by Epiphany Bible Students

No. 64

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

This last July‑August Present Truth confines itself mainly with the article in question. This paper came to us in the July 12 mail, at which time our August No. 63 was already complete for mailing. While we consider our August number a reasonably good exposure of the Present Truth we now discuss, yet in view of the brazen attempt at self‑justifi­ca­tion by R. G. Jolly for his many sins of teaching and practise, and his impudent flaunting of the truth, we present here some further considera­tions. He repeats, repeats, repeats with the same gusto as the unprincipled politicians; and it is indeed a sad observation that the Truth has not taught him, after all these years, that politics means no more to the Truth than does the Truth to politicians –  ­“These are contrary, the one to though other.”

R. G. Jolly makes very detailed effort to prove his superiority over the Youth­ful Worthies; but....“What you are speaks so loudly we can't hear what you say!” At the outset, let us emphasize that we have never attempted to usurp his position; our only difference with him is because of his sins and gross revolutionisms against those very Truths he claims so loudly to be upholding. The veracity of his statements seems to concern him not at all! Take, for instance, his statement at top of p. 52 – “he has been greatly and unjustly faulted” –  for publishing Volumes 16 and 17. We direct our readers to the last page of Volume 15 (which was published in 1950, shortly before Brother Johnson's death), where it will be noted he clearly states the next volumes to be published would be: “Volume XVI – Genesis‑Leviticus‑Deuteronomy; Volume XVII ­Numbers, Vol. II.” At no time in any of his writings does Brother Johnson give the slightest hint that Volumes 16 and 17 would be The Chart and The Millennium, as one of his last acts was to declare them Volumes 18 and 19. So here again – as we have so often been forced to do – we must score another brazen falsehood against this “cleansed” Epiphany Levite.

On p. 55, col. 1, last lines of par. 2, he says we deny “a class of consecrated ones in the Epiphany Camp.” Brother Johnson also denied it! In E:11‑473 Brother Johnson says, “faith‑justification October, 1954.” We have offered this quotation in previous writings; but it has always been ignored by R. G. Jolly. Why? Because he can't answer it! All of us know Brother Johnson taught just the opposite to what R. G. Jolly is now offering; namely, those forced out of the Court into the Camp automatically lose their tentative justification. He also taught tentative justi­fication operates to the end of the Gospel Age, at which time it will cease to operate.


He offers a number of types to compare the Great Company and Youthful Worthies, and once more displays his tragic inability “rightly to divide the word of Truth.” On p. 51, col. 1 (12) he discusses the “seed of Abraham.” Isaac and Jacob are out­standing members of that “seed.” Is he contending the Great Company are “higher” than they? Brother Johnson taught the Ancient Worthies would forever have a higher position than the Great Company (would be higher in position during the Kingdom, although lower in nature) – a teaching all can readily discern who have the spirit of a sound mind. (See E:4‑454 and E:1‑269) Of the Great Company Paul says in Heb. 2:15: “Through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” (See Berean Comments) Of the Ancient Worthies the same Apostle writes in Heb. 11:37 – “They were stoned, sawn asunder, slain with the sword.” There is no evidence of “fear” in these grand characters – no comparison at all between them and the Great Company – no evidence at all that they sat behind desks, called names, and told one falsehood after another. Thus, Brother Johnson had excellent reason to rate them above the Great Company. And the Ancient Worthies are a part of “the earthly seed of Abraham” (sand of the seashore), which seed R. G. Jolly attempts to explain in the article under review. As Brother Johnson has aptly observed – when these people fall into the hands of Azazel they talk all sorts of nonsense. And R. G. Jolly is a living corroboration of that sage obser­vation!

