My dear Brethren: Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!
As promised in our September issue, we now consider certain features of the above paper, in which R. G, Jolly indulges in his usual name-calling - ”Chronic faultfinder, opposing errorist,” etc. -in a desperate effort to retain in “the snare of the fowler” those of his readers that he has persuaded not to read our papers. (See Acts 13:8-10) Indeed, we are quite happy it is not necessary for us to indulge in name-calling. All we have to do is tell the truth about RGJ; that is more than enough! As we have previously quoted, “You can fool some of the people all the time, and all the people some of the time,” but it needs no argument that we never fool the Lord any of the time. Nor have the members of the “great multitude fooled Him any of the time, notwithstanding all their loud professions and claims of “great works” (which will be burned). When they said “Lord, Lord, open to us” (Matt. 25:11) He knew them not. He is now manifesting His rejection of that Class (in this Epiphany period) by their “strong delusion” (See 2 Thes. 2: 11-also Berean Comments) And by such tactics, “Offenses needs must come, but woe unto him, through whom they come.” (Luke 17:1) To such the Lord pronounces the sentence, “There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt, 25:30--See Berean Comments).
On pages 50-52 R. G. Jolly treats of “The Parable of the Pounds,” as though we were in the Parousia and have no additional special Epiphany light on the subject as though he were one of the crown-lost leaders in Little Babylon who refused Epiphany Truth. He refers to “a considerable class” and then proceeds to classify the “wicked servant” as the “foolish virgins the Bride’s companions, a great multitude, not wholly copies of God’s dear son, those who all their lifetime were subject to bondage through fear of death.” (“They were loyal to God, but they did no more than maintain their loyalty,” Bro. Russell says--Question Book, p: 309) All this nomenclature is scriptural and correctly applied, but why stop there? Why not clearly describe the “Great Company” so clearly and superbly described by Brother Russell in many places -and especially by the Epiphany messenger in Volumes 15 and 4? Why not also classify them as the “unprofitable servant” of Matt. 25:30; and why not explain that the word ‘‘wicked’’ in Luke 19:22 is from the Greek word “poneros,” meaning “Bad malignant, miserable”? And why not explain, too, that this same word “poneros,’’-is translated “evil” 38 times in the New Testament? We know that he would probably have done this before 1938 -so, if he is the ‘cleansed’ Levite leader he claims to be, why shouldn’t he remember this pertinent Epiphany Truth? But above all, why did he not include the following from the Epiphany Messenger in his treatment of this Pounds Parable?
“Remembering that the slothful and wicked servant (of this Pounds Parable--JJH) represents the Great Company, we can see how, from the standpoint of speaking of a part of a thing for its whole, the pound can be taken from the one and given to the other. In the first place, that part of the pound that consists of acceptableness of the human all for sacrificial purposes is taken entirely away from the Great Company (Note: They have no part in the sacrificial service -sin-offering and most certainly no part in the Star Members’ prerogatives, something they didn’t even have when they retained their crowns---JJH); for its humanity ceases to be a part of the Lord’s antitypica1 Goat … Henceforth lacking essential features of the pound, they may be properly spoken of as having their pound taken from them (which the Scripture corroborates--JJH) …as long as they retain their place in the Great Company, they still retain the robe of Christ’s righteousness; but they have spotted it badly (especially by withholding Present Truth and perverting both Parousia and Epiphany Truth as R. G. Jolly is now doing--JJH). The Lord gives the pound taken from the slothful, to the faithful servants...a notable and overshadowing instance in which the Lord took away both the pounds and the talents from the Great Company in the Truth as a class, and gave them to the Little Flock as a class....giving these to the Little Flock for Jordan’s first smiting from 1914 to 1916” (E-6:229,230 -And this is something That Servant didn’t make clear - the Truth on the subject not being revealed to him. It was for the Epiphany Messenger.)
Having omitted the foregoing very vital and clarifying substance of the Pounds Parable, he yet has the brazen effrontery of Azazel to state in his first paragraph on p. 60:
“It is only as we hold to ALL (emphasis by RGJ himself!) the Scriptures as expounded by the two Messengers and harmonize them properly that we have the fulness of the Truth.”
