and confi­dence in 1950. Had we known him then as we know him now, we would have taken a nar­rower and much more critical view of anything he presented as “advancing Truth”; but it should be observed that we are always most easily misled by those we trust. Even Jesus learned this by His own bitter experience – “mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted” (Psa. 41:9).

According to his own admission the evening after the funeral, R. G. Jolly him­self held the view for sometime after Brother Johnson’s death that there were still Saints among us, which belief left him suddenly as he lay awake in the early morning hours when he received a flash that there are no more Saints on earth (just as he received a sudden “illumination” – another flash – on his way to the Grand Rapids Con­vention in 1955 concerning his Campers Consecrated: They would be the “new” Millen­nial princes – similar to the ‘types and pictures’ he was making in 1910 as mentioned in his letter published in the November 1910 Watch Tower). We have always been wary of manifested crown-losers who make claim to special illumination, or flashes of ‘new’ light! All such light flashes of which we know were actually mud splashes of error.

As stated above, we took a generous view toward those who still continued in their High Calling Hope, because we clearly realized at the time that whether the answer be Yea or Nay it in nowise affected the status of any winlings that might attach themselves to us; this was not even remotely related to the issue such as Brother Johnson advocated early in the Epiphany when he taught the High Calling should no longer be presented to newcomers. After 1950 the work as respects new­comers to the Epiphany Truth was exactly the same as it had been before; nothing at all had been changed there – nor had R. G. Jolly advocated such a change. Nor, in the final analysis, would anything whatever be changed with respect to the status of Saints, should there still be some among us. However, that fatal event October 22, 1950 did most mightily affect the status of one individual – namely, one R. G. Jolly (a manifested crown-lost leader who admitted his manifestation). If there are still Saints on earth, then the claims he has made since that date can be only the babble of a gross perverter – his claims such as paralleling Brother Russell, his claim of Pastor and Teacher, his claim that he now represents the “Lord’s Arrangements,” etc., as he sets aside one arrangement after another The Epiphany Messenger established for the Epiphany period.

As some of our readers already know, Brother Johnson had seen thirty-three reasons for the High Calling closed when we first became acquainted with him early in the Epi­phany (the acquaint­ance being only through his writings; we had not then yet met him per­sonally). So we wrote him thirty-three reasons why he was wrong. But did he answer us with abusive imprecations? Not at all! Rather, he suggested we visit him for a personal talk, which invitation we accepted immediately; and at which time he gave us the counsel one might expect of him whom God gave “largeness of heart” (1 Kings 4:29) the counsel being that he and this writer continue as brethren in the “love of the Truth,” leaving the ultimate rewards with the Lord, but resolve to meet the covenants we had made. Had RGJ had such “largeness of heart” his experiences would have been much different! It was a bitter pill for him to acknowledge himself as a crown-loser when he manifested himself as such under The Epiphany Messenger’s leadership and re­straint. If a crown-loser had made such an announcement of him when he still had the High Calling Hope, does any one believe that he would have accepted such a pro­nouncement – especially, knowing as he did that revolutionism is the only yardstick, and the crown-loser making such an announcement used some other yardstick for his pronouncement? This is what he “pronounced” of all new creatures – not only in the Epiphany Truth, but all new creatures in the other Truth groups. He did not accuse them of revolutionism – his only charge was that they were living and Brother Johnson was dead.

And we present this generous view of the beloved good Epiphany Solomon in strik­ing contrast to the baleful revilings and actions after October 1950, when many breth­ren were disfellowshiped simply because of their honest belief in their Saintly stand­ing – and a vicious “whispering campaign” (something RGJ is adept at starting) con­ducted that such brethren were in the second death – a vile repetition of the degrad­ing performance in 1917, when the same tactics were used against Brother Johnson and other magnanimous brethren. It is also to the shame of many so-called Youthful Worthies associated with both “cousins” (RGJ and JWK) that they joined heartily, and even gleefully, in encouraging their leaders in this disgraceful performance. Reports have come to us from various sections that such Youthful Worthy classes were prompt to disfellowship those who adhered to their High-calling hope – just as many of them have disfellowshiped us for continuing to uphold and present the fundamental doctrines taught by both Star Members.