By the same token, when he tries to argue inferiority for the Youthful Worthies because they are not shown in the type of Lev. 12, we observe that the Ancient Worthies are not shown there either. Nor are the Youthful Worthy Class shown in with the Great Company Class in their abandonment to Azazel process, which is no reflection on the Youthful Worthy Class (although the measurably faithful Youthful Worthies will surely have to undergo similar untoward experiences to destroy their fleshly minds, while the fully faithful Youthful Worthies will remain dead to self‑will and alive to God's will). We are not here attempting to contrast the relative standings of the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies; we merely draw attention to the nonsensical deductions of one R. G. Jolly, who is attempting by these ethereal props to set up himself as a person­age in whose teachings others should rely. At no time have we ever attempted such self­exaltation, although the one (R. G. Jolly) who now attempts self‑exaltation for himself has repeatedly accused us of it. But, then, this is what we should expect of those who talk nonsense and who must rely upon “loquacious, repetitious, false‑accusing, foolish effusions” of Epiphany crown‑losers (See E:10‑591, par. 1) to inform others of their own importance.

On p. 54 (42) he speaks of “the exceedingly fruitful ministry of the Great Company when they as Jesus' agents gather the people into the camp condition of the Epiphany.” But Brother Johnson also teaches this would be “after they are cleansed” by the “fires of Armageddon”; and (44) on this same p. 54, Brother Johnson puts the clear contradiction to R. G. Jolly's present contentions when he says,

“building the Epiphany Camp, first, from among the nominal‑church believers after the nominal‑church is destroyed,”

Of course, this clear contradiction doesn't bother R. G. Jolly one bit; and he'll also keep right on falsely claiming he is upholding Brother Johnson's teachings, while he contradicts those teachings on the very same page. Yes, he certainly is a “noble” example of a ‘Pastor and Teacher,’ as he runs amuck and ahead of the Lord to do now what will correctly be done “after the nominal church is destroyed.”

We refer once more to Brother Johnson's teaching that only the Star Members of the Gospel Age have brought forth new doctrines, and we quote from E:10‑XXIV in the Appendix on Types:

“All the brethren, except the star‑members, are forbidden direct Biblical study on new doctrines, types and prophecy, which is ‘gazing’ for them.”

Campers Consecrated is not only a new doctrine, but it voids the teachings of the Star Member on that very doctrine. Brother Johnson taught the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture would contain the unconsecrated; and he never offered the slightest inference anytime anywhere of a consecrated Class in the Epiphany Camp. Thus, R. G. Jolly, who hurls at us the false charge of “sifter, usurper,” etc., proves himself guilty of those very things – proves himself guilty of “gazing,” the penalty for which, if persisted in, is D E A T H! Let all follow him in his heedless plunge who are likeminded; also, let him produce one instance where we have done any “gazing.” His revolutionism in this instance is even more serious than his revolutionism against the Star Member's doctrine that all of the Great Company must be fully abandoned to Azazel for their cleansing. He points to himself as a living “example” of a cleansed Levite without the necessity of being included in the clear teachings of the Epiphany Messenger:

“As in none of the Great Company do these two forms of the rod prove sufficient fully to free their Holy Spirit from bondage of developed worldliness, selfishness, error and sin, and in a large number hardly fazes them at all .... Their delivery to Satan implies that they come into such a condition as the priests disfellowship them, and thus withdraw all brotherly help and favor from them. It also implies that God temporarily abandons them, and lets Satan buffet them” .... (See E:15‑525 and March 1949 Present Truth, p. 42, col. 2). R. G. Jolly is proclaiming that he was cleansed with­out that procedure (tells us this is Epiphany “error” instead of Epiphany Truth) –  ­that he was cleansed before October 1950! All must know that Brother Johnson did not at any time during his lifetime withdraw brotherly help from R. G. Jolly. Yet he has the audacity to claim he is _in harmony’ with the Epiphany Truth. We could cite many instances of his gross and persistent revolutionism, but these two instances should suffice for now.