In the person of R. G. Jolly we have the only leader of any Truth group anywhere (so far as we know) who admits he is a crown-loser, thus self-evidently confessing that he has had his pound taken from him. Yet this same crown lost leader (who lost his pound .. as qualified by Brother Johnson in the quotation aforegoing from E-6 :22.9) now hurries to tell us he knows all about it (?) in producing this article with the most salient Epiphany Truth omitted -all the time claiming that he is “holding fast” to both Parousia and Epiphany Truth! Only one befuddled by Azazel would attempt such a performance. Truly, Fools (foolish virgins) rush in where Angels fear to tread! Understand, of course, had this been produced by a crown-lost leader in other groups -who never claimed to have received Epiphany Truth -then we couldn’t “find too much fault” (except their refusal to accept the Truth). Yes, indeed, he is “holding to ALL the two Messengers’ taught”! And we readily recognize that he is doing so when he omits vital points on the Great Company (clear Epiphany Truth) as he “smooths” the way for himself and others of his kind. We recognize, of course, that he is smarting under the crushing refutation we gave him on the Talents Parable; and we realize only too well that he was prodded to his present attempt with the “pound” by Azazel in an effort to humiliate him still further. And we urge our readers to believe we make this latter statement in sympathy, and without rancor or malice.
Nevertheless, in this connection we believe it in order to impress upon our readers that R. G. Jolly admits he has lost his pound -admits that he is a part of the “unprofitable servant” of Matt 25:30, cast “into outer darkness” (error) admits he failed in full faithfulness to smite Jordan in 1914·16 -admits he was forced from the Holy and away from the Lampstand, the Shewbread and the Golden Altar in 1938, thus receiving the first feature of his fit-man experiences (unfavorable circumstances) -admits he has lost his anointing (the spirit of understanding) all of these things being part and parcel of his open confession that he has lost his crown. And with all of this, Brother Johnson -as late as 1943 -openly published that he was not then yet cleansed; yet seven short years later he claims (by his acts) to have emerged from his “captivity in the dungeon” (See Ex. 12:29) with all the answers to all the questions, and just about every answer wrong. It is little wonder his failures have been so pronounced; that his humiliations have been so acute (as in the Talents controversy, and now in the Pounds debacle, etc.). And this will continue to be his portion until he makes open confession and recants with that “godly sorrow (that) worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of” (2 Cor. 7:10 -See Berean Comment), or is eventually forced from the Household completely.
THE EPIPHANY CAMP IN THE FINISHED PICTURE
In the sub-caption as above on page 61 R. G. Jolly offers some more of his “profane, empty declamations” (2 Tim. 2:16, Dia.); so we would begin by asking just one simple question: Are we now in the finished Epiphany, or are we not? If he knows whereof he speaks, then surely he should have an-answer for this, but we opine he will not publish one, because if he does he wil1 find himself. In a quagmire of confusion whichever way he answers. Furthermore in the very quotation he gives from E-10:672 why does he not include the following? “Non-Truth Great Company and youthful Worthy brethren and new ones not yet consecrated are to be won for the Truth, some of whom will be won before Babylon is destroyed and others of them afterward.” Quite often he resorts to the evil of quoting from the Messengers, or from Scripture, citations that definitely disprove his contention, so we now quote what Brother Johnson said early in the Epiphany of similar would-be somebodies!
“Why do they so often quote passages to prove points positively disproven by those very passages? Is it not because they are in Azazel’s hands, and are thus blinded by him, and at his direction palm off his errors on the dear unsuspecting sheep of God’s Flock?
And we must remember, too, that this is the first time in Gospel-Age history where we have a self-admitted crown-lost leader, loudly contending that he is ‘cleansed,’ and at the same time revolutionizing against great light -having both Parousia and Epiphany Truth at his disposal, He admits that he has been removed from the “more than conqueror” Class; but by his perversions and ‘gazing’ clearly manifests that he is not yet of this “conqueror” (cleansed Levite.) Class, Brother Russell explains ----- these two classes on p. 138, Question Book: “A conqueror is one who finally triumphs. The Great Company class will all be conquerors”, except those who will die the second death.....To be more than a conqueror is to do something more, something greater, than to enter eternal life by the skin of the teeth, (It seems that Brother Russell classifies all Great Company as entering eternal life by the skin of the teeth. (JJH) A more than conqueror does something special. For instance, the Lord Jesus not merely kept the law, but additionally he laid down his life, sacrificially. So he was more than a mere conqueror.”