When the question was put to us at that time whether those that had separated themselves from us because of the controversy might be in the second death, we answered, “Ridiculous! Brother Jolly does not stand in the same position as Brother Russell, or any other Star Member; at best, if the separatists were not in fact saints, then it could only mean one Levite sassing another Levite, with both sides possibly wrong – especially in their attitude.” This might eventually deteriorate into such “reviling” that it could lead to the second death for some on either side of the argu­ment; but we could see no evidence that it had proceeded to that point then. Cer­tainly, this could be no Scriptural cause to disfellowship any one; but the Epiphany is a time for ‘making manifest the counsels of hearts’ – a truth which must apply to all in the Household of Faith. Hence, what happened after 1950 ‘made manifest’ the uncleansed condition of many Great Company and Youthful Worthy members; and be it observed that those most blindly partisan in their support of the present Executive Trustee have been those most ready to reveal that “instruments of cruelty are in their habitation.” For all this there must eventually come a fearful reckoning.

“PATHS OF ERROR”

It has been suggested that “Last Saint Brother Johnson” or “Last Saint Gone” was the Epiphany Messenger’s Stewardship doctrine; and it would be for those of us who remain to develop that doctrine. Any one grounded in Parousia and Epiphany Truth should readily see the error in this position. No crown-lost leader ever developed any Gospel-Age stewardship doctrine; rather, every one of them perverted what the Star Members left for them. Brother Russell himself gave us the SCRIPTURAL teaching that the last saints would be here until early in Anarchy; and Brother Johnson offered additional proof of that from the Bible, although he did make the mistake of believing that he would be the last one – that he would remain here until 1956 – a parallel to Brother Russell’s death in 1916. Certainly, it should require no argument that his parallel to Brother Russell’s death did not materialize; he died in 1950. In a prev­ious paper we gave what we believe was Brother Johnson’s stewardship doctrine: The Epiphany in its relation to the Epiphany Elect.

After the death of each Star Member, the crown-lost leaders PERVERTED the stew­ardship doctrines left in their charge. This was true of J. F. Rutherford, who per­verted Brother Russell’s stewardship doctrine (Restitution, etc.) by offering conse­cration – or ‘dedication’ to the world of mankind; and this is true of RGJ who has PERVERTED Brother Johnson’s stewardship doctrine – The Epiphany in its Relation to the Epiphany Elect: he now has another non-existent class to walk a narrow way with the Elect in this Epiphany period. In this he also PERVERTS both Messengers’ teachings and Stewardship doctrines. Of course, he has also perverted the teaching of both Mes­sengers on the “last Saint,” in his determination to eliminate the saints in 1950; but that perversion was not the stewardship doctrine of Brother Johnson or Brother Russell, as all Parousia and Epiphany-enlightened brethren know. If the time element had pro­duced the other features that both Messengers taught would be a criterion of this great event – the Time of Trouble such as would topple the earth in its social, governmental, and religious elements – then we ourselves could fully subscribe to the thought that Brother Johnson was the last saint, or at least among the last saints to leave the earth (since his expectation of 1956 had fallen through because of his death in 1950).

SOME PERTINENT TYPES

As this controversy developed into a most serious and painful disturbance in 1951, we did then in that year ask RGJ what answer he had for the large Gospel-Age Samson – considering Brother Russell’s statement in the Berean Comments on Judges 16:30, “With the death of the last member of the Church, the Body of Christ, will surely come the downfall of Churchianity and the present system of world power.” He offered the very reasonable observation that God’s estimate of “Immediate” would not necessarily be a day, a week, or even months – with which we agreed; but, now that over eighteen years have elapsed, this item certainly requires a more scrupulous appraisal. At that time RGJ asked that we keep silent on this point in order not to aid the “opposition” in their arguments against him, because it was indeed a premise which could not be conclusively overthrown; and the weight of argument might easily appear to favor the other side.

