by Epiphany Bible Students

No. 66

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

The above captioned article appears in this September‑October Present Truth; and once more we repeat the words of our Beloved Lord, “Wisdom is justified of all her children!” Just recently one erstwhile Jehovah's Witness said the question was contemptuously hurled at her: Do you place the Bible above the Watch Tower? In sub­stance – if not in so many words – R. G. Jolly now asks his readers if they place the unproven words of Brother Johnson above the Bible. In this matter of the Last Saint we have offered clear Scriptures to prove this event could not possibly have occurred on October 22, 1950; and each time has R. G. Jolly ignored the Bible, while emphati­cally repeating “what a man said.” While this same man (the beloved Epiphany Mes­senger) also truly said that “prophecies and types connected with a trial of character cannot clearly be understood until the trial is met by the Faithful.” (See E:4‑160, top, re some immaturities of That Servant.) But R. G. Jolly failed to include what he (Brother Johnson) really taught on the matter – namely, that the last Saint would not be glorified until early in Anarchy! Be it clearly understood we do not wish to discount the last two Star Members; but, by the same token, we shall not place their thoughts, unsupported by Scripture, and their word above that “which is (infallibly) written” by inspiration. The Epiphany Truth would be sadly out of order had Brother Johnson treated That Servant's thoughts and words (unsupported by Scripture) in the same manner as does R. G. Jolly with the Epiphany Messenger's thoughts and words (where it suits his purpose) unsupported by Scripture. R. G. Jolly accepts just the reverse position, while relying heavily upon his name‑calling to convince his readers. In this he clearly reveals who his soulmates are.

About forty years ago Billy Sunday came to Dayton, Ohio – where we then resided. As many of us know, his greatest prop was eternal torment as the wages of sin. There­fore, we wrote him a letter setting forth many Scriptures to refute his God‑dishonor­ing theme, telling him if he did not answer our letter from his platform, we would submit our letter to the local newspapers for general publication. After some sar­castic remarks from his strong pair of lungs, he shouted, “He's a big idiot!” That was his answer to the Truth! We wrote similarly to a local hell‑fire preacher in Dayton; and his answer was, “This man must have been kicked by a mule in his youth. Poor fellow!” And their audiences cheered to such “lung‑thinkers!” R. G. Jolly now offers abundant proof of his attachment to these kindred spirits by resorting to the same technique.

He makes pretense of relying upon Brother Johnson; and at the same time openly contradicts him. Brother Johnson repeatedly and emphatically taught that in this Epiphany time the gauge of Leviteship was REVOLUTIONISN, and nothing else! R. G. Jolly now ignores that teaching, saying the death of a man made blanket manifestation of all Levites. Having received his “inspiration” on this teaching while theorizing in bed at 4:00 A.M., a day or two after Brother Johnson's demise, it is little wonder he informed Pilgrim Eschrich his presence was not needed at the funeral! Just think of it! Were any of the United States Pilgrims given such advice when Brother Russell died? But it is clear enough now why R. G. Jolly did such a thing. Knowing that Pilgrim Eschrich retained strong Little‑flock hopes, it would have been awkward – most awkward – for an uncleansed Levite to arise and assume control. Such a thing just couldn't be!

Following is a partial reprint of some of our observations on the above (complete papers free upon request) – none of which has R. G. Jolly even attempted to answer:

“When we returned to Detroit in October 1950 –  after conducting Brother Johnson's funeral – we said then that nothing we thought or wished would place any one in the Body of Christ, or take any one out of it, because – “God hath set the members in the Body.” Therefore, we scrupulously avoided heaping any abuse upon those who held an opinion contrary to ours. That also is still our position. But we believe it now in order to state that we were overmuch and too easily influenced by the conclusions of R. G. Jolly on this subject, because we held him in high esteem and confidence in 1950. Had we known him then as we know him now, we would have taken a narrower and much more critical view of anything he presented as ‘advancing Truth!’; but it should be observed that we are always most easily misled by those we trust. Even Jesus learned this by His own bitter experience – ‘mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted’. (Psa. 41:9) According to his own admission the evening after the funeral, R. G. Jolly had himself held the view for sometime after Brother Johnson's death that there were still Saints among us, which belief left him suddenly in a flash as he lay awake in the early morn­ing hours (just as he received a sudden ‘illumination’ on his new Millennial princes on his way to the Grand Rapids Convention in 1955). We have always been wary of mani­fested crown‑losers who made claim to special illumination; but our confidence in R. G. Jolly at that time submerged a caution which we ordinarily maintain.