The ironical feature of this “strange fire” (false doctrine) is that R. G. Jolly accepted it from J. W. Krewson, whom he is now reading right out of the Household of Faith. As always occurs in such instances, the acceptance of one error requires the abandonment of one or more previously held truths. In his desperation to find some support for his new class of spiritual hybrids (Campers consecrated), R. G. Jolly nominated the half tribe of Manasseh west of Jordan to type them – contrary to the truth he once accepted from the real Pastor and Teacher, Brother Johnson, to the effect that this half tribe was counted for the whole, the entire ten tribes west of Jordan typ­ing the Restitution class. He is also forced to abandon the following truth which he once accepted, this quote being from E:10‑209:

“The Epiphany Camp in the finished picture is the condition of truly repentant and believing, BUT NOT CONSECRATED Jews and Gentiles ... a building of the Epiphany Temple for the Lord.”

R. G. Jolly must now change the construction of the Epiphany Temple – another truth he once accepted – to adapt it to his Campers consecrated. And in the face of this, he is still brazen enough to offer much loud talk about his “faithful adherence” to the Star Members' teachings; in fact, in the very Present Truth we are discussing he offers quite some detail about the Epiphany Temple – all the while he himself is the one who is desecrating that Temple.

Also, in view of R. G. Jolly's bombastic claims to being ‘Pastor and Teacher,’ we believe it very apropos here to quote from E:7‑277, where Brother Johnson is dis­cussing the seven Levites in charge of the Society specifically, and Great Company members in general:

“But with the organizational leaders of the Great Company, deadness to self and world and aliveness to God are not complete (Jas. 1:8). Their selfish propensities, especially exercised in self‑will, grasping for power, lording it over God's heritage, dividing the flock and desiring to shine before others as able teachers and executives are so uncurbed by themselves, that not one of them alone can be trusted by the Lord with an unrestricted General Ministry.”

His fourteen pages in the article under discussion are in large part a direct and subtle indirect attempt at self‑laudation, a trait which always produces a bad odor –  just the opposite of the holy Spirit which exudes a “sweet odor ... the fragrance of the knowledge of God in every place.” When Brother Russell, Brother Johnson, and St. Paul spoke and wrote of themselves they had the stature to support those expres­sions without resorting to trickery and one falsehood after another to make their statements hold. And, referring to his charge of power‑grasping by us, we answer in defense that we are doing now the same as we did during Brother Johnson's life –  ­although we now address the General Church in writing; whereas, we did it verbally from the platform in General Conventions prior to 1950. Nor did Brother Johnson ever pub­licly or privately accuse us of being a power‑grasper with a bad conscience, which charges he made in writing against R. G. Jolly – the same R. G. Jolly who still has the brass to yell “power‑grasper” at us. Our Pilgrim appointment specifically author­izes us to address the General Church in any country on earth; and that is all we are doing. Nor would we be doing that now if we had a faithful leader at the helm in the L.H.M.M. For about five years after Brother Johnson's death we made no public effort to disturb R. G. Jolly, although we did make many attempts privately to him per­sonally, and “in the spirit of meekness,” to correct his gross sins and persistent revolutionisms; and our public attacks upon him came only after long private efforts had failed to reform him.

In addition to his many errors and sins, he also in 1953‑55 was openly circulat­ing slander about us; so his present disadvantages and woes are the direct product of his own making. This is identically the same experience Brother Johnson had with him –  he also was eventually forced to declare to all the Church that R. G. Jolly had a “bad conscience, was unkind and unfair, was influenced by Azazel in his conduct, given to many misrepresentations.” And all this is recorded of him before he was fully abandoned to Azazel (before all Brotherly help and favor were withdrawn from him, and before all restraint was removed by the Lord through the demise of the last Star Member in 1950). It is indeed a sad and unsavory account of R. G. Jolly that Brother Johnson left us; and we would stand guilty before the Lord if we slighted the trust the Star Member reposed in us if we should keep silent in the face of what has transpired since 1950. “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”


Once more does R. G. Jolly inject the Hiram type into his paper in a desperate face‑saving maneuver; and once more does he effuse his self‑evident nonsense. R. G. Jolly himself was among the first and the loudest to lay hold on the Scriptural history that Solomon built the house of the Lord and finished it; and this he repeated­ly quoted in his attempt to prove that Brother Johnson was the last Saint. If the Epiphany Solomon finished the Lord's house, then self‑evidently the Epiphany Hiram had to complete his part in that work at least as soon as Brother Johnson did his part. Thus, the Hiram type had to expire at least by October 1950. In the type Hiram not only passed completely out of the Scriptural record many years before Solomon died, but history tells us he actually died some years before Solomon died – indicating here in the antitype the full consummation of the Hiram type some years before 1950. There is the same evident nonsense in R. G. Jolly's comments here as we find in so many of his “new Truth” (?) presentations.

