by Epiphany Bible Students

No. 101

My dear Brethren: – Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!

Over Labor Day we attended the Philadelphia gathering, receiving the usual calumny, diatribe and slander – none of which did we return in kind. On Saturday evening, Aug­ust 31, R. G. Jolly made considerable comment about the Krewson lawsuit, injecting his customary name-calling, etc. While we have contended from the outset that J. W. Krewson's case was “weak as water,” it is very evident, too, that the weakness of his case was further accentuated by his own incapacity to answer R. G. Jolly. The crux of the con­tention was the Laymen's Home Mission­ary Movement name and label of its publications –­ especially, The Present Truth and Herald of Christ's Epiphany. Inasmuch as R. G. Jolly now contends we have been in the Basileia for nine_years, what moral right does he him­self have to use that name?

When Brother Russell recognized our Lord's presence, he immediately designated his paper, “The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence.” When Brother Johnson recog­nized we had progressed into the Epiphany, he imme­diately designated his paper, “The Present Truth and Herald of Christ's Epiph­any.” If R. G. Jolly is now following their example, as he claims, and if he really believes we have progressed into the Basileia (before the three main features of the Epiphany are here – Armageddon, Anarchy and Jacob's Trouble), as he is now preaching it, why hasn't he changed the name of his paper to, “The Present Truth and Herald of Christ's Basileia”? All his activity at present toward new Truth converts he stresses as a Basileia (Restitution) work, Why, then, is he still “Heralding the Epiphany”? Had J. W. Krewson rigidly cross-examined him on this and a few other points, we believe his defense would have been so much strengthened that he just might have emerged victorious from a tragically weak position. We do not here champion his cause, for we believe R. G. Jolly was at least partially justified in the action he took, with which position the Court also agrees.

In his resume he also threw a few barbs at us for appropriating the name, “Herald of the Epiphany”; and we now cordially invite him to institute legal proceedings against us if he believes the charges he made before the Conven­tion, And, if he does, we now assure him we shall not charge him with violating 1 Cor. 6:1-4. And we would also then settle a few other matters in the same Court action, where we believe the weight of Jus­tice would appear with us. (of course, here we are not in the least concerned that he will resort to such action, for we are fully persuaded he hasn't courage to meet us any place where we would be treated on equal terms with him. Rather, he'll content himself with hurling loud invective from the Convention platform – or with his “secret weapon,” his “whispering” campaign” – where he's sure he'll be safe – brave little man that he is!) Be it noted for the present, however, that he could hardly wait until the Epiphany Mes­senger was in the tomb before he hurried to rid himself of the name, “Herald of the Epiphany,” and replace it with the name, “Bible Standard” – a name which he himself, has borrowed from early in the Epiphany (See E-10:72,73,74,75). We adopted our name because we are still Heralding the Epiphany,” and the name clearly declares our posi­tion; whereas, R. G. Jolly is now “Heralding the Basileia;” without any of his publi­cations declaring such in their nomenclature. Consistency, thou art a Jewel!


During the Question Meeting the question was asked: “How much did the Krewson lawsuit cost?” On this R. G. Jolly went into about ten minutes of detail to relate what a “bargain” his lawyers had given him; but never once did he reveal the figures, which would allow the questioner to determine the matter for himself. Certainly, any contributor would have a right to know how his money is being spent; but he knew no more at the end of R. G. Jolly's ten minutes than he did before asking. This is in exact parallel to cases described by Brother Russell on pp. 289-296 of the Question Book. On p. 294, par. 1, is the following:

“'Brother Russell,' he said, 'instead of trying to catch him and hold him for an hour, I thought I would have to try to get loose myself, and prevent him from holding me.' I said, 'No, brother, you have not the idea; you will have to try to hold them down to the question, because they cannot answer it, and they know they cannot, and they will try to get you mixed up. And they will not admit they cannot answer it.'“

Then in another similar case, Brother Russell gives us this: '“I said, 'Brother, I guess the reason why he did not was because he did not know how to answer it, and thought that was the best way to get out of it.'“

We have given these excerpts from That Faithful and Wise Servant's answer to the question, ''When will the Great Company suffer the Great Tribulation, and will they be at the marriage supper of the Lamb?” found on pp. 289-296 of the Question Book. It would require too much space to quote all of it, but we urge our readers to see all of this answer, if they have the Question Books and note carefully how Brother Russell describes the similar technique of Big Babylon's “sleight-of-hand' artists (R. G. Jolly's kinsmen in Big Babylon – the Great Company leaders there!).