And be it noted, that prior to his manifestation in 1938, RGJ was equally emphatic with Brother Johnson in his description of crown-lost leaders in other groups -quite blissful in his ignorance that he was really talking about himself. Prior to 1938 he was much more busily engaged, as a Pilgrim under the Epiphany Messenger’s supervision, with crown-lost leaders than we now are engaged with discussing him and his errors (and, be it further noted, that: he was apparently very clear on Tentative Justification, the Camp and the Court, etc., before 1938 but unfaithfulness makes one forget formerly-held truths, See E-13:488, bottom). But what a reversal we see in him now! Time after time he attempts to minimize, or pervert Scriptural denunciations of the Measurably Faithful Class -for himself chiefly, as well as for any others of that Class that may now agree with him. Instead of carrying on with the Epiphany Truth and manifestations (for the special benefit of his ‘kinsmen’), he is now just as busy in attempting to replace himself in the “good and faithful Servant” Class -in the “faithful unto death” Class (Rev. 2:10 having exclusive application to the Litt1e Flock) -attempting to seize for himself a “cup”-an exclusive privilege of the Star Members -See E-8:l92, 193; E-9:383; E-10: XXIV, appendix;··”E··U:1.91.), and offering “strange fire” (false doctrine· See E-U: 190, bottom, and p, 191) in such usurpation. Certainly, all of this now makes his position much more precarious than those of his “kinsmen” who err through ignorance (of Epiphany Truth particuarly), “From anyone to whom much is given much will be required.” (Luke 12:l.8--Dia.) And our Lord’s words apply with equal force to those of his partisan Great Company and Youthful Worthy supporters who now encourage him in his wayward course.
Then he makes passing reference to E-10:114, but even he does not have the audacity to quote the complete context, which we now do as follows: “Another and still stronger reason that J is the “he”of verse 10 is this: that the message of v. 11 will not be due-until Oct. 1954, when the Epiphany. begins to lap --into the Basileia, Kingdom; for 1954 is the date that the last member of the Great Company will get his first enlightenment that will bring him into the Truth by Passover, 1956: after 1954 no more Youthful Worthies will be won (Note: This one clause is all RGJ seizes upon to support his “house built upon the sand”--JJH); and after 1954 no more persons will enter the tentatively justified state. (This one clause alone makes a shambles of the entire three pages RGJ offers to “prove” his points--JJH) Hence the exhortation: “He that is unjust (the tentatively justified, who are not actually justified, not just), let him be unjust still (remain tentatively justified, and not consecrate); and he that is filthy (the impenitent Sinners, who in no sense are clean), let him be filthy still (remain in his then condition); and he that is righteous (Levites of the Great Company and youthful Worthies, who, being in the Court, are righteous), let him be righteous still; and he that is holy (Priests are holy, since they are in the Holy), let him be holy still.” Certainly, when we come to a time when no more consecrations are possible for Gospel-Age purposes, it would be useless to exhort the tentatively justified to consecrate (This refers to the 1954. date, now much stressed by RGJ--yet he is not only urging such to consecrate as “useful” even here in 1965--11 years later--but he also is trying to bring new ones to accept his newly concocted tentative justification in the Camp!-JJH) and sinners to repent, for the tentatively justified and the sinners could arise no higher from their standings before God under such a condition (yet it is only since 1954 that RGJ is building his Epiphany Camp “in the finished picture” with his Consecrated Tentatively-justified (?) Campers--JJH); hence, only at such a time could the first and second exhortations of v. 11 be given, but, of course, the exhortation for the Great Company, Youthful Worthies and Priests to continue faithful will remain appropriate as long as they are in the earth. Thus the nature of these four exhortations, coming in the order in which they come in v. 11, proves that these exhortations will be given by the Epiphany messenger; for in the order given they will not come until from 1954 onward (even though the Epiphany Messenger died in 1950 -four years before these predicted events should occur-RGJ is offering this citation to ‘prove’, his 1954 date--JJH).”