“As stated above, we took a detached view of the controversy because we clearly realized at the time that whether the answer be Yea or Nay it in nowise affected the status of any winlings that might attach themselves to us; this was not even remotely. related to the issue such as Brother Johnson advocated early in the Epiphany when he declared the High Calling should no longer be presented to newcomers. After 1950 the work as respects newcomers was exactly the same as it had been before; nothing at all had been changed there. (Note: Nor has it been changed since 1954, despite the false doctrines to the contrary – namely, the Epiphany Campers consecrated or Quasi‑elect consecrated.) Nor, in the final analysis, would anything whatever be changed with respect to the status of Saints, should there still be some among us. However, that fatal event October 22, 1950 did most mightily affect the status of one individual – ­Namely, one R. G. Jolly (a manifested crown‑lost leader). If there are still Saints on earth, then the claims he has made since that date can be only the babble of a gross perverter – claims such as paralleling Brother Russell, the claim of Pastor and Teacher, the claim that he now represents the ‘Lord's Arrangements,’ etc. As some of our readers already know, Brother Johnson had seen thirty‑three reasons for the High Calling closed when we first became acquainted with him early in the Epiphany (the acquaintance being only through his writings; we had not then yet met him person­ally). So we wrote him thirty‑three reasons why he was wrong. But did he answer us with abusive imprecations? Not at all! Rather, he suggested we visit him for a per­sonal talk, which invitation we accepted immediately; and at which he gave us the counsel one might expect of him whom God gave ‘largeness of heart’ (I Kings 4:29) – ­the counsel being that he and this writer continue as brethren in the love of the Truth, leaving the ultimate rewards with the Lord, but resolve to meet the covenants we had made. And we present this generous view of the beloved Epiphany Solomon in striking contrast to the baleful revilings and actions after October 1950, when many brethren were disfellowshiped simply because of their honest belief in their Saintly standing. For Shame!! Certainly, this could be no Scriptural cause to disfellowship any one; but the Epiphany is a time for ‘making manifest the counsels of hearts’ – a truth which must apply to all in the Household of Faith. Hence, what happened after 1950 “made manifest” the uncleansed condition of many Great Company and Youthful Worthy members; and be it observed that those most blindly partisan in their support of the present Executive Trustee have been those most ready to reveal that “instruments of cruelty are in their habitation.” For all this there must eventually come a fearful reckon­ing!

“As this controversy developed into a most serious and painful disturbance in 1951, we did then in that year ask R. G. Jolly what answer he had for the large Gos­pel‑Age Samson – considering Brother Russell's statement in the Berean Comments on Judges 16:30, “With the death of the last member of the Church, the Body of Christ, will surely come the downfall of Churchianity and the present system of world power.”

He offered the very reasonable observation that God's estimate of “immediate” would not necessarily be a day, a week, or even months – with which we agree; but, now that almost seven years (Note: written in August 1957) have elapsed, this item certainly requires a more scrupulous appraisal. At that time R. G. Jolly asked that we keep silent on this point in order not to aid the “opposition” in their arguments against him, because it was indeed a premise which could not be conclusively overthrown; and the weight of argument might easily appear to favor the other side.

“As companion to the Samson picture we have the words of Jesus, “Ye are the salt of the earth ... ye are the light of the world” (Matt. 5:13,14); and here is the Be­rean Comment on v. 14: “When the lights have all been extinguished, the great time of trouble will follow.” Just prior to Brother Johnson's death, the Korean war had commenced; the financial structure seemed to be tottering; the antitypical Assyrians were definitely on the march; “all faces were gathering blackness”; gloom was preva­lent in all quarters. In contrast, we believe an unbiased view would declare the “earth” to be in better state of preservation today than it was in 1950 – on the sur­face, at least. Thus, there is no secular physical evidence that the “salt of the earth” has been removed to bring about its “spoiling”; the “lights” have not yet all been extinguished.

“In the same line of argument is the David‑Saul type, the latter typing the crown-­lost leaders up to Armageddon. In the type Saul died first – he and his sons “that same day” (1 Sam. 31:6) – , of which David was witness. Brother Johnson certainly thought the antitype would follow the time order of the type, his mistake in this matter be­ing only that he thought he himself would be one of the David class who will be here to witness the “funeral” of antitypical Saul in the Armageddon collapse of the social order. In line with this, we have his statement in E:3‑446 (middle): “It will, there­fore, not be manifest who will be the eventual Little Flock members, until all the Truth Levites have been manifested, have cleansed themselves (Num. 8:7), have recog­nized themselves as Levites (Num. 8:9,10), have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb (Num. 8:12), have been set apart for the true Levitical service (Num. 8:11), and are set before the Priests as their servants (Num. 8:13)". Certainly, no one will contend that the foregoing has yet occurred!