In connection with the question on the cost of the Krewson lawsuit, we quote. a paragraph from the May 1956 Present Truth, p. 52, col. 1, par. 1, in which R. G, Jolly gives the brethren just as clear (?) a report of the finances of the Bible House as he did with the question at this Labor Day Convention on the Krewson lawsuit:

''We believe that our carefulness in handling the funds donated by the brethren for the Truth work will have the Lord's approval, as well as the approval of the brethren in general. We believe that the brethren will also appreciate knowing that we have had an audit of the L.H.M.M. finances made, beginning from the time Bro. Johnson had the last audit made, and that we have the auditor's notarized statement that the books are in good order.”


The foregoing was the pronounced and oft-repeated slogan of the Parousia Messenger; and so intent was he in observing the practice that he would not even put on a ''poor mouth,” as he himself stated it. This was in keeping with the course of our Lord and the Apostles – as it also is with us. With seats free, and no collections, we can easily afford to tell the Truth! However, at every day's session of this Convention attention was directed to the box on the table to receive donations; and each noon the box in the dining room was stressed, where contributions could be made to defray the cost of the food served. It is our own opinion that when a board is spread, and guests invited to eat – and then invited to pay for what they eat – such conduct is just about the absolute zero of “cheap” decorum. Early in the Epiphany, while we were yet with the Dayton Ohio Class of the Society, that Class was having a small Convention, rather costly, and the suggestion was made that neighboring Classes be invited to contribute to the spiritual feast to which they were being invited. At which we ourselves stated that such a course just reminded us of a man in the street who was wearing a silk shirt, but his underwear had not been washed for a month. After that there was no more said about appealing for contributions!

Also, at the Saturday evening Business Meeting R. G. Jolly gave consider­able time and loud talk to his great appreciation for contributions of even One Dollar, because such help him to send Bibles, etc., to the poor heathen in Africa. Here again he for­sakes the elevating high standard set before us by the “Laodicean Star,” and reverts to the technique and purpose that prevailed throughout Christendom a hundred years ago, at which time great stress was also given to “help the poor heathen” gain “salvation.” Just some more Big Babylon technique!


A question was propounded, asking proof on this subject. It was the first ques­tion R. G. Jolly considered in the Monday morning Question Meeting. As the questions were handed to Chairman August Gohlke by the various ushers, we noticed he kept putting them underneath – to be sure that this Campers question would have first attention. It had all the appearances of a “plant,” because R. G. Jolly took a full forty minutes to answer – just about an ordinary discourse for the average speaker; and this gave him ample excuse for not having “time” to answer quite a few other questions that had come to the platform.

As “proof” he offered three Scriptures: (1) Leviticus 12, (2) Rev. 22:11, (3) Moses' two stays in the Mount of 40 days each. R. G. Jolly said he had “many more Scriptures”; but forty minutes wasn't sufficient time even to mention them. As we have previously pointed out, Leviticus 12 has to do only with the purifying of the Little Flock and Great Company developing Truths, which were freed of error by 1914 and 1954 respectively – and the cleansed Servants who minister those Truths. There is not the slightest hint that it involves the call of Youthful Worthies or Campers Consecrated; that is just something R. G. Jolly is reading into it to suit his purposes; thus, his analysis is not exegesis, it is eisegesis!

Next, we examine Moses' second stay of 40 days in the Mount, which R. G. Jolly contends is antityped from 1914 to 1954. Even assuming his contention to be correct, there is here also nothing in the picture that by any stretch of the imagination could involve the call of “Youthful Worthies or Campers Consecrated. But, aside from this, Ex. 34:33 states, “Till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a veil on his face.” Note now the Berean Comments: “A veil on his face – typifying the Ancient Worthies.” Why does R. G. Jolly ignore this in his interpre­tation? Can he possibly fit it into 1954? And, if he is forced to ignore such a vital component of the picture to reach his strained interpretation, are we not forced to question both his sincerity, and his ability to be Pastor and Teacher?