Of course, only one befuddled by Azazel would select one lean and isolated clause from such copious declaration to ‘prove’ his point -which reveals the desperation in which he now finds himself; and only one befuddled by Azazel would have the temerity to emphasize that we should have “ALL from the Messengers” to keep in balance our beliefs, as he himself ignores completely about 95% of the foregoing quotation; and as he ignored the Epiphany clarification of the Pounds Parable. As we have previously stated, it is the interpretation of Rev. 22:10-11 that governs in this matter, the date 1954 being only incidental and subordinate to the interpretation. We ourselves accept the entire interpretation as correct; but, since the interpretation did not operate at 1954 (anymore than it operated in 1950 at the demise of the Epiphany Messenger), we believe it is only the most elemental of Scriptural exegesis that should cause us to recognize the mistake in the date-- just as was true of Brother Russell’s mistakes when his expectations did not materialize in 1914-1915 as to the length of the Time of Trouble (the same also being true of the Epiphany Messenger on his 1954 date as respects the length of the Time of Trouble: the Epiphany and the Time of Trouble are identical). “Are we now in the “finished picture” of the Time of Trouble? In 1954 just nothing occurred to verify that date as the end of the Time of Trouble; therefore, one befuddled by Azazel would continue to stress such a date, and refer to a quotation which directly contradicts his present contention. Does he claim that no Great Company can now lose his standing, and no Youthful Worthy can be remanded to the Camp, to parallel the Saints condition in 1914 with 1954-56? Does he also claim we are now in the finished picture of the Time of Trouble? We doubt that even he is so befuddled by Azazel that he would make such a claim. But, since the Time of Trouble and the Epiphany are identical, we should - when speaking of “the finished picture” -be able to substitute Time of Trouble for Epiphany any time we discuss the subject. Let R. G. Jolly try that in his discussions under review; then his Levitical nonsense will be manifest to all.
And, since he insists upon considering “ALL Scripture” pertaining to any given subject, why does he continue to ignore Psa. 46:1-3; Elijah’s whirlwind ascent into Heaven; and Zech. 8:10 -”Before those days hire for man could not be obtained, and hire for beast was there none. And neither to him who went out, nor to him who came in was there success by reason of the danger, Yea I let all men loose each one against his neighbor,” (Rotherham) Here is Brother Johnson’s comment on this latter text:
“The connection shows that this is to occur after the foundation of the Church beyond the vail was laid, but before the glorified temple would be completed. Hence, it evidently refers to the time of Anarchy after Armageddon).”(E-6:630, par. 1) Yet, RGJ has his temple completed not only before Anarchy, but more than fifteen years before the violent features of Armageddon have even commenced! And he is the one who is counseling that “ALL Scripture” should be considered on any given subject! Of course, all of this is in keeping with the course of his “kinsmen” of the past, those crown-lost leaders who perverted every Stewardship doctrine entrusted to them by the star Members. (See E-8:192, past middle) He is now very much occupied in perverting (Azazel means Perverter) Brother Johnson’s Stewardship doctrine: The Epiphany and its relation to the Epiphany Elect -with his “changing laws” (doctrines) of the Court and Camp. Also, new doctrines are “gazing” for all but Star Members. See E-l0 XXIV, appendix; and Moses, Aaron and Miriam –Type and Antitype in Chapter 2 of Epiphany Vol. 9. He is also completely silent on the Samson picture (see Berean Comment on Judges 16:30), although we have repeatedly emphasized Brother Russell’s clear explanation of this type as a decisive contradiction to his present contentions.
CONCERNING TENTATIVE JUSTIFICATION
And with similar Azazelian trickery he accuses JJH of That Evil Servant’s tactics in handling the subject of Tentative Justification (accuses us of that which he himself is most guilty), stressing that we use a quotation from 1920 to bolster our views. Even if that were true -which it is not -that 1920 quotation is repeated in Brother Johnson’s publications of 1938, with no change whatever suggested by him. Thus, anyone would be justified in naming that as a 1938 quotation – a fact that anyone not befuddled by Azazel would know, as it is elemental. However, we now offer a number of other citations from both Messengers that completely disprove his entire “house built upon the sand” -the “house built upon the sand” being the Great Company structure because it has been built by the “unprofitable servant” of Matt. 25:30 and the “wicked servant” of Luke 19:22. Our first reference is from E-6:713:
“These two arguments prove that the New Covenant must operate after faith (tentative -JJH) justification ceases to operate, i.e., after the Gospel Age.”