“We now proceed to a consideration of the Zechariah type of 2 Chron. 24:20, 21. Zechariah was High Priest in Israel; therefore, he was a link in the continuation of a Tabernacle type – and it should be emphasized at this point that every type pertinent to the Tabernacle service had to continue until its antitype appeared. This was true of all the Aaronic types that centered in the Tabernacle – chief of which was the office of High Priest. In the strict sense, Israel had only one High Priest – just as Spiri­tual Israel has only one “Apostle and high priest of our profession” (Heb. 3:1). Aaron was the only High Priest directly called of God and directly anointed into the Priest's office by God through Moses (Ex. 29:7) – just as Jesus was the only one selected to fill His office, and –  “no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God as was Aaron” (Heb. 5:4,5). All the High Priests that followed Aaron came to that office by succession, as a matter of birth (Note: In The Epiphany especially, Spiritual Birth – those who were “in the Truth” just as the ruling monarchs of England reach their position as a matter of birth. Thus, some of them were weak – as was Eli; and some were sinful – as was Caiaphas. But all of them were probably reasonably accur­ate in their performance of the Atonement‑Day service and similar ceremonies; and, so far as we can recall, none of them ever lost their priestly anointing – the type contin­ued unbroken until the antitype appeared.

“It should be observed, too, that the Aaronic Priesthood was the only all‑inclusive type of the Gospel‑Age Priesthood. All other types pertinent to the Christ had certain limitations – lacked some one or more of the features to be found in the Aaronic order. And just as Aaron was the special eye, hand and mouth of Moses (Ex. 4:10‑17; 7:1) – ­(Moses typing Christ) – so also was each priest that followed Aaron the special eye, hand and mouth of God in Israel. (See Berean Comments on John 18:13) Reasoning back from the antitype, had any High Priest violated his anointing, he would have been for­ever rejected from the priesthood – just as all who lose their priestly anointing in the Gospel Age are barred forever from returning to that office, or of exercising the powers of that office. Losing their anointing is identical to losing their crowns; and any who attempt to exercise the office of eye, hand and mouth of the Lord, once they lose their priestly anointing, would simply be power‑grasp­ers of the worst order. We present this detail to demonstrate the extreme folly of any crown‑loser who would attempt to set himself up at Pastor and Teacher before the Lord. Saul typed the crown-­lost leaders up to Armageddon; and, once Saul had been rejected by the Lord, “the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.” (1 Sam. 28:6)

“It is stated Zechariah was “stoned in the court of the house of the Lord”; and Jesus said this occurred “between the temple and the altar” (Matt. 23:35). Certainly, this addition by Jesus was not without purpose. We know the brazen altar in the court types the humanity of the entire church. And Zechariah was slain between the altar and the temple. Thus, while it is logical enough to conclude that Zechariah types the last eye, mouth and hand (the last Star Member of the Church), it is clear enough from this type that he would pass from the picture while some were still in the sacrificing condition (the brazen altar), with others already in the glorified state (Solomon's Temple). Therefore, instead of this type proving antitypical Zechariah would be the last Saint, it proves just the reverse – that there would still be some sacrificing Saints after he had gone. It proves also, that those Saints remaining after antity­pical Zechariah's death would never again be served by a special eye, hand and mouth –  ­that Cod would “supply all their needs” through other sources by His Word and Providences.

“In support of this conclusion, we have Brother Johnson's analysis of Rev. 19:1,2 as given in E:3‑132,133,134. In v. 1, it is stated John “heard a great crowd in Heaven”: and the words in v. 6 are substantially the same – “heard the voice of a great crowd.” Brother Johnson says vs. 1 and 2 refer to the Great Company in the Society smiting Jor­dan the second time; and at the bottom of page 133 he says: “Whenever John is said to hear this or that the reference always is to the things transpiring at the time of the hearing.” Then on page 134: “Therefore, the John Class hears the message of the Great Company delivered While the Little Flock is yet in the flesh” (emphasis by Brother Johnson). Either Brother Johnson is wrong in his analysis of vs. 1 and 2, or others are wrong in their conclusions re vs. 6‑9. John “heard” the message of the Great Company in vs. 6‑9. Therefore, both messages must occur while the John Class is in the flesh if we are to accept Brother Johnson's teaching on this matter.