Take now Rev. 22:11: Brother Johnson expounds this on p 114 of Vol. 10; and R. G. Jolly gave profuse comment on p. 114 – ignoring, of course, many of its essential parts – just as he did with the Moses episode. Page 114 says, “these exhortations will be given by the Epiphany Messenger (when writing Vol, 10 in 1938-40, Brother Johnson was firmly convinced he would be here to do this in 1954JJH); for in the order given they will not come until from 1954 onward.” Here again R. G. Jolly must violate all exegetical logic in a strained attempt to meet 1954. He himself is now admitting that the application could not apply before 1954; yet another set of his teachings has the ''Holy'' Class (the Saints) com­pletely out of his picture in 1950 – four years before he now wants his interpretation to apply, Of course, it doesn't bother him at all to have one vital segment of his circle falling by the wayside before the time-setting he now attempts to “prove.”

If R. G. Jolly really believes Brother Johnson was the Epiphany Messenger (and he shouts his approval whenever it seems to suit his purpose), let him consider now 2 Chron. 7:11, “Solomon finished the house of the Lord,” Brother Johnson's own inter­pretation of “finishing the house of the Lord” is that Brother Johnson himself classi­fied God's people in their Epiphany relations and purposes. If Brother Johnson “finished the house,” why, then, is it now necessary for a Levite to put an addition to it in the form of Campers Consecrated? Bear in mind that R. G. Jolly contends his Campers are in the Household of Faith in his newly defined “Camp”; they are so closely related to the Youthful Worthies that it's almost impossible to tell them apart! A dear sister reminded us of a similar contention by That Evil Servant in connection with his 'brand' of converts: “When Jehu and Jonadab (who rode in the chariot to­getherJJH) are out in the service, you can't tell which is which”! Indeed, some one his well designated R. G. Jolly's new converts as “Consecrated CAMPERS”!

In a separate question on this subject – “Are Consecrated Campers on the same narrow way with the Youthful Worthies?” – R. G. Jolly answered, No! Let us go back now, and examine what he said in July 1955 PT, p. 57, and 58:

“Thus the Youthful Worthies (and the Consecrated Epiphany Campers), like the Great Company, are surely traveling a narrow way.”

It is true the word “same” is not in the above quotation; but, when he says all three classes are “like,” it certainly can mean only one and the same thing. Of course, he is so befuddled by Azazel that we doubt he is certain in his own mind just what he does believe. Also, like That Evil Servant, he basks in the assurance that “you can fool some of the people all of the time”; and such belief feeds the ego of all Perverters (Azazel means Perverter). Sad to relate, That Evil Servant never once realized that the one person being fooled most of all was himself; and R. G. Jolly will receive a similar rating if he continues in his present course. As we observed him during this meeting, several times we gave silent appraisal of him: You poor little man; YOU POOR LITTLE MAN! It seems to bother him not at all to present to trusting brethren false interpretations, or even open falsehoods whenever it suits his purpose, So again we repeat, You poor little man! And we say this designedly and with true pity for his condition – because his rating could have been quite high had he been faithful to his consecration vows; it would have been so high that he would have realized his High Calling hope. King Saul offers a very clear type of R. G. Jolly and other crown-lost leaders, who were at one time “from his shoulders and upward higher than any of the people.” (I Sam. 9:2) King Saul types crown-lost leaders up to Armageddon.

