by Epiphany Bible Students

No. 31

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

In accordance with the statement in our last writing, we now offer some elaboration on certain items in this last November‑December Present Truth.

First of all, we take note of some comments on page 94, where reference is made to “the errorist”. Presumably he means this writer, although he doesn't say so. Isn't it odd that R. G. Jolly, the self‑appointed Pastor and Teacher, cannot accept his leading from the true Pastors and Teachers of Laodicea who never once left their readers in doubt of whom they spoke – always designating them by name when refuting their specific errors? Now isn't it odd – so very, very odd – that he practices the same technique of That Evil Servant (the very same Perverter that R. G. Jolly himself was not afraid to call by name when refuting his errors early in the Epiphany), and is now using the very same methods in the Present Truth as did JFR in the Watch Tower? It will be recalled that JFR often made slurring and derogatory remarks about Brother Johnson and his teachings, but avoided the mention of his name. But where JFR – the Master Errorist of the Epiphany – was sure the Truth would serve his purpose (even as Satan quoted Scripture when it served his purpose) he had no qualms whatever about mentioning his opponents by name – and that repeatedly; as instance his refutation of the 19‑year “correction” to the chronology as put forth by the PBI. And in this Pres­ent Truth now under consideration the same course is followed – the PBI is specifically designated as such, with only a side reference made to this writer as “the errorist”. Just think it over, Brethren! Brother Johnson and Brother Russell had their chief interest primarily in presenting, defending and contending for the Truth – gaining a follow­ing being a secondary concern with them. They well knew the true sheep would hear the “voice”. And, in keeping with their methods, we also have attempted to tread their footsteps – never leaving our readers in doubt of whom we speak. The Star Members always sought to protect the sheep in clear and unmistakable fashion – which we also con­sider our first duty. As Brother Russell has so ably put it – “Christians in general overlook the important lesson, namely, that the chief work of the ministers and under-­Shepherds of the Lord's flock during this Age is to “feed the flock,”.

And, as stated in our December 1 writing, we shall henceforth consider Evangelist Krewson jointly with R. G. Jolly, as occasion requires – as we now do in this instance. Both of them use the same method described above, thus offering an easily read acknowl­edgment that they are “cousins” of most intimate relationship. Without mentioning us by name, he refers to us as a “novice – false teacher – inept reasoner, Auxiliary Pil­grim.” Whatever may be the limitations of these two “cousins”, there seems to be no limit to their gall. When we ponder the bungling presentations offered by Evangelist Krewson on the Stewardship Doctrines, the Abandonment to Azazel, and No Opposition to character faults, then consider his reference to this writer – or to any one else ­as an “inept reasoner”, the vagary of his contention should require no further comment. And, when he refers to this writer as an Auxiliary Pilgrim, he is simply putting forth a rank falsehood – just as his “cousin” also resorts to falsehood whenever it seems expedient. We sign our papers as Pilgrim because we are such by Brother Johnson's appointment – probably the only such Youthful Worthy in the United States, and possibly the first in the entire world – known as such by Brother Johnson – ever to receive such appointment by him. “The wisdom that cometh from above is first pure”; but Evangelist Krewson's suggestion at certain places in his writings, that his readers use their imagination would seem to indicate that many of his conclusions are not “pure wisdom” but are “pure imagination.”

Now to the statement of R. G. Jolly on page 94, col. 1, that he has “thoroughly refuted the sophistry of the teaching respecting the Saints' reign”. So far as we can recall, we have given specific answer to all salient items offered by R. G. Jolly on this sub­ject. If he knows of any we have not treated, we now invite him to set them forth. And in the same vein we now offer a number of points we have set forth, and ask R. G. Jolly to give the reference where he has “thoroughly refuted” these items.

Nov. 1, 1957, page 1, we quoted this from Brother Johnson on I Cor, 15:24: “What is meant by all rule, and all authority and power? We answer every vestige of Satan's governing, of Satan's claim of right, and of Satan's might; all this must be destroyed utterly and forever, and this will be done at the end of the Little Season.” Let R. G. Jolly give the reference where he “thoroughly refuted” this.