“In this connection, we believe it well to note the striking similarity in the technique of Azazel from first to last of the Gospel Age. Jesus had said, “Simon, Simon, behold, the Adversary has asked for you, that he may sift you like wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith may not fail.” – Luke 22:31 (Dia.) Here is a clear statement that Satan would attempt to destroy the Christ Company at its very outset by snaring the one to whom was committed “the keys of the Kingdom.” And what was his modus operandi? Why, he used “a certain maid‑servant” – Luke 22:56 (Dia) ­in his attempt to topple over and destroy Peter; but he failed because Jesus had specially prayed for him that his “faith fail not.” And in keeping with his attempt against the first members of the Christ Company at the beginning of the Age, he proceeded in identical fashion at the end of the Age by using a “handmaid” (Joel 2:29) – a Great Company member – to “bruise the heel” of the Body in an effort to destroy the grand Plan of the Ages. This same “handmaid” is actually typed by a maid in his Pilgrim office (see E:14‑282). All just happenstance, you think? Yes, Satan is a wily deceiver; but “we are not ignorant of his devices” (2 Cor. 2:11) “lest he should get an advantage of us.” (See August 1, 1957 article.)

The following is from our Nov. 15, 1957 issue: “As all Bible Students know, Brother Russell and Brother Johnson both taught that a type must never be used to establish a doctrine; it can only be used to support a doctrine already established. But in this instance, R. G. Jolly not only does not prove a doctrine by his Zechariah type, he actually tries to set aside a doctrine already well established – and he makes this attempt by a fractured type at that!

“In Brother Johnson's explanation of the Zechariah type he emphasized that he would be here until 1956, and that his end would be a violent one. Since neither the date of his death nor the manner of his death occurred according to expectation, we state it was a fractured type. But the doctrine was well established by both Brother Russell and Brother Johnson that some Saints would remain on earth until the violent features of the Time of Trouble arrived. In our August 1 writing on The Last Saint we offered a number of Scriptures and comments from the Star Members pertaining to this matter – enough certainly to establish the doctrine just set forth – ; and we now offer others in support of it.

“Brother Johnson's belief that his would be a violent end (if he were to be the last Saint) comes logically enough. The first ‘righteous blood’ to be shed occurred in the violent death of Abel; and the last “righteous blood” – specifically described as such by Jesus – came through the violent death of Zechariah. The last righteous blood actually to be shed violently in pre‑Gospel‑Age times was that of John the Baptist; and Brother Russell accepted that as a concluding type of the Gospel‑Age priesthood in his belief that the last ones would come to a violent end. For Gospel‑Age purposes the first righteous blood to be shed was that of Jesus – also violently poured out – just as St. Paul's blood likewise was violently “poured out” (2 Tim. 4:6,Dia.).. And the Scriptural teaching seems clear and indisputable that the last righteous blood of this Age would be violently poured out –  as instance, 1 Thes. 4:17: “We which are alive shall be caught up together with them in the clouds.” Brother Johnson's comment on this in E:6‑518 follows: “The anarchists will terribly persecute spiritual Israel, as indica­ted by Elijah's whirlwind ascent, and by the last ones being ‘violently seized by cloud’, the literal translation of the Greek rendered in the A.V. – 1 Thes. 4:17 ‘caught up in the clouds.’”

“The foregoing is exceptionally clear; and cannot be explained away by a mere fractured type. Let R. G. Jolly – and all others who claim the Saints are no more – give their explanation of the above, in harmony with their present position.

“Companion to the foregoing is Brother Johnson's statement in E:6‑630 on Zech.8:10: The ‘no hire’ for man or beast of Zech. 8:10... 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.’

“Here again is some more doctrine that must be discarded if the fractured type of Zechariah is to prevail. It will be noted that all the types we presented in our August writing support the doctrine. In further support of our statement that Zech­ariah could type the last Star Member, but not the last Saint, we offer the Moses type –  wherein he types the Star Members. Moses did not complete the march of Israel into Canaan, which shows clearly enough that it would not be a Star Member in the end of this Age who would complete the march of spiritual Israel into the heavenly Canaan.

“There is also the prophecy of Gen. 3:15 – ‘thou (Satan) shalt bruise his heel’ (the last members of the Christ company on earth). Is there any physical evidence to show this ‘bruising’ has yet occurred?