But what about those who succumb to his symbolic “witchcraft” (especially deceptive false teachings)? It will be very similar to many who closed their eyes, opened their mouths, and swallowed the perversions of That Evil Servant. Once they awoke, many of them just went into seclusion – much the same as a beaten puppy slinking away with his tail between his legs. This will be the same fate with many now being deceived by this uncleansed Levite; and, in the finished picture, “They will cease altogether to be of the Household of Faith.” (See E-4:406)


When R. G. Jolly has been specially humiliated by our refutations, as he has been by our September article sent out before this Labor Day Convention, he usually resorts to the Thousand-Year-Reign of The Christ, and the “sifter”.(?) who is teaching error thereon. When Brother Johnson refuted such errorists as J. F. Rutherford for beginning the Reign by gathering his Great Multitude as his Restitution converts, we are certain that he would have just as vigorously attacked R. G. Jolly for 'gathering' (or separat­ing) the good Sheep (Restitutionists), and doing a separating work ahead of the Kingdom proper; because that is what he is doing, no matter under what label he 'labors' (Psa. 107:12). Self-evidently, he thinks he is now selecting the very chief Restitu­tionists (not permitting The Christ to decide that!). At least that is all he is promising his new converts up to the present time: They will be higher than all the other quasi-elect!

We have repeatedly quoted Brother Russell where he tells us that the King­dom Reign began in no sense of the word before 1912; also, where he tells us that the Kingdom was set up at September 21, 1914. Also, we have referred to Brother Johnson's statement that the Saints after that time are referred to as the Bride of Christ for the first time – ­and that while some of them are still in the flesh. We will cite the references for our readers' benefit, and will be happy to send copies of any of these articles to any who request them. See our May 1, 1956, No. 9 – where Bro. Russell says The Reign of Christ did not in any sense of the word begin in the past (written in 1912); Brother Johnson's statement that the Little Flock is referred to as the Bride of Christ after 1914 (with some in the flesh) – see our paper No. 19, Feb. 1, 1957; see our No. 44, July 1, 1958 for quotations from Bro. Russell re the setting up of the Kingdom on Sept. 21, 1914. At no time did Bro. Russell ever state, from 1912 onward, that the Kingdom reign began in 1874, as R. G. Jolly now contends. Yet he accuses us of being “out of harmony” with the Parousia Messenger on this subject!

R. G. Jolly has his Campers Consecrated walking “a narrow way” with (or 'like') the Great Company and Youthful Worthies, without having the sustaining promises that assist these two elect classes to walk this 'difficult' way (and as a reward these Campers Consecrated will be transferred – demoted – from the Household of Faith to a “Works Justi­fication” during the Mediatorial Reign!). We wouldn't be surprised if R. G. Jolly tells them privately that no one can discern the difference (during the Mediatorial Kingdom) between the physically perfect Youth­ful Worthy Princes (“in all the earth”) and the physically imperfect “princeship” he describes for his Campers Consecrated – to help sustain them along “a narrow way.” Considering R. G. Jolly's predicament with his Campers Consecrated jumble, it does not surprise us to hear him shout about the “Sifter” who is “out of harmony” with Bro. Russell on the Thousand-Year Reign of Christ, and who is teaching error on the Last Saint and the Zechariah type. Apparently R. G. Jolly needs further elaboration on these three subjects, which we expect to present in detail in a future article, D.v. As for ourselves, we have no desire to join in with the 'labor' (Psa. 107:12) of such Perverters (Azazel means Perverter) as JW's and R. G. Jolly to now “save” the non-elect. We repeat: We have no desire to join in with those who say in their hearts, ''My Lord Delayeth.”


Occasionally the question comes to us – 'Why do you come here if you don't agree with us? We could answer by asking them whether they ever go among groups with whom they don't agree? And, Why did Jesus go into the synagogue when He knew those hypocriti­cal power-grasping leaders hated Him? (Of course, the record is clear: “They hated Me without a cause.”) Also, why did St. Paul go into the synagogue, where also were “the Jews who took counsel to kill him”? (Acts 9:23) Elaborate answer is not necessary for such insipid inquiries; but we believe it well now to make our own position clear: We are simply obeying the command of our Lord (Luke 34:47): “Repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” As those instructed in Epiphany Truth know, Canaan for Gospel-Age purposes types the sphere of the Truth and its Spirits And, Jerusalem being the Capitol of that land, would indicate that organization dominant in the sphere of the Truth. During our dear Brother Johnson's life, the LHMM, with him at its head, was foremost in the sphere of the Truth. Thus, in our attempts to administer the Truth first of all to those in the LHMM, we are “beginning at Jerusalem.” This does not mean we neglect all others, because some effort is made toward Saints and “Sinners” in Little Babylon – toward nominal Christians in Big Babylon – or even toward unbelievers. We are still motivated by the Apostle Paul's state­ment, “I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” The Apostle did not mean we are to use all means “fair and foul” to gain some, as some Great Company leaders apparently conclude; what he meant is that we use “all means” provided by the Lord through His Arrangements for His faithful people.