Nov. 1, 1957, page 2 (repeated from Feb. 1, 1957, page 4) we offered this from Brother Johnson: “In Matt. 25:31‑46 (the parable of the Sheep & Goats) there is given a brief description of the Judgment process. V. 31 shove our Lord's second advent with His faithful angels, or messengers; and the next verse shows how He gathers all nations before his MILLENNIAL THRONE, making them subject to Him as THEIR KING.” Where did R. G. Jolly “thoroughly refute” this?

Here we digress to consider his statement at the Chicago Convention that the bind­ing and loosing of Satan and the Mediatorial Reign occupy the same period of time. Cer­tainly, any novice in the Truth knows that the Mediatorial Reign has not yet begun – nor will it begin yet for a number of years; whereas, the binding of Satan did begin in 1874 and the loosing will occur at 2874 – just as the Mediatorial Reign, will end in 2874. Thus the Mediatorial Reign will fall far short of a thousand years, and cannot possibly be associated with R. G. Jolly's emphasized “the thousand years” of Rev. 20:7. When we showed in our November 1957 writing how utterly ridiculous was his contention about “the thousand years” it apparently sent him reeling so badly that he offered during his semi-­stupor a worse piece of nonsense than he had in the first instance. In E‑12‑265 Brother Johnson catalogs and describes in detail the 21 offices of Christ. Almost all these operate at some time during the Millennium – some of them starting at 1874, with a num­ber of them not doing so. Likewise, some of them terminate at 2874, but a number of them do not do so. Among the latter are the offices of King and Judge – neither of which will lapse until the end of the Little Season, just as Brother Johnson has stated. While individual judging will occur all during the Mediatorial service, the large over­all judgment will not even commence until the Mediators office ceases to operate at 2874. Now, to continue:

Nov. 1, 1957, page 2 (last paragraph), we stated R. G. Jolly's contention does violence to the 2520‑year parallel and voids completely the 3520‑year parallel. WHERE did R. G. Jolly “thoroughly refute” this?

Nov. 1, 1957, page 3, we stated the purpose of the reign of Christ and the Saints is to accomplish the “Restitution of all things” – which “Restitution” cannot possibly be realized until near the end of the Little Season. Where did R. G. Jolly “thoroughly refute” this?

Here is another expression from Brother Russell in Parousia Volume 6, p. 418: “The Son of Man shall come in his glory and all the holy messengers with him, as re­corded in Matt. 25:31‑46. When the Son of Man `shall sit on the throne of his glory' he has promised that his faithful Ecclesia, his Bride, shall share that Millennial judgment of the nations.” This Millennial judgment certainly includes the Little Season, the final over‑all separation of the Sheep and the Coats. So, while R. G. Jolly is “refuting”; let him “thoroughly refute” this, too!

And, of course, he should “thoroughly refute” his own statement on page 5 of the January 1954 Present Truth, as follows: “The Millennia! reign of Christ will, therefore, be for the full subjection of all enemies and the restoration of peace and covenant relationship between God and man.”

It should be noted that prior to the appearance of our Nov. 1, 1957 writing, R. G. Jolly had simmered down to about two items – the linen garments and his emphasized “the thousand years” of Rev. 20:7 – on which he continued with parrot‑like monotony: “The sifter‑errorist keeps silent on these two items because he cannot answer them.” Now that they have bean explicitly answered in our Nov. 1, 1957 presentation, he shrinks to the nondescript exclamation – “thoroughly refuted.” With this, of course, he will not fool any one who has carefully read what we have written; but we realize his chief concern is to keep those fooled that are still blindly following him; and – “If the blind lead the blind”!