“But, weak as the Zechariah type appears, it is reasonably solid compared to the nonsense offered in explanation on page 78 of ‘John hearing the Rev. 19:6,7 message.’ R. G. Jolly contends that John in this Scripture is transposed from the Little Flock to the Great Company and Youthful Worthies. This contention is strikingly co‑incident to the claim of That Evil Servant that Elijah was transposed into Elisha – just by the death of Brother Russell. And the only argument given for the transformation in Rev. 19:6,7 is the death of Brother Johnson – and nothing more! Well, if there be any sound substance to this contention, we should be able to substitute “Great Company” for the pronoun “I” in v. 6. Let's try it and notice how it sounds: “The Great Company heard as it were the voice of the Great Company” (apparently talking to themselves!). Does it sound sensible? Yes, indeed, definitely ‘non’sensible! As Brother Johnson so ably stated – When these people fall into the hands of Azazel they talk all sorts of nonsense. “And the contention in this instance of John being transformed from the Little Flock to the Great Company and Youthful Worthies – then talking to themselves –  well nigh approaches ‘perfection’ in nonsense. And the sin here is doubly magnified when R. G. Jolly attempts to besmirch Brother Johnson's good name by attaching such nonsense to him, and claiming the Bible teaches it. Is the claim that ‘three times one equals one’ any more ridiculous?

“The foregoing remarks re John on Patmos representing God's people would be inappropriate had R. G. Jolly properly qualified Brother Johnson's statement about John ‘representing the Lord's people.’ John represents only ‘the Lord's faithful and obedient people.’ In no instance in the Bible do God's faithful and obedient people in their faithfulness represent unfaithful or measurably faithful and disobedient people. Every Great Company type has one or more reprehensible features attached to it; and the reason is self‑evident – they portray those particular failings of various Great Company members. Even in the case of Moses –  great and good man that he was – ­he pictures future unfaithful classes only when he was disobedient. And in the case of Cyrus, a heathen, he represented Christ only when he was doing God's will – “my shepherd Cyrus,” Isa. 44:28 – To say that faithful Apostle John represented the uncleansed Great Company since 1950 is sacrilege. There must indeed come a time when John on Patmos (Patmos means ‘suffering’) will represent all God's people – but this cannot be so until the Great Company are cleansed, obedient and faithful. We have offered so much from Brother Johnson and otherwise – including R. G. Jolly's truthful admission at the Jacksonville Convention in Feb. 1955, that Brother Johnson had never withdrawn brotherly favor from him – which is certainly true, and is proof that R. G. Jolly couldn't possibly have been cleansed at October 22, 1950, because the final step had not been taken in his case to effect his full cleansing – viz., the withdrawal of all brotherly help and favor by the World's High Priest. Certainly none of the various groups were cleansed at October 22, 1950 as a class. None of this has been answered, because R. G. Jolly cannot answer it. Let him and his sectarian supporters continue to fight the Truth, if they will; they must eventually hear the Lord's word grating on their ears – ‘It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks’ (Acts 9:5).

“Furthermore, Brother Johnson states in E:5‑420 that the message of Rev. 19:5 will be preached by the Great Company after they are cleansed. For the past two years we have offered many proofs from Brother Johnson's writings showing that no Levitical group was cleansed at October 1950 – though there were individuals among them who probably were cleansed. None of this has been refuted to date, so we shall not pursue it further here.

“The suggestion has come to us through the mail that Rev. 19:6 makes no allowance for a false message –  which would be the case if we are right and R. G. Jolly, et al, are wrong. To this we answer that the same premise would apply to Rev. 16:17 – “It is finished.” The message that the High Calling was closed was published first by the Great Company in the Society; and, while the message was correct, their date was wrong. They offered March 27, 1918, instead of September 16, 1914; and it offers a fitting parallel to the present contention about the Saints being no more on earth. As Brother Johnson so truly stated – Bungling is the natural and usual activity of the Great Company.” (See our Nov. 15, 1957 article)

On p. 67, col. 2, par. 3, last sentence, R. G. Jolly attempts to “beauty‑parlor” his errors by quoting Brother Johnson, “I will be watching you from beyond the veil.” For a time after Brother Johnson's death, some of R. G. Jolly's subservient Yes‑men even went about the country declaring Brother Johnson was still supervising “our work from beyond the veil.” This was an identical “twin” to the Society preaching after Brother Russell's death; and it became apparent soon after 1916, and soon after 1950, that the bungling efforts of uncleansed Levites so disgraced the beloved Star Members that the thought was quickly dropped. “Bungling is the natural and usual procedure of the Great Company,” said Brother Johnson.