Nor should we fail to consider here the “lad who held Samson by the hand” (Judges 16:26), and the comments on p. 60 (60). in this type it is very probable that the lad did not die with Samson, and we are in hearty accord that the “lad” (R.G.Jolly) continued in the antitype after Brother Johnson's death. But we should not forget that the Philistines in this picture typed Sectarians, and the lad was one of them – that the lad had not the slightest idea he was aiding in destroying his own clan by what he did. If the antitype still continues – and we agree that it does – then R. G. Jolly is still the “little" sectarian boy.

But in all of this let us refer to That Evil Servant for analogy. Under That Servant (while JFR was still a Saint, and even after he had lost his crown because of unfaithfulness) he performed outstanding service of nation‑wide Prominence as antitypical Benaiah, “who was captain over the third thousand” (See E9‑271), “by his booklet issued during the Time of Trouble (winter), A Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens, refuting the nominal Church's slander against our Pastor (2 Sam. 23:20).” At that time JFR was among the “three of David's (Brother Russell's) four mighty men.” (See E:10‑121) But we find a desperately­­-fatal and sad ending to that once‑effective assistant to That Servant: “the Lord ... shall cut him off, and will appoint his posi­tion with the hypocrites.” (Matt. 24:51) And with this example of tragic retrogression before us –  a renegade who made shipwreck of sublime opportunity – are we to consider his former noble deeds or his eventual sad end (“the Lord cut him off”) in our present evaluation of him?

And by the same analogy we say now of R. G. Jolly that our chief concern is what he is now – today. Like That Evil Servant, he, too, was a Saint under Brother Russell, but lost his crown because of unfaithfulness. He, too, rendered effective service later as a Great Company member under both Brother Russell and Brother Johnson –  though JFR greatly outshone him in his good acts and prominence of position (altho, in fairness to R. G. Jolly, we offer the observation, too, that his evil deeds as “the evil Epiphany Solomon,” and since, have not been nearly as heinous as those of That Evil Servant). Therefore, his recitation of valiant and commendable deeds of days long past carries no more weight than those greater deeds of That Evil Servant – although the J.W.'s still loudly recite those good acts to “prove” their present errors. The labored attempt of R. G. Jolly to live in the past could be hilariously laughable were it not so very, very sad and serious in its present consequences. He was once “a son of God,” one of the Fully Faithful, a part of the “salt” and the “light”; and his determination to have himself yet in positions forever lost once they are lost should be viewed with acute suspicion by all God's fully faithful people. Such tactics are an age‑long trick of the Adversary – the Catholic Church exploiting the noble deeds of Saint Peter as a cover‑up for their revolting sins. And when R. G. Jolly refers to himself as “a faithful pilgrim under Brother Russell,” he is indeed taxing the credulity of his readers to the utmost. Had he been “faithful,” would he have lost his crown? In his letter published in Nov. 15, 1910 Watch Tower (Reprints 4716) he freely admitted there he was “gazing” – just as he's been “gazing” since Brother Johnson's death. And such “gazing,” through unfaithfulness, would cause him to lose his crown – just as it will cause him to lose his life if he persists in it. This warning is not our own conclusion; it is the teaching of the Star Member! “Lord, who shall sojourn in thy tabernacle? Who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.” (Psa. 15:1,2)