If we are now in the Epiphany as distinct from the Gospel Age (as RGJ now claims, with which, however, we do not agree, as we believe the Epiphany is the last special period of the Gospel Age, just as the Epiphany Messenger taught), then faith justification is no longer in operation -no longer available for anyone -according to the above citation. We now offer something from E-11:167, 170:
“Only during the Gospel Age can our Lord’s merit be appropriated by faith alone (thus, if the Gospel-Age picture in any sense is completed, as RGJ now contends, then faith -tentative -justification must be a thing of the past--JJH) ....there will be no more faith justification working during the Millennium….When this (Gospel) Age ends Christ’s merit will cease to be an imputable thing.”
Also the following by the Epiphany Messenger: “The fact that all Israelites of the camp who left Egypt at the age of 20 years and upwards, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the wilderness under God’s disapproval (Heb. 3:7 – 4:2) demonstrates that the camp represents, for the Gospel Age, those rebellious nominal people of God, who though desiring some harmony with God, either never attain or else cease to retain even Tentative Justification, i.e., in the finished picture, those who are less than tentatively justified.” -(E-6: 195. bottom) “It does not allow for any symbolization of that condition in which unconsecrated believers are – a condition by far more important than that typed by the Camp (the Court condition is the only place where Tentative Justification is pictured, which Brother Johnson tells us is a “condition by far more important than that typed by the Camp” -JJH) ...One’s journey from the Camp to the Gate cannot at any stage represent a real faith in Christ as Savior, inasmuch as the Court curtain represents things connected with faith -the outside of it a ‘wall of unbelief’ in Christ’s righteousness to those outside, the inside, of it a ‘wall of faith’ in Christ’s righteousness to those inside.” (E-6:l99) We have been very pronounced in presenting this Truth against RGJ’s errors on the Camp: No place in the Camp to symbolize Tentative Justification, much less consecration!
Tentative Justification and the imputation of Christ’s merit in this Gospel Faith Age are inseparable; and let us keep in mind that every word Brother Johnson ever wrote about either was after we had come into the Epiphany (he was the Epiphany Messenger!), which he himself emphatically declared to be the last special period of he Gospel Age.
R. G. Jolly complains about our use of something that Brother Johnson wrote in 1920, so we observe that the above was published in 1948. But even the 1920 piece was published in book form in 1938 without alteration of any kind, so the 1920 date is just as applicable as the 1938 date – and just another evidence of R. G. Jolly’s desperation for some talk when he has nothing to say. Further, in corroboration, we now quote from E-4:322 (9):
“During the transitional period -between the Gospel and Millennial Ages -those Levites, the tentatively justified, who will not consecrate lose their tentative justification, i.e., cease to be tentative Levites and are put out of the Court.” Tentative Justification and Leviteship are synonymous, and when one loses one he loses the other.
The following from ‘‘What Pastor Russell Said,” p. 312, is also directly to the point: “‘At the close of this Age there will no longer be a tentative justification.”
At the bottom of p. 61, col. 2, R. G. Jolly quotes Brother Johnson to the effect that “The Epiphany Camp in the finished picture is the condition of the loyal tentatively justified.” While Brother Johnson in other places describes such people as merely the “faith justified,” we need not argue the point here. Had Brother Johnson stated himself here, as he has clearly done in other places, he would have said, “the loyal former tentatively justified.” But he resorted to a common practise of referring to this Class in terms formerly applicable to them -much the same as many of us referred to “Judge” Rutherford long after he had vacated his judge’s office. Here again R. G. Jolly is resorting to a twist that is prompted by desperation. In this reference by R. G. Jolly there is not the slightest hint that such “loyal justified” will be a consecrated class; that is something R. G. Jolly himself has injected into the picture -and it is on this point that we now take issue with him -on the quasi-elect in the finished Epiphany picture being a consecrated class. However, we first qualify this statement with Brother Johnson’s comment in the June 1945 Present Truth, p. 96, top of col. 2:
“During this Epiphany time the faith-justified who have been the Gospel-Age Levites are by the lapsing of their faith justification remanded, the untrue ones among them to the Epiphany Camp, the untrue ones among them without the camp.” A question would now be in order: Does R. G. Jolly understand the meaning of the word ‘lapsing’? In previous papers we have detailed that “the truly repentant and believing” of those remanded to the camp are exactly the same characters as they were while in the Court, their remanding to the Camp being only because of their failure to consecrate -that they lose their tentative justification (the Grace of God) when leaving the Court; and the above citations from Brother Johnson clearly support our position on this, but in no place does Brother Johnson support R. G. Jolly’s contention that this Class becomes consecrated (while sin is in the ascendency -during the time when such consecrations would bring “elect” rewards) after their ejection from the court -or that there is any other kind of persons consecrated in the Camp in the finished Epiphany picture (because the Camp then holds all those persons who could not win out under such adverse conditions, so they await the Kingdom opportunities for all Restitutionists -See Epiphany Vol. 12, p. 526; also pp. 187,188, 218, 319 and 320). And we might add that Brother Russell’s teaching did not support J. F. Rutherford’s Jonadab Class either (although the Witnesses still “contend for the faith -”false doctrine” - once delivered to them by J. F. Rutherford!). Much of R. G. Jolly’s conglomeration he received from his “cousin” Krewson, who now leaves him to defend the error, as he goes complacently on with others of his individual pet errors.