On pages 68‑69 R. G. Jolly disparages a Youthful Worthy sifter (presumably J. W. Krewson); taking him to task quite laboriously for his erroneous “parallels.” It will be noted, however, that he fails to mention “Brother Russell's Epiphany Parallels,” by the same person, which R. G. Jolly willingly and gladly published in the Present Truth, so long as they fed his ego. (Note: This parallel is in keeping with all his subsequent parallels – hallucinations.) Would a child in grammar school now not evaluate those presentations for the spiritual rubbish that they were? Time itself has offered a clear exposure of that nonsense!

Then, on p. 69, R. G. Jolly makes an attempt toward “the other errorist,” mean­ing JJH. He speaks of “a loan of a large sum of money” he refused in 1952 – presumably as our reason for finding fault with him. Why doesn't he state the amount of the loan? And why doesn't he offer at least some small section of our correspondence with that to lend credence to this slur he is setting up? The answer is, He hasn't any! As Bro. Johnson has so ably stated, “half truths are more misleading than whole errors.”

We inform our readers now that we requested from R. G. Jolly a loan of $5,000, which may have been a “large sum” to him, as it is probable he never realized such an amount in his own possession before he received his “promotion” to Executive Trus­tee of the L.H.M.M. But, there's more to this! Back in the thirties, during the depression, Brother Johnson approached us in the hope we might secure title to 1327 Snyder Avenue to avoid the movement of headquarters and the resultant confusion. We not only advanced the money to buy outright 1327 Snyder Avenue, but we also gave Brother Johnson title to the property. After Brother Johnson's death R. G. Jolly asked our permission to dispose of that property (he must have felt some obligation then, or he would not have needed to ask our permission), which we graciously encour­aged him to do, so that all L.H.M.M. effort could be directed from the present Taber­nacle. R. G. Jolly disposed of 1327 Snyder for about $11,000.00 –  a clear windfall to him under the circumstances. And for him now to attempt this insulting reference to our request for a loan (not a gift, although he was a recipient of a much larger gift from us at the time,) for less than half the proceeds of our own gift to the Movement, simply establishes what a little man he is – a very cheap “little” man!

Brother Johnson on at least one occasion related that at Christmas time, when brethren would send him special tidbits, he would offer R. G. Jolly a half of what he had received, which R. G. Jolly readily accepted. Then, later Brother Johnson learned that those same brethren had sent R. G. Jolly an amount equal to his own; so that, after dividing with him, R. G. Jolly then had three times the amount Bro. Johnson himself had. As Shakespeare so aptly stated, “Yon Cassius hath a lean and hungry look!” Yes, indeed, R. G. Jolly hath a “lean and hungry look.” Whatever of education he may have received to further his insatiable ambition to be a “preacher,” it was sadly inadequate to cleanse his cheap interior. It grieves us deeply to offer this uncomplimentary observation of him, but his unholy ambition, revolutionistic course, together with his offering “strange fire” (false doctrines) forces us to make crystal clear just what ‘manner’ of man he is.

When Brother Johnson said the Great Company would have to serve themselves after his demise, there is nothing about that which should arouse any awe. It's a self-­evident truth! All during the Gospel‑Age the Great Company has done the same thing after the demise of the Star Member. And what a service they offered! They always seized control through hook or crook; after which their chief service was persecuting the Faithful as they themselves built up Big Babylon; just as during the Epiphany the Great Company have persecuted the Faithful as they built up Little Babylon – ­and just exactly as R. G. Jolly has been doing since Brother Johnson's death.

On p. 70, col. 1, par. 2, R. G. Jolly once more refers to “this errorist” (JJH) in connection with the abandonment process, so we quote again from E:15‑525, which directly contradicts him now – as it has done right along – and we ask once more for a clear answer to this and the other Scriptures we have presented foregoing on the Last Saint, etc. WILL HE DO IT?