In all this elaborate effort at self‑exaltation, the real concealed motive of R. G. Jolly is a sophistical attempt to divert the mines of his readers from the crush­ing refutations we have so repeatedly given him – especially those in recent months. Clearly enough, he must relieve that pressure – just as present‑day worldly autocratic frauds stir up trouble somewhere somehow when conditions at home become unbearable. Therefore, we think it well here to consider John 16:8: “When the holy spirit (Com­forter) is come, it will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judg­ment.” These words by Jesus certainly entertain no respect of persons. The Holy Spirit (God's disposition and power in His people) is a priceless gift; it is also a very personal possession – not something floating about in space. But, as it brings with it “the peace of God which passeth understanding,” so it also places an obligation upon each one individually to “reprove for sin, for righteousness and for judgment.” Those who avoid this obligation offer reasonable doubt that they have the Holy Spirit at all, or have “grieved” it so badly it is almost extinct in them. And this obligation rests upon the small and the great in God's Household – “each one according to his several ability.”

In keeping with this truth, “the Lord sent Nathan unto David” (2 Sam. 12:1). While the both of them were Ancient Worthies and prophets in Israel, Nathan had no jurisdictional standing at all in the Government of Israel when he told David, the King, “Thou hast despised the commandment of the Lord to do evil in His sight.” And in Gen. 20 we have the record of the heathen Abimelech reproving Abraham, although typically and antitypically Abimelech was inferior to Abraham. A similar situation is recorded in Gen. 12:14‑20.

Furthermore, didn't R. G. Jolly advise all – Saints, Great Company, Youthful Worthies, or even the tentatively justified –  to use every power at their disposal to resist the evil course of That Evil Servant? And, has he not offered such advice to all in the L.H.M.M. respecting the evil leaders, et al, in other Little Babylon sects since Brother Johnson's death? But, concerning himself, is he telling us now it's just wrong to reprove him for sin, righteousness and judgment? It will be recalled that the pet slogan of That Evil Servant was “out of harmony with the Society” toward Brother Johnson and all others who criticized him. Even R. G. Jolly himself was “out of harmony with the Society!” And, while That Evil Servant was hypocritical enough to use the Society as his “beard” (a front to conceal the real man), R. G. Jolly makes no such pretense. He's now telling his readers, “Shame on you if you're out of har­mony with me – even though I do talk mostly nonsense!” It will be recalled that Brother Johnson repeatedly invited JJH to address the General Church, including the Saints, during those years he did not invite R. G. Jolly to do it – those years in which many of the brethren objected to service by R. G. Jolly because of his uncleansed condition – after he had been exposed as a power‑grasping revolutionist who tried to gain control of Brother Johnson. There are certain Scriptures treating of these Great Company leaders, which we hope to elucidate when we consider it the Lord's will for us to do so; but we believe present comments will suffice to satisfy our readers about the relative status of R. G. Jolly and ourselves. If we were properly qualified to “preach the word ... confute, rebuke, exhort, with all long‑suffering and teaching” (2 Tim. 4:2) the General Church in the presence of the Star Member himself (who gave us the appoint­ment) and other Saints, then we should now be equally qualified to address those who self‑admittedly claim a lesser status. If we had an obligation to “preach the word” to the General Church under the Star Member's approval, how much more would we be obliged to do so now when a Levite – an uncleansed Levite – is in charge! In the months before his death, Brother Johnson repeatedly insisted that Brother Hoefle should con­duct his funeral; and he made these requests when the one of a “higher class” (R.G. Jolly) was right in the same house with him at Philadelphia, and JJH was 600 miles away in Detroit. Once more we repeat the words of Brother Johnson – those in Azazel's hands talk all sorts of nonsense!

“The way of the Lord is strength to the upright: but destruction shall be to the workers of iniquity.” (Prov. 10:29) “They that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, which cannot be removed, but abideth forever.” Psa. 125:1

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim



Dear Brother Hoefle: –  Greetings in His Name!