We believe it well to emphasize here that there is fundamentally no difference at all in the tentatively justified in the Court of the large Gospel-Age Tabernacle, and the unconsecrated tentatively justified in the Epiphany Tabernacle; and on this Truth R. G. Jolly seemed very clear before 1938, And during the Gospel Age any who deserted their true repentance and belief would then lose their tentative justification and be forced from the Court -just as would be true in the Epiphany. However, we know of no Scripture that places a time limit for possession of this “Grace of God”; it probably differs with different individuals. And from this we can safely conclude that some tentatively justified in the Gospel-Age Tabernacle were continued in their Court position over into the Epiphany; the mere change of time would make no difference to such until their allotted time to utilize the “Grace of God” had been consumed. He should remember that Tentative Justification is a condition -not a place -and is typified by the Court; and when the Court condition is no longer available for entrance, then the Tentatively Justified condition is no longer available. A mere babe in the Truth should be able to recognize this point,
But the situation will be different in the finished Epiphany picture – at the end of the Time of Trouble – at the end of which every individual will be forced from the Court who has not consecrated (forced from the condition where it is possible to make consecrations before New Covenant opportunities are available – See E-4:406); and, until that occurs, it could not properly be said we have reached “the finished picture” (the beginning of the end of the Time of Trouble). However, with R. G. Jolly’s present contention -although he has not said so in so many words if there could be no more consecrations to Youthful Worthiship after 1954, then all those tentatively justified who had not consecrated by then would automatically have been forced from the Court into his present Camp, leaving only the consecrated in his present Court. And, when such a situation arrived, it would automatically force all others from the Camp. Does R. G. Jolly contend this is the situation NOW? And is it his contention that his (fictitious) Camp now contains only two classes of tentatively justified -the consecrated and the unconsecrated? And, when will it be finally determined that his present unconsecrated have “received the Grace of God in vain”? In his fully-abandoned condition (Without supervision and restraint of the Star Members) he is overworking his “besetting sin” of making types and pictures (See his letter in Nov. 15, 1910 Watch Tower--”I began with the help of Strong’s concordance to delve into the meanings of words. I sought to make pictures and draw types from nearly every chapter in the Bible,” he said of himself).
TYPES PROPERLY APPLIED
In E-3:232, top, Brother Johnson offers this conclusion: “When Biblical types are antitypically fulfilled, there is to be found a most remarkable and soul-satisfying agreement between the type and the antitype; and this agreement leads to increased faith and good works.” Such was certainly true of all antitypical interpretations given us through Brother Russell and Brother Johnson; and it is quite apropos that we now present one from Brother Russell that is so pertinent to our subject:
“The person seeking God draws near as he enters the Gate and comes to the Brazen Altar, He sees this Altar and what it means. To him it means that he is a sinner….He recognizes that the sacrifice was necessary to make atonement for sin....Now, the Court represents all the believer’s experiences in Justification, from the time he enters the Gate, coming into the Court, passing the Brazen-Altar, till he comes to the Door of the Tabernacle. It is Tentative Justification, from the time the individual begins to take the first step.” (Question Book -412-415) Here we have an antitypical interpretation that presents logic and strong appeal to everyone “who is of the Truth.” It certainly is soul-satisfying!