Nor are we without some cordial reception at the LHMM gatherings; and one such com­pensates richly for a dozen we may meet who apparently are totally unschooled in the mean­ing of “the spirit of the Truth.” As Brother Russell was reported to have said, “I'd rather have five earnest consecrated brethren any time than a whole room full of others.” So say we also!

To all our readers we extend the fond wish that the Lord may “feed them according to the integrity of His heart; and guide them by the skillfulness of His hands.” (Psa. 78:72) And we also offer the timely warning to those now encourag­ing R. G. Jolly and his partisan supporters in their evil deeds: “Thou shall not follow a multitude to do evil; neither to wrest judgment.... Keep thou far from a false matter and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked.” (Ex. 23:2-7)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim



Our dear Brother Hoefle: – May Faith, Hope and Love be multiplied unto you through our Lord and Master!

Your good letter dated Aug. 10 informing us of the new tract is received.

We went over the copy with care and we heartily agree it is very appropriate as a follow-up of the Gideon tracts, as you suggest. The Two Salvations tract will surely be more help to the earnest inquirer. Please let us have 200. We assure you and all with you of our love and prayers. Your brethren by His Grace,

The Crofts Hill Ecclesia (JAMAICA)


Dear Brother and Sister Hoefle: Christian Greetings!

It is again my pleasant duty to extend to you the Class' sincere thanks for your recent visit to us. We were greatly refreshed by your discourses, and specially appreciated the way you frequently pointed us to the Star Members' writ­ings. May the Lord continue to use you to remind us, lest we forget.

I am enclosing copy of letter from Brother ------- (the blind brother whom you visited at Manzanilla) to Brother Roach. He undoubtedly enjoyed the visit. We all join in sending sincere Christian love to both of you, and all the friends there.

Yours by His Grace – Secretary-Treasurer (TRINIDAD)


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Loving greetings of Grace and Peace!

This is to let you know that I have run out of tracts for the obituary work, and would like more when you can spare the time. Also, I think the Two Salvations will be a splendid article for those whose interest is being aroused. You may send me some, and I will try to place each one wisely...... The question has just come to my mind, Would it be advisable to send them to those in the different Truth groups, who may have forgotten – and for others who may not know of the importance of the TWO Salvations – the precious gift to us from Brother Russell!

I am expecting that your visit to Trinidad was a blessing and fruitful. Also, that your attendance at Philadelphia Convention will accomplish that which our Lord will be pleased and prosper in it.

I heard from Sr.------- today, and she wrote of her pleasure and faith in your work.

May you both be strong and of good courage and bring deep blessings upon your service.

By His Grace, -------  (MASSACHUSETTS)


Dear Brother Hoefle: - Greetings of Love in our Redeemer's Name!

We are quite sure that recent experiences at Trinidad and the Philadelphia Convention have been spiritually profitable to you both, and has resulted in blessing upon quite a few dear brethren whom you met and had fellowship. We are quite sure that the Lord will notice many things which would have His blessing upon all those in particular whom He found taking heed to what you have had to say to them; and it will give us much pleasure to read about the meetings held. I am writing to dear Bro. Roach.

Our JW friend came last Sunday. We are sure you will fully understand when I say that he received a great blessing in our home, hearing things as never before from us..... When we told him we had in our home the full set of Seven Volumes, six of which are entirely our dear Pastor's writings, he did show much interest and some excitement – letting us understand how delighted he would be to get possession of these (and even offered to make an exchange for some of the Jehovah's Witness Volumes, including “The New World Bible” – which we promptly refused). You will understand that we did this for a few very good reasons. I had been making this a matter of prayer for a long time (for a set of these years ago), when, just picture me standing at our front door in answer to a knock, and there was a dear Brother to ask me if I would care to have a full set of the bound Watch Towers! If ever an answer to prayer was swift, that surely was... One thing the JW Brother told us, that among them quite a large number he could not feel justified in calling brethren.........