As companion to the Samson picture we have the words of Jesus, “Ye are the salt of the earth.... ye are the light of the world” (Matt. 5:13,14); and here is the Berean Comment on v. 14: “When the lights have all been extinguished, the great time of trouble will follow.” In the same line of argument is the David-Saul type, the latter typing the crown-lost leaders up to Armageddon. In the type Saul died first – ­he and his sons “that same day” (1 Sam. 31:6) –, of which David was witness. Brother Johnson certainly thought the antitype would follow the time order of the type, his mistake in this matter being only that he thought he himself would be one of the David class who would be here to witness the “funeral” of antitypical Saul in the Armageddon collapse of the social order (the leaders then dying as antitypical Saul, but not necessarily as individual human beings). In line with this, we have his statement in Epiphany Volume 3, p. 446, Middle: “It will, therefore, not be manifest who will be the eventual Little Flock members, until all the Truth Levites have been manifested, have cleansed themselves (Num. 8:7), have recognized themselves as Le­vites (Num. 8:9,10), have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb (Num. 8:12), have been set apart for the true Levitical service (Num. 8:11), and are set before the Priests as their servants (Num. 8:13).” Certainly, no one will contend that the foregoing has yet occurred even here in 1969! Even RGJ doesn’t make such a claim for those outside his group.

Aside from the Apostles and Brother Russell, it was not necessary at any time during the Gospel Age for Saints to accept instruction from Star Members who lived contemporaneously with them. Thus, the Saints with Luther did not receive instruc­tion from Zwingli, and vice versa, etc. And It was Brother Johnson’s clear teach­ing that Saints living in the Epiphany were not required to receive instruction from him; so the question would seem properly in order: If the Saints were not required to accept instruction from him while he lived, why should they have to die just be­cause he is dead? And for 20 years after Brother Miller died there was no Star Mem­ber at all on earth! RGJ contended in one Present Truth that the Saints must have a Star Member living contemporaneously with them, and now that there was none it was a ‘proof’ there are no more saints left. We called his attention to this mistake, which he resented more than he appreciated – although he hasn’t made this foolish claim since that time.

OTHER PERTINENT SCRIPTURES

Following on, we consider Amos 9:13: “The plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed.” A careful reading of this text will reveal it is written in reverse of the natural order – because the “sower of seed” must precede the “reaper” in the usual agricultural process. And Bible students have long since learned that inspired Scripture is not written in loose or careless manner in construction or choice of words. Brother Russell has shown that this is a Harvest Truth; and the words of Jesus apply in the Harvest of the Gospel Age, just as they did in the Jewish Age: “The fields are already white to harvest.... I sent you forth to reap whereon ye bestowed no labor.” (John 4:35-38) Thus, the harvesters of the Gospel Age were enjoined, “Thrust in thy sickle, and reap” (Rev. 14:15) – reap with the sickle of Present Truth; the wheat into the barn, the tares into bundles for the burn­ing – reap the fields which they had not sown. Therefore, the “plowman” (the Time of Trouble – see Berean Comment) would overtake “the reaper,” putting a stop to the reap­ing work. By that time the wheat (the Faithful) and the barley (the Measurably Faith­ful) harvests were complete in their reaping features – the night had come wherein no man could work in “reaping” the saints, as the war overtook the various countries of Christendom.

In the Jewish economy the land had been divided by lot, and each man tilled his own plot of ground. Barring unusual circumstances, the same person sowed and reaped the same field. Inasmuch as Amos 9:13 was written upon that premise, we believe it is logical to conclude that the same CLASS is meant by the “reaper” and the “sower of seed” In both parts of the text – the same being primarily the Little Flock. Once the reaping ceased, a new work began – the work of sowing seed to win Youthful Worthies. In the case of reaping, all Classes joined in the work, as they also have done in the sowing of seed; but the Little Flock predominated in the reaping to its completion; and the construction of our text would cause the logical conclusion that they should do the same with the “sowing of seed.”

Who is the “treader of grapes” that shall overtake “him that soweth seed”? It is the Armageddon and Anarchy features of the Time of Trouble. It should be noted that after the earth is plowed it still has the appearance of earth, and – given reasonable time – will revert back to substantially the same appearance it had before the plowing. But not so when grapes are trodden. In Palestine this usually occurred about August by placing the grapes in a stone or wooden trough, when the husbandman tramped them out with his bare feet, thus allowing the juice to flow into a second trough – after which the remaining pulp was cast away as refuse. And be it noted that once this was done, the grapes never again had the appearance of grapes, never again reverted to grapes, as is the case with earth after it is plowed. Thus, the symbolic earth now still retains its original appearance some 55 years after “the plowman” over­took “the reaper” – a thing that will never again be true of the grapes once they are trodden out.