“But these experiences have not proved enough entirely to free their new minds, hearts and wills – their Holy Spirit – from their developed bondage to self, the world and sin, though they contribute toward that end in all and almost entirely accomplish it in those who lose Little Flockship by the skin of their teeth. Thus we see that the rod helps toward freeing their Holy Spirit, God's disposition in them, from its pertinent bondage. (E:15, bottom of P. 524; and top of page 525)

“Is in none of the Great Company do these two forms of the rod prove sufficient fully to free their Holy Spirit from the bondage of developed worldliness, selfishness, error and sin, and in a large number hardly fazes them at all, and variously but in­completely affects the rest of them, the Lord resorts to a second set of untoward experiences, which are calculated finally fully to deliver their New Creatures from the bondage into which their unfaithfulness to their justification or consecration has brought them. He delivers them over to Satan .... 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, until their fleshly minds are destroyed, which delivers the New Creature, the Holy Spirit, from the bondage of sin, selfish­ness, worldliness and error. Filling their minds with more or less error, Satan makes them busy themselves with false religious work, works of false propaganda, of building false religious sects. He deceives them into believing they will accom­plish great works, win great numbers, gain great favor, etc. The upshot of it all, however, is great disappointments, troubles, losses, frustrations and failures, as is shown of them in Ps. 107:12; Matt. 7:21‑23,26,27.” (See E:15‑525, par. 1)

That such withdrawal of all brotherly fellowship and favor from the Great Company for their 'abandonment to Satan’ is supported by clear Scriptures, and not Brother Johnson's thought merely, can be seen by 1 Tim. 1:20 and 1 Cor. 5:5

R. G. Jolly still insists that due Truth is for all the consecrated, despite Brother Johnson's clear contradiction of his contention. Note the Question (9), p. 128, in E‑4, and Answer, part of which follows: “What, however, the Lord may give during the Epiphany for the priests alone, will be for them alone, until it has served its secret purpose... E.g., now the understanding of the priestly matters pertinent to leading Azazel's Goat to the Gate, delivering him to the fit man and abandoning him to Azazel, is withheld from them.” (It is self‑evident that R. G. Jolly did not under­stand his ‘abandonment process’ during Brother Johnson's ministry, and it is clear enough that he is still in ignorance – still kept ‘secret’ from him – despite the clear and simple Epiphany teachings that have been repeatedly presented to him.)

How much clearer could this be? Of course, we're not surprised that R. G. Jolly is blind to this clear teaching (the Great Company not only can't receive ‘advancing truth,’ but they lose a large part of what they have already received ‘when in the hands of Azazel’), because it is clear enough from his writings that he does not even yet understand the abandonment and cleansing process of the Great Company. Brother Johnson says in E:4‑129: “So far as the meat in due season – the advancing Truth – ­is concerned, they do not partake of, but reject it, while in the fit man's and Azazel's hands. And as a result their new creatures are famished, weak, sickly and asleep, out of which sleep some of them will never awaken.”

            R. G. Jolly does not only reject ‘advancing truth,’ but he now rejects the Epiphany teaching on the ‘abandonment process’ – a fundamental Scriptural Epiphany teaching. His New Creature is indeed ‘famished, weak, sickly and asleep’! We do pity his condition! But no one can help him by supporting his ‘erroneous course.’ J. F. Rutherford doubtless never understood his ‘abandonment to Azazel process’ – ­and he ‘never awakened from his sleep.’ R. G. Jolly is a living example of the fact that “due truth” is not for all the consecrated, i. e., if he is still in the House­hold of Faith.

In this connection it is well to note that, after the abject failure of his $5 Correspondence Course, his Flying Saucer tract, his attendance at those “Chop Suey” Conventions (Did they order him out? We wonder!), his efforts to impress the Great Company in other Little Babylon groups, now he comes somewhat to life with the tracts of antitypical Gideon's Second Battle – after our exposure of his evils here – ­in a weak attempt to ‘prove’ he is cleansed by his espousal of those “timeworn and threadbare” tracts. While we are much pleased to see this reversal on his part, we must yet note his multitudinous other revolutionisms, false doctrine, etc., in which he still continues, which keep screaming to the sky – “UNCLEAN, UNCLEAN!” (E:4‑271– top)

There is much, much more that could be said about R. G. Jolly's Present Truth (a misnomer), his perfidy, his perversions (Azazel means Perverter), but this should suffice for now. In due course we shall offer more, D.v. “Lord, who shall abide 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) For now, to all who read “in a good and honest heart” we pray the God of all Grace may stablish, strengthen and settle you in every good word and work.

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim



We suggest October 16 through November 13 as our period for the Special Effort in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle (against the Consciousness of the Dead and Eternal Torment). The date this year is almost the same as was given us the last year of Brother Johnson's ministry. In 1950 the date was October 15 through November 12. The Where are the Dead, What is the Soul and The Resurrection tracts are specially adapted for participation in this Battle. The Battle is not complete yet, and Brother Johnson tells us the Faithful will participate therein unto its completion. So we urge all Epiphany‑enlightened brethren everywhere to use similar literature for this Special Effort, leaving other work to those who do not appreciate the priv­ilege of serving such ‘timely’ literature. An excellent way to engage in this battle is at church doors for those physically able and providentially situated to do so.