But let us now compare the foregoing with R. G. Jolly’s presentation of Justification in the Camp. Has he offered one bit of proof by way of securing such Justification? No, indeed he has not! And he hasn’t given it because he doesn’t have any. His Justification in the Camp is pure invention (picture-making and fictitious) on his part -a fit companion for Romanism’s Pergatory, which also finds no true support in the Bible. Both of these aberrations are the cunning work of Azazel – both produced by those befuddled by him, and believed by those similarly influenced. RGJ’s Campers do not pass through any Gate anywhere (except those he has forced out in his “picture” of 1954) -they do not consider the Brazen Altar in their course -they do not observe the Laver as they approach the Door of the Tabernacle. They simply arrive at their Justification and Consecration out of thin air; and we are offered now a tangible illustration of Brother Russell’s conclusion that it is the Great Company who “fight as one that beateth the air.” (1. Cor. 9: 26 -See Berean Comment) Any “rooted and grounded” in Parousia and Epiphany Truth could not be carried away for long by such ‘‘wind’’ (See Eph. 4: l4, and Berean Comment).
On page 62, col. 2, par. 1, R. G. Jolly reaches the pinnacle of Levitical nonsense and confusion when he says “Brother Russell used the term ‘household of faith’ in two senses: one for the consecrated, and the other for the unconsecrated believers.” Yes, indeed, he did! But, did he ever say those believers in the Camp were among the justified Household of Faith -anti typical Levites? The Household of Faith is not pictured (as RGJ ‘pictures’ his Campers Consecrated) in the Camp. In Tabernacle Shadows, p. 55, par. 2, Brother Russell makes himself very clear when he states “all believers, the entire ‘household of faith’ – the Levites,” (It is only those who have no inheritance in the land who belong to the Household of Faith; and only those who consecrate in the Court, and continue faithful therein -will remain of the Household of Faith.) Thus he makes it very clear that only those within the linen curtain were the true “Household of Faith” the Levites.” There is no Levitical standing shown anywhere in the Camp – Gospel-Age or Epiphany Camp. Therefore, we are forced to describe his comments on page 62 as errant nonsense and confusion, and is a clear demonstration of the extremes to which those go who forsake any of the Truth with which they were once sanctified; truly, they become “leprous”! Let us remember that during the Gospel Age -as also in the Epiphany, the last special period of the Gospel Age -there are millions of believers in the Camp, but they are not “truly repentant” believers who accept Jesus as their Savior (who apply the saving “blood” of our Lord for their personal cleansing – available only in the Court during the Gospel Age, including the Epiphany--tentative or actual). In Vol. 8 Brother Johnson states that in the very broad sense we may include in the “Church” all who make any profession of Christian belief; yet he also often uses “the Church” in exclusive reference to the Little Flock. And in no place does he include the entire Church among the justified--in the Court or in the Camp. However, in the finished Epiphany picture (at the end of the Time of Trouble) -when the truly repentant believers are remanded to the Camp, it will then contain the “truly repentant.... but unconsecrated Jews and Gentiles” -just as taught by the Epiphany Messenger in E-10:209. But until such time, the Camp contains those rebellious against present- day requirements for obtaining “peace with God” that the Household of Faith enjoy (the Levites- the tentatively justified in the Court). R. G. Jolly, not discerning this difference, makes himself ridiculous in the statements now being reviewed-a clear proof that the oil in his lamp “has gone out.” (Matt. 25:8)
In this connection, it is nothing new to see those in error accusing those faithful to the Truth of being drunken, as evidence the Jews at Pentecost accusing the Apostles of being “full of new wine.” (Acts 2: 13) This is more noticeably true in the case of Hannah being accused by Eli in 1 Sam. 1:14: ‘‘‘How long wilt thou be drunken?” And note Brother Johnson’s comments on this thing in E-13: l4--”The crown--lost leaders (typified by Eli--JJH) denounced the faithful as errorists, and exhorted them to give up their errors.”