And what are the grapes? They are the “clusters of the vine of the earth.... fully ripe.... cast into the great winepress of the wrath of God.” (Rev. 14:18,19). The tread­er of grapes is the same thing Daniel saw (Dan. 7:11): “I beheld till the beast was slain.... and given to the burning flame.” This has not yet occurred; therefore, the “treader of grapes” has not overtaken “him that soweth seed” (the Little Flock in their endeavors to win Youthful Worthies – the last elect and the last consecrated class of the Gospel Age “in the finished Epiphany picture.”). Therefore, “him that soweth seed” must still be with us. This is in harmony with the clear, direct and emphatic teach­ings of both Star Members – both of whom repeatedly stated, from Scriptural authority, that some of the “feet members” would remain at least until the “treader of grapes” had begun to do his work. So we are presented here with the teachings of two Star Members the last two “principal Men” – as against the teachings of an uncleansed Levite, one who has clearly demonstrated time after time that the “oil in his lamp” has gone out. RGJ has in times past – although not anymore because of our crushing refutations – re­peated in parrot-like precision: “The doctrine of Tentative Justification as operat­ing from the time of Abel, Enoch and Noah (Heb. 11:4-7), until restitution begins, is a Scriptural one, and will remain so despite the denials of the counterfeit channel...” (E-4:346).

If the “oil in his lamp” had not gone out he would have realized that the subject of Tentative Justification, and its time limit, is for the very purpose of establish­ing the time element for winning Youthful Worthies, as can be readily seen from the fol­lowing:

“If our dear readers will keep in mind that The Tower’s denial of Tentative Justi­fication during this Age is the foundation of its rejecting the Scriptural doctrine that those faithful consecrators from 1881 until Restitution sets in (just as RGJ is now do­ing—JJH), for whom there are no crowns available, .... will be the Millennial Associates of the Ancient Worthies in reward and service, they will be able by Scriptural, reason­able and factual thinking completely to overthrow every argument that the article under review presents to defend its thesis; for through Tentative Justification alone can God now deal with this class in preparing them for association with the Ancient Worthies.” (See E-4:342) And we, too, will be able by Scriptural, reasonable and factual think­ing completely to overthrow every argument that RGJ presents to defend his thesis (his perversion of Tentative Justification and his non-existent class).

There is another Scripture directly bearing on this subject in Rev. 19:6-8, where the declaration is made by the “great crowd” (the Great Company of crown-losers) that “our Lord God, the Omnipotent, reigned.” They are joined in this by the “sound of many waters, and as a noise of mighty thunders”; and the Berean Comment says this will take place “after Babylon’s fall.” There is not yet the slightest indication that the “many waters” (large numbers throughout Christendom) are sounding such a message – nor should we expect it yet if Brother Russell was right in saying it would occur “after Babylon’s fall.” Not even do we hear this ‘message’ sounded by any of the Truth groups (over 18 years after it was proclaimed by RGJ!) other than the LHMM group. But this was Brother Russell’s teaching to the day he died in 1916, and it was confirmed by Brother Johnson until the day he died in 1950. Comes now a Levite to tell us both of them were wrong in their Scriptural interpretation! Therefore, we are forced to the sad conclusion that here is one more Parousia and Epiphany truth that is now being thrust out by those who would have us believe there are no more saints on earth.

A “FORCED” ATTESTATORIAL SERVICE

And to aid each one in this determination, we direct attention to the ‘Attesta­torial Service’ (?) that has supposedly been carried on since 1954 by the ‘cleansed’(?) Levites. Just what has been accomplished by it? Has the leader of the LHMM convinced even one small group that the High Calling is closed, and that crown-losers should now be cleansing themselves? In fact, has he convinced even one individual in any group aside from his own, who considered himself a saint in 1950, that he was wrong in his opinion? His Present Truth subscribers in 1966 were fewer by almost 500 than they were in 1954 – a decrease of 34% as a result of his great (?) Attestatorial service for 12 years! How does this compare with the Attestatorial Service of 1914-1916? But, where­as he should be zealously engaged in declaring the Great Company cleansing truths far and near, what do we find him doing? Aside from obstinately declaring there are no more saints on earth (leaving none to gainsay his authority as the Lord’s mouthpiece at present), HIS main objective is to win campers Consecrated (a non-existent class) exactly as the Jehovah’s Witnesses are also doing with their special non-existent class! Note the elegant detail in which Brother Johnson describes him, and them – and all their kinsmen, as they are thus befuddled by Azazel:

“Filling their minds with more or less error (such as justification outside the Court, etc.—JJH), Satan makes them busy themselves with false religious work, works of false propaganda, of building false religious sects. He deceives them into be­lieving they will accomplish great works, win great numbers (as the Witnesses and other. have already done, and as the LHMM is feverishly trying to do—JJH), gain great favor, etc..... He leads all of them on wild goose chases.” (E-15:525) Always “working for the Lord,” but not doing the Lord’s work!

If the LHMM leader still retained the Epiphany Truth that the ONLY Scriptural gauge for determining crown-losers is gross and persistent revolutionism against the Truth and/or its Arrangements (or the partisan supporters of such revolutionists), then he himself would know of plenty of crown-losers whom he should be warning of their precar­ious state (many of whom he recognized as such before the demise of the Epiphany Messen­ger). But, instead, what do we find him doing? We find him fighting and perverting the truth on the Abandonment process, and now setting aside the Truth that ONLY revo­lutionism is the true gauge for recognizing new creatures as crown-losers. Thus, he abuses those with Little Flock hopes (that is, his Epiphany-enlightened brethren) – not for any revolutionism they have committed, but merely for standing steadfast in a be­lief of their own faithfulness – a belief in which he himself encouraged them to contin­ue prior to October 1950.

This same sifting error by crown-losers found its exact duplicate during the Harvest of the Jewish Age, and note St. Paul’s vivid description of them:

“The word of those men will eat like a mortifying sore; of whom are Hymenius and Philetus; who missed the mark with respect to the Truth, saying that THE RESURRECTION has already happened (as RGJ also now declares the First Resurrection “has already hap­pened” to a completion); and they are perverting the faith of some (just as RGJ has perverted the faith of some). However, the firm foundation of God stands, having this inscription, ‘The Lord knows those who are His.’” (2 Tim. 2:17-19, Dia.) History re­peats itself here in the end of this Gospel Age! So far as we know, he is the only crown-lost leader who has perverted this Truth. Certainly, RGJ has “perverted (Azazel means Perverter) the faith of some” Youthful Worthies and new creatures as he “wanders from the Truth.... in his path of error” (Jas. 5:19, 20—Dia.), as he revolutionizes against the clear Epiphany Truth, namely: Gross and Persistent REVOLUTIONISM against the Truth and/or its Arrangements is the only sure guide for determining crown-losers in this Epiphany period.

And the Attestatorial service that began in 1954 has been such a miserable fail­ure that only one sadly befuddled by Azazel would have the temerity even to make men­tion of it at this late date. The true Attestatorial Service of the Saints in 1914–­1916 lasted for 25 months, and was a marked success from every standpoint. Large con­vention halls and theatres could not receive the huge crowds that came to see the Photo­drama of Creation; and the smiting of Jordan with the pertinent truths was made appar­ent in every country of Christendom. Quite a contrast, and certainly not a true paral­lel, to the feeble effort that was made after 1954; and which RGJ insists is still be­ing continued – although its effects cannot be discerned even with a microscope. And the “parallel” is now fifteen years gone, as compared with 25 months in 1914-1916, with fail­ure clearly marked all over it. Here again only one badly befuddled by Azazel would be crass enough to label it a “parallel” at all – 25 months against fifteen years. It is a tremendous presumption on the gullibility of his readers, because it is no “parallel” at all!

Therefore, Beloved, “Be infants no longer, tossed and whirled about with every wind of that teaching which is in the trickery of men, by cunning craftiness in sys­tematic deception; but being truthful in love, we may grow up in all things into Him, who is the Head – the Anointed One; from whom the whole Body, being fitly joined and united, by means of every assisting joint, according to the proportionate energy of each single part, effects the growth of the Body for the building up of itself in love.” (Eph. 4:14-16, Dia.)

(to be continued)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

....................................................................

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – What is your answer to Brother Jolly’s three questions in the March-April Present Truth on the resurrection of the just and the unjust?