To those in our group who are enlightened regarding the condition of all the groups in Little Babylon, we suggest they continue waging the ‘good fight’ against their revolutionisms and ‘strange fire’ (false doctrines). The Three Babylons tract may be used toward Little Babylon, although it is not a part of Gideon's Second Battle. Our beloved Epiphany Messenger ‘poured out his soul’ unto death in resisting, refut­ing, and attacking the errors in Little Babylon, and we do indeed honor his memory by using the Epiphany Truths he gave to us in continuing the battle against error, sin, selfishness and worldliness, especially as manifested in the various groups of Little Babylon. Let us continue to pray daily, “God Bless their Memory,” and pro­ceed in our daily lives to ‘continue’ in the Truths they ministered to us.



QUESTION: –  Will you please explain Rev. 20:12, “the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life.”

ANSWER: –  “The books were opened” simply means that our present Bible will be made plain, expounded, explained to all mankind during the Millennial reign. Our present Protestant Bible contains 66 books, 39 of which are in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. The meaning of the word “Bible” is “the books,” and it would have been just as correct and more revealing had the text read, “the Bible was opened”; but, clearly enough, the Lord did not wish to make the statement so easily understood for all at this time.

“Another book” is probably a third section of our Bible, which will be given during the Millennium for the further revelation and guidance of the human race. In Joel 2:28 it is stated, “your old men (Ancients) shall dream dreams, and your young men (Youthfuls ) shall see visions.” The Ancients and Youthfuls are the Ancient and Youthful Worthies, who will receive inspired messages, as did the Ancient Worthies to build the Old Testament; and these inspired works will comprise “another book” to be added to our present Bible, or The Books.



Dear Brother Hoefle: – Christian greetings in the name of our Lord and Head!

Yours of the 15th of Sept. is to hand. Thanks for those kind words of en­couragement. It is ever my determination to serve the Lord, so that I, too, might be found faithful. Although passing through different adverse circumstances of life, yet as the mariners at sea I shall fight until my deliverance comes.

I am also in receipt of the October paper. It has certainly warranted our interest and keen attention. Your experiences at the Philadelphia Convention, and elsewhere, with uncleansed Great Company brethren, and their associates, are not at all strange to me. From my personal experience here with some of the opposers to the clear and faithful teachings of our dear Pastors has made me understand beyond the shadow of a doubt what kind of treatment you must be having.

But as I have told some with whom I came in contact, that a faithful Servant of the Lord is always a type of another, whether Little Flock or Youthful Worthy. As you have rightly shown, from our Lord's Day it has been the same experiences – ­even until now. Let each rejoice as the good Lord has favored them to suffer for righteousness. Brother Russell tells us we are to defend the Truth. it is as God's and Christ's representa­tives, and our standard, and we should defend it, 'even until death.’ When we recall Brother Johnson's experiences with Rutherford and his adher­ents, then it affords you great courage to continue your fight in defense of the Truth – your experiences being similar to his. These claimed present‑day ‘Pastors and Teachers,’ they fight but like craven coward who cannot withstand the Truth. Likewise their fol­lowers. They try to avoid us. Why? Because they cannot stand before the Truth as it shines forth on their .... sleepy faces. Oh, may the dear Lord still be with you, to keep and strengthen you for His service, is my daily prayer for you. For your con­tinued strength, I quote October 5 Manna text and its Comments.

I ask to be remembered to Sister Hoefle and to the dear ones with you, and wishing you all the Lord's richest blessings

Yours by His Grace, Brother ------- Jamaica


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Love to you both in His dear Name!

Please send me some more tracts, Where are the Dead and The Resurrection of the Dead. Enclosed is a little for the Lord's service.

Yours in the Master's service ------- Conn.


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and peace in Jesus' name!

I thank you for your good letter, and I think I will keep looking for what knowledge your writings produce, as I am blessed by your writings; and since I do believe God is using you to lead spiritual Israel I think I can get all due Youthful Worthy truth gradually in “due time.”

Thank you for your August article. We talked it over one Sunday after service, and all thought it was so plain. It is a puzzle how brethren who seem so well versed in Parousia and Epiphany Truths could be so blinded they cannot see such plain pointers..... Dear Brother we appreciate your labor for Truth and Righteousness, and the Lord will surely recompense you... Hymn 93.

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