In this same Present Truth is found the concluding article on the Habakkuk prophecy the same being indeed sublime so long as it adheres to the writings of the Star Members. This treatise by them would delightfully grace the pages of any publication, regardless of who “The Editor” of that publication might be. But once again – true to R. G. Jolly's style – we find the usual admixture of Truth and nonsense when he offers his own conclusions. It is truly tragic that in so many instances the clear uplifting comments of the Star Members must ever be sullied by Great Company meddling and perversion. On page 91, col. 2, “Present‑day Conditions Fitly Described”, there is offered a quotation from page 5383 of the Reprints, the same being from Brother Russell's article of Jan. 15, 1914; and from the quotation R. G. Jolly's conclusion is given on page 92, top of col. 2 “Heb. 3:17, 18 is no longer nearing fulfillment, but has entered into fulfillment.” When he attempts such perversions, there can be only one of two answers – Either he is completely befuddled by Azazel, so that he doesn't know what he's doing, or he is wilfully resorting to trickery to mislead the guileless and trusting sheep. Nor is it necessary for us to determine which of these two evils is present here. Suffice to show that in this very same article from which he quotes to prove the prophecy has “entered into fulfillment”, we now quote the following:

“When the little flock shall have passed beyond the vail, there will still be the great company of the Lord's people left here. Many of these will apparently continue in Babylon until the time of trouble shall cause Babylon to fall. And by the fall of Babylon these will be set free. Before all this is made plain to them, they may use the language of our text, and later came to see clearly. In the 19th of Revelation this company is spoken of as rejoicing in the fall of Babylon and saying, `Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him; for the marriage of the lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.' (Vs. 7) All things had seemed to them to be failures; and now they see that God's plan has not failed, but has been fulfilled.”

Certainly none will contend that the foolish virgins in Babylon are yet using “the language of our text”, as Brother Russell said above that they would do when it has “entered into fulfillment” – after Babylon falls! And Brother Russell plainly states, too, that the proclamation of Rev. 19:7 will not properly occur until Babylon falls; although R. G. Jolly repeatedly insists that he and his adherents are giving this message now – before Babylon has fallen!

It is well to consider here, too, the reference made in the last paragraph an page 91 to E‑15‑514 to the composite Great Company – how some of them miss the Second Death by the skin of their teeth, while others of them miss the Little Flock by the same margin. And while contemplating this, why not also consider page 525 of this same reference, which we have so often quoted, where Brother Johnson says that ALL OF THEM (the best and the worst of them) must be abandoned to Azazel through disfellowship­ment (withdrawal of all brotherly help and favor) by the Priests before their cleansing can possibly be effected? Instead, he mimics Hitler's technique to repeat, repeat, and repeat his falsity that the LHMM section of Azazel's Goat is already cleansed – but he never once has shown how he can harmonize this with Brother Johnson's teaching here. Our contention here is in defense and support of the oft‑repeated faithful teaching of the last Star Member an the Abandonment and Cleansing process of ALL THE GREAT COMPANY (including those who missed the Little Flock by “the skin of their teeth”) – against which teaching both self‑styled Pastors and Teachers have revolutionized, and are still doing so.

Furthermore, on page 90, col. 2, the “Six saved classes” are discussed; but it will be noted that there is no mention of the Consecrated Epiphany Campers. And why not? Because neither Star Member ever saw such a class, so it is not mentioned in their analysis of Habakkuk – or anywhere else in their writings. And R. G Jolly having been the first to make public proclamation of this class (so far as we know), it must be considered a new doctrine. But Brother Johnson plainly teaches in so many words that no crown‑lost leader could ever be favored with bringing forth a new Truth doctrine – although they have been used by Azazel to bring forth many a false doctrine. This very premise should cause the Lord's faithful people to cast a suspicious eye on anything new he may proclaim – and especially so with his Consecrated Epiphany Campers – because he does not have a single Scripture to support his teaching.

Another Point: On page 92, par. 2, R. G. Jolly says this – “We encourage all, whether they are new creatures or not, to take up this joyful proclamation of praise and honor to God, of Christ's reign begun, of the marriage of the Lamb being complete”, etc. This proclamation which he now asks all to declare is so potent that it actually caused a serious division in the LHMM itself. Even if it were the truth – which we be­lieve we have shown clearly enough to be error – it is such a strong message that even many of the most enlightened Truth people cannot receive it; yet his DYK tract was handed to his unthinking sectarian adherents with the instruction that they give it general distribution in all quarters. Notice now E‑4‑52 an such matters:

“It will thus be seen that on some phases of this subject we cannot as yet speak with positive assurance. On this subject `now we know in part' only.... Therefore, in discussing this matter let us be cautious not to be positive in our statements ... let us confine ourselves to such sobriety of speech as leaves the details of this time feature ... a matter of inference and not of positive Proof. It would be wiser to say nothing at all on the subject to those who do not accept the Parousia Truth, and very little to others not in the Epiphany Truth.”