I continue to read the Present Truth magazine, as it helps me better to under­stand your refutations and strengthens my faith in the Truth. I also read J.W. Krewson's writings, although realizing that his writings could not possibly do the harm that R. G. Jolly's can (his foolishness being so transparent). In J. W. Krew­son's June paper he tells his readers it is “dangerous” to read R. G. Jolly's writ­ings. I note you tell your readers the opposite – to read the Present Truth and compare with your writings. Of course, I realize the Present Truth could not help ‘babes’ –  and such might become entangled with the L.H.M.M. sectarian errors, just as many such have become bound in sectarian bondage with the Jehovah's Witnesses. But for those who have been grounded in Parousia and Epiphany Truth not to be able to read what R. G. Jolly has to say, at this late date – and discern between truth and error, good and evil – is unthinkable! Nor do we believe any such would be so led for any length of time, except the measurably faithful, or the unfaithful.

J. W. Krewson now at last admits R. G. Jolly was uncleansed at the outset (after Brother Johnson's demise in 1950) just as you have taught all along. This is in direct contradiction to what J. W. Krewson has taught heretofore, and is a new twist for him. In his previous writings he's said R. G. Jolly was ‘cleansed’ when he was collaborating with him – when he was publishing his advancing (?) Truth (actually his advancing errors), but became uncleansed when his ambitious power-­grasping tendencies to ‘unseat’ R. G. Jolly became apparent to him; that when J. W. Krewson was no longer preparing the ‘food’ in the Present Truth magazine R. G. Jolly was abandoned to Azazel (at the time losing the brotherly ‑?‑ help of J. W. Krewson!). We note you have simply pointed out the clear Scriptural Epiphany teaching on the _abandonment to Azazel’ process –  which teaches that none of the Great Company (including those who lost their crowns by the skin of their teeth) could be fully abandoned to Azazel until all brotherly help and favor of the Priests were removed from them – which, in the case of R. G. Jolly, was done for the first time when Brother Johnson was removed at his demise in 1950. None of them could be fully cleansed, as you point out, without this last step (even though some, as apparently R. G. Jolly was for a time, received a partial cleansing when partially in Azazel's hands – See E:15‑524 and top of p. 525). But R. G. Jolly and J. W. Krewson revolutionize against this clear Epiphany teaching, and are persisting therein, it seems.

As you refer to them, these “cousins” were quite a pair when they were “in harmony” with one another: each one patting the other on the back for his efforts (in revolutionizing against the Truth and its Arrangements), without any restraint from any one at the time (at least any public resistance) of their fleshly minds.

Both have the same characteristics – hesitate not (as you often say) to practise any kind of gymnastics on large or small issues, if it suits their purposes, or whims. J. W. Krewson has reiterated the statement several times that Truth needs no defense, yet he repeatedly tells us he has to defend his teachings (see his June paper, page 8, par. 4). Is that an admission that his ‘teaching’ is error? At the bottom of page 16 of J. W. Krewson's June paper (and top of page 17) he points out the fact (which certainly is the truth!) that what happened in the L.H.M.M. head­quarters after 1950 was an “exact facsimile” to what happened after Brother Russell's death. This is quite an admission! How true it is! One error after another was foisted on the Lord's people, with J. W. Krewson the chief writer (as he admits ­see bottom of p. 21 and top of p. 22), while R. G. Jolly was the “dummy” editor. Did the Watch Tower under J. F. Rutherford ever publish one item of error written by Brother Johnson after Brother Russell's death? These strained parallels simply stand out for the nonsense, as you say, that they are! It is now quite a spectacle to see them “refuting” one another to gain the chief seat in the synagogue! J. W. Krewson says he's the only one now claiming the “teaching” office (i.e. to be the Mouthpiece). It seems to me that R. G. Jolly has done a great deal of that in the past, and is doing a pretty good job of pointing to himself as the chief one in the July‑August Present Truth. Certainly, R. G. Jolly has more “credentials” to dis­play than does J. W. Krewson (who has simply nothing to offer). He claims Brother Russell wasn't given any official standing by any previous Star Member. Of course not! Brother Russell did not work with and under any previous Star Member as did J. W. Krewson. He can't point out one official act Brother Johnson performed that would indicate he had any special talent or prerogatives. Brother Johnson very frequently pointed out the Toms, Dicks and Harries of the Krewson variety (who had writer's itch), who were never appointed to the Pilgrim office by Brother Russell. Brother Russell certainly ‘put his hand’ upon Brother Johnson (although the Lord gave him his appointment as Epiphany Messenger). He was a faithful Pilgrim.