ANSWER: – In this, as with all of his other errors, he becomes more deeply involved with each utterance he makes. The resurrection of the just is an expres­sion found only twice in the Bible – Acts 24:15 and Luke 14:14. Neither of these Scriptures allows for any “Yes and No” juggling, as RGJ is now attempting. Here again he is caught in a web of his own weaving. The Question at the Chicago Convention simply asked if the Campers Consecrated would experience the “resurrection of the just.” To this he gave an unqualified Yes, stating that they are now among the justified, so they would necessarily experience the resurrection of the just – although he then said they would not have part in the “better resurrection.”

A little analysis will demonstrate how foolish his contention is: ALL of “the just” (the four elect classes) will appear in the resurrection with more than they had in this life – rewarded according to their faithfulness and opportunity; but his Campers Consecrated will appear in the resurrection with less than they have had in this life, that is, if we accept his contention that they now have tentative justifica­tion. Gospel-Age tentative justification is a faith justification; and it ceases to operate when the Gospel Age ends. Thus, all the quasi-elect during the entire Age, and including those now in its end, will appear in the resurrection without that faith justification which they had in this Age. Of course, all the living quasi-­elect will have ceased to be tentatively justified and remanded to the Camp in the “finished Epiphany picture” (See E-10:209). Thus they will come back from the grave with the exact characters they had at death: there is no change in the grave. But they will not come back with perfect physical, mental and other human qualities, any­more than will the other Restitutionists. And if perchance they should live through the Time of Trouble, they will merge into the Kingdom from the Epiphany Camp. This is the teaching of the last two “principal Men,” and the teaching that we continue to uphold and defend. Even those tentatively justified in the Court are no more than nominal Christians, so long as they fail to consecrate (if we accept the Epiphany Messenger’s teaching); and with the close of this Age all who fail to consecrate will be ejected to the Camp where they will take their place among the nominal Christians.

This does not mean that these Campers will have less intrinsic merit, because those among them who continue repentant and believing will have the benefit of the good characters they have developed in this life, enabling them to make greater and quicker progress up the Highway of Holiness. But this same condition would be true of those who have not accepted Jesus as their Savior at all, if they have conducted themselves honorably, nobly and altruistically in this life. If they are in this condition, they will readily accept Jesus as their Savior when the Kingdom is established.

Campers Consecrated will come up in the resurrection with their generation – no different except in their character than their neighbors. Thus, there are only four Scriptural classes of the just – and the Epiphany Messenger never taught more than four. Let RGJ give us even one Scripture to justify his “Yes and No” answer in this matter! Let him show one line in the Epiphany writings that supports his answer! His tactics are simply the tactics of many politicians who also readily say, Yes and then again No. He says “we must distinguish carefully between generalities and speci­fic applications”; but the two texts we have given (Luke 14:14 and Acts 24:15) do not generalize – they are very specific, and that for good reason: Because all others must self-evidently be classified among the unjust, regardless of how noble or ignoble they may have been in this present evil world.

He attempts to “generalize” his present error by posing the question, “Are we still in the Parousia?” Of which Parousia is he now talking – the small or the large one? The small Parousia ended in 1914; and in no sense of the word can we now “generalize” ourselves as being in it. And as for the large Parousia, we have never been out of it! RGJ’s efforts to extricate himself from the quagmire of his own making simply “makes manifest to all” that “teaching which is in the trickery of men, by cunning craftiness in systematic deception” (Eph. 4:14, Dia.) – simply some more of his nonsense. Yet he is crass enough to refer to us as “the sifting errorist” – in which he offers us just one more proof of Brother Johnson’s correct appraisal of him in E-10:585: “A bad con­science” and guilty of many misrepresentations; and in E-10:592: “Loquacious, repeti­tious, and a false-accusing Epiphany crown-loser.”

For a time he was teaching that Brother Russell taught tentative justification would still prevail in the Kingdom reign; but our crushing refutations of his error there made him beat a hasty retreat. But, as he did that he also used the same tac­tics he is using against us now. However, when we consider his type – King Saul of Israel (a type of the crown-lost leaders up to Armageddon) – and the depraved methods he used against faithful David, we should “think it not strange” at what we see transpir­ing now.