What a familiar ring the foregoing offers to R, G. Jolly (also a crown-lost leader) now putting forth the accusation of “opposing errorists,” etc.! And, if Brother Johnson were here now, R. G. Jolly would be denouncing him - instead of us just as he did actually do in 1938 (See E-10:585 and 646). We believe Brother Russell’s comments in the July 1, 1916 Watch Tower, Reprint 5916, are a fitting complement to the above:
“Those who have been teaching errors will soon be ashamed (Isaiah 66:5), while the fire of this day will only manifest the truth to all. No power, no tongue, no pen, can successfully contradict the truth, the great Divine Plan of the Ages. It is strong before its enemies and before all who make assaults upon it, and ere long the folly of its foes shall be made known to the whole world. “There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. “ (by the Great Company -See Matt. 25:30 and Berean Comments--JJH)
And to this we would add the words of Solomon in Proverbs 10:5, 9 & 13: “He that gathereth in summer is a wise son; but he that sleepeth in harvest is a son that causeth shame. He that walketh uprightly walketh surely: but he that perverteth his ways shall be known. In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found: but a rod is for the back of him that is void of understanding.” And we would counsel all to “Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding,” (Psa. 32:9)
Sincerely your brother,
John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim
CORRECTION: -On page two, par. 1, of our August paper we inadvertently stated the period of the Judges as 430 years. It should read 450 years
BROTHER BAXENDALE HAS FINISED HIS COURSE “WITH JOY”
My dear Brother Hoefle: May grace, and peace be your portion through our Redeemer!
Our dear Brother Baxendale died July 12. Sister...and I traveled to Oldham On July 9, staying with Sister.....and then went to see Brother Baxendale the following afternoon and evening. Although he suffered a good deal of pain at times, he was happy and ready to go when it was His will. He told us he had no malice or hatred in his heart toward any, but loved them all. It was very touching, because so many misunderstood him -and because, too, he stood out against false doctrines and arrangements. He did his best to sing Hymn 171 and one of the nurses joined in. Sister Baxendale was told that he was often in prayer. Another hymn he tried to sing was Count Your Blessings. Sisters-----visited him, too -and we were glad we went also. We went home the day he died, but there was a letter in the post asking if Brother----would take the service. So 1 replied that I would. Sister went also, arriving Oldham July 15 and then on to Eccles, Manchester Friday, July 16. The funeral service was evidently in blessing, for Sister Baxendale asked for a copy.... Sister----was able to pass on some tracts and they were gladly received. Some day it will bear fruit to His Honour and Glory. In all this, our dear Sister Baxendale was a good example of carrying out a Christian faith. “We sorrow not as others, who have no hope.” The following day, July 17, Sisters----and I went to Glossop to see Sister-----,et al. we were warmly welcomed and had a very nice time together. Found them appreciative of your monthly papers. They sent a spray of flowers in memory of Brother Baxendale; also Sisters------and ourselves. In all there were 17 who want us to return before the winter sets in. Sister----joins me in love to yourself, Sister Hoefle and all the dear ones assisting you.
Your brother by His Grace --. (JGD) (ENGLAND)
NOTE: - Had the above information reached us before our September paper was completed for mailing, we would have included the name of Brother Baxendale along with that of Sister Condell and Brother Roach, as we believe those observations in our September paper apply equally to him, He, too, was valiant in defense of the Truth he loved -a “good soldier” in the “good fight” of faith. JJH
Epiphany Bible Students’ Ass’n
After reading your papers on The Resurrection and Where Are The Dead. I am requesting, if possible, you to send me The Three Babylons and What Is The Soul. Thanking you,--------(CONNECTICUT)
Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace! You will be interested to know that we recently went to a Jehovah’s Witness Convention, and were able to get out quite a number of the Three Babylons tracts. This was very appropriate for the occasion, as the afternoon topic was on Babylon. It was reported there were Over 11, 000 there. Brother----drove us right in front of the place where the crowd was greatest. Some thought the tract was especially designed for the meeting (which it was!), while others were very rabid -saying “I’m a Jehovah’s Witness and don’t want to read anything else,” (about the same attitude of some in the LHMM group who are just as rabid toward us, if not moreso). We could have told them that they wouldn’t have much success if they received the same answer, and attitude, from Baptists, Methodists, etc. But we didn’t bother to answer them. Several brought the tracts back and said they had had one and read it before -which they may have; that they wanted none of us! They are indeed a sect-bound rabid group, generally speaking - with their leaders inculcating in them the Satanic lie that their organization is the Lord’s organization on earth -and to look elsewhere might mean their eternal annihilation. One person asked me if we were of the Dawn. I said, Certainly not! When I did several came up and took the tracts.
We believe this is a good work toward Little Babylon, and we are getting much the same treatment from Little Babylon that the Parousia brethren got from Big Babylon under That Servant.
Our warm Christian love to you, with the prayer that your work in the Lord will continue to prosper, By His Grace, -----