Brother Johnson surely did give R. G. Jolly some recognition, even though he had to expose his sins. We all know that R. G. Jolly had certain fine qualifi­cations, but none of us ever heard of anything outstanding about J. W. Krewson until after Brother Johnson's demise (when R. G. Jolly gave him so much prominence). His (J. W. Krewson's) inability and inadequacy for the position he claims are only too clearly manifest in his writings.

There's so much more that could be said about the both of them, but I will stop for now. If you care to use any part of this letter in the interest of the Truth, you may do so. May the Lord bless you as you Courageously keep up the “good fight.”

Your sister by His Grace -------

NOTE: –  And the same may be said for the “advancing Truth” these two “cousins” have presented on the pyramid (both claiming it to be “advancing Truth”). Repeat­edly have we referred to those 27 mathematical frauds in the Jan. 1947 Present Truth. After that revolting exposition of their “skill” on pyramid figures, it would seem to us that only such as have no shame in them could ever again have the unmitigated gall to mention that structure. Those who can produce such counterfeit figures are able to “prove” anything with figures. Here is a powerful proof of the truism –  Figures don't lie, but liars do figure! It should be kept in mind that the pyramid is a “witness”; it does not produce advancing Truth – it merely “witnesses” to Truth already deduced from the Bible, which is superior to the pyramid. Without the Bible, the pyramid would tell us just nothing at all. –  JJH


Dear Brother Hoefle:

Thank you very much for sending me the tracts. I shall mail them as I have time. I am at a new address here in.... May the Lord bless you richly!

Your sister ------- Colorado


Dear Brother Hoefle:

Greetings in His Name! May I hasten to ask you to forward about 50 of the Resurrection tracts. I'm completely out. For the most part I've distributed these at burial grounds, and they were accepted. I trust you may ultimately receive some response for other literature. And now with ardent Christian love to you and Sister Hoefle, and all the Blessedness in this His Service.

By His Grace, Your brother ------- NJ


Dear Brother Hoefle:

Grace and peace from our Lord Jesus Christ in appreciation of the good work you are doing! I would like for you to accept this Calendar of ‘Bonny Scotland.’ These places are near where Brother and Sister ... are living, and they took me to see them during my summer holidays ...... I think I have mentioned to you before that Brother ... is over 90, and still working. I have managed to give out your tracts to various people, and have met with three who are interested in the Truth. I very often get mistaken for a Jehovah's Witness, until I manage to explain the difference..... Your writings are a great help, as owing to health and weather conditions I am unable to meet with Brother --------- only on the last Sunday of the month. He lives some distance away from me. May God bless you both and give you strength to carry on the good work.

In Jesus' Name and Service, Sister ------- England


My dear Brother Hoefle:

Greetings of love and peace in our dear Redeemer's Name! Well, Brother, I have received your papers, which we were very glad to get. There are features in them that we never understood before, and in many of the others, too. The statements are clearly put so that any one who might be interested could gain the _knowledge of the Truth,’ and understand. Thank the Lord for you, Brother! He has always reserved some one to do His work. Just like our dear Sister Condell, who has done such a wonderful work by sending our names to you that we can be getting the papers direct from you now that she has passed away. But she has a record left behind for the good work she has done. Oh, Brother, I just can't express the grievous blow and personal loss that the death of our dear sister has been to us..... May the Lord help each one of us to do our part as dear Sister Condell did hers. Fondest love from the home circle for you, Sister Hoefle and the others. The Lord bless and increase your knowledge more and more...

Your sister and brother ------- Jamaica


Dear Brother Hoefle:

Grace and peace be multiplied unto you and Sister Hoefle as brave, faithful Gideonites...... I no longer take P.T. or Bro. K's writings. I feel there is no doubt as to their having misled many dear ones whom I have tried to help. The tracts came the 28th and were so welcome. I am enclosing $... for the postage of this lot and the next one.

With sincere love in the Lord, Sister ------- Mass.