I must close with our united love and best wishes in the Lord ... Bro ------- (ENGLAND)


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Christian greetings in His dear Name!

I realize you dear ones have a lot of worthy work and labor at this time, so I will be brief.... Your welcome letter of August 2 enjoyed by each of us. But I am disappointed in Uncle Sam's service. The Sept. issue #99 –­ ''Responding to the Trumpet's Call – has not been received. This is the first issue I have missed, I read Sister's..... #99, which she received about the 12th. I can't afford to miss it, so am asking you to send me another. Whoever received my copy... I do hope will read it and get curious enough to send for more Truth literature.... I do pray for you dear ones in your service for the Lord in the work you are doing. The results may seem slow at times, but we know in “due time” your efforts and labor in God's Word (Bible Truths) will be proven to be for the “love and need of other” – and they will be blessed.... I'm sorry to ask you for extra work in sending me another copy, but I can't miss any, as I save them and re-read.

Christian love and blessing in this month's effort in services. Your Sr. ------- (CALIFORNIA)


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and peace in our Beloved Master!

It is with great pleasure that we pen these few lines to you –­ hoping that you both are quite well and “rejoicing in the Lord” – because you are devoted to this great work, sincerely and honestly. Brother and I receive your letters each month–- which is in defense of the Parousia and Epiphany Truth; and we trust our dear Heavenly Father will strengthen you to continue in this great work which you have so unselfishly undertaken. Brother and I study your writings and receive rich blessing –­ and thank our dear Heavenly Father from the bottom of our hearts for being so richly blessed. We can understand your writings, they seem so clear....

Now, dear Brother, no doubt you will be going to the Philadelphia Conven­tion, so we would love to have you call on us, if possible, and give us a talk (spiritual food). We could have the temporal food, as I would love to have you come for dinner if you can make it, and any of the dear friends in your party.... And I am sure it will be a great pleasure to see you all again in person. It was at Bro....... two years ago when you spoke on Psalms 1. We enjoyed is so much.....

With much Christian love to you and Sister and all.... dear friends..

Brother and Sister ------- (NEW JERSEY)


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Greetings in our dear Redeemer's name!

We are happy to tell you we are still on the Mountain Top; indeed we are refreshed and strengthened through your visit to our Ecclesia in Trinidad – ­for which we are very thankful to our dear Heavenly Father and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

What I wanted to tell you on our way to Manzanilla was that I want to withdraw certain statements made as to R. G. Jolly in my letter to you published October 1, 1962. The part I want to withdraw is from page 7, eleven lines from top, which reads as follows: “for it was R. G. Jolly (a guest) and elder Brother Robertson, who arranged for the Chairman, and that he (R. G. Jolly) would be guest speaker – and that I would do the Bible reading for the Memorial service. Bro. Khan was to serve the wine and Bro. Robertson the bread.” This is all I wish to withdraw. As you may have noticed, in the Present Truth for Nov-Dec. 1962 R. G. Jolly states that he was apprised by letter one month before that he was to be guest speaker for the Memorial for 1962, so I am with­drawing that part from the letter. I should have said the following words – “Now this is exactly what R. G. Jolly did: The night of the Memorial Brother Jolly handed a program to the Chairman (after the service had started with a hymn and prayer), dictating in detail how the service should be conducted. In the same Present Truth, page 90, par. 2, R. G. Jolly states the Chairman must be given certain latitude as to various details; but any one can note under such circumstances the Chairman would have no latitude at all – after a program was given to him to follow. That is why I said the charge 'clericalism' made against Bro. Roach fits him (R. G. Jolly) – for I was answer­ing this charge of 'clericalism' made against Bro. Roach.

Warm Christian love to you and all with you. By his Grace, Bro. ------ (TRINIDAD)