In these two citations we have an excellent contrast between the Good and Wise Epiphany Solomon and the Evil and Foolish Epiphany Solomon. In over thirty years never once did Brother Johnson offer the brethren a tract for distribution to the general pub­lic declaring the close of the High Calling; but the very first tract that R. G. Jolly prepared for the brethren for general distribution positively declared – Not that the High Calling is closed, but a message of much greater intricacy (even if it were the undisputed Truth) – that every one in that High Calling had then left the earth. And he had a million of these tracts printed for general distribution! Recently he has been telling the brethren that it is now easier to interest people in the Truth because they no longer have a definite creed; and the foolishness of this contention is appar­ent when we ponder the fact that he has not even been able to teach the Truth to Truth people, the Epiphany‑enlightened Truth people. With all the great advantages at his dis­posal, he has gone steadily backward since 1950; therefore, we call upon him once more ­and to all the brethren everywhere – to use the tracts of the Good Epiphany Solomon to carry to a completion antitypical Gideon's Second Battle, and leave the unprovable speculations of R. G. Jolly for him to distribute if he thinks they are so much better than the works of the two Star Members.

And may the Holy Spirit of understanding abide richly with all who honestly try to imbibe that “wisdom from above, which is without partiality”.

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim


Questions of General Interest

Question: – In his October‑November paper, P. 39) Brother Krewson says R. G. Jolly's ill­ness after the Chicago Convention was “permitted because of his opposition to the lord's Truth while there.” What is your thought an this?

Answer: – The only Truth we heard him oppose while we were in attendance was the Truth we ourselves have been presenting. Others have asked us the same question; and we had to tell them we are not certain why R. G. Jolly's illness was permitted. We know what Brother Johnson said about That Evil Servant's imprisonment and his later double pneumonia (these things occurring, apparently, before he was out of the Household of Faith), that those things probably came to him partly as suffering for right­eousness and partly as Fit‑Man experiences to recover him from his evil course, and to effect his cleansing. We would be inclined to offer the same answer to the question presented here. And it continues to be our prayer that all the experiences the Lord metes out to him for his cleansing will eventually work out for him that “godly sorrow” that will bring about a true repentance and reform – a “turning back from his path of error” – (Jas. 5:20‑Dia.).

Question: – You seem continually to lambaste R. G. Jolly and others who have slandered and abused you. Why do you not follow the course of our Lord with St. Peter as described in John 21, where He never once referred to Peter's denial, but used the most winsome terms to recover Peter?

Answer: – We would be most happy to have done just as Jesus did if our traducers had done what Peter did – evidence that true and Godly repentance for the gross sins they committed. But, until they are repentant, then we feel constrained to follow Brother Russell's Berean Comments on Luke 17:3 – If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him (to fail to do so means to injure him); and if he repent (but not otherwise, though always remaining in an attitude of forgiveness, waiting for the desired and necessary repentance). Of course, Peter was also one of the Little Flock; whereas, these brethren are admittedly members of Azazel's Goat – and this difference enters into the matter, too. At a Philadelphia Convention not long before Brother Johnson died our pre­sentation of this teaching caused quite an uproar among a number of those present; and it was R. G. Jolly himself who arose to the platform to declare that we had presented the Truth – and that our critics were wrong. It seems he is now willing enough to revolution­ize against this teaching – telling us by act, if not in plain words, that it is not necessary for the “sinner” to repent and make amends. Questions such as this one have come to us from other faithful and sincere brethren; and we are pleased to pre­sent what we believe to be the Truth on it. Brother Johnson has a very fine article in the August 1950 Present Truth – “Provoking One Another To love”. We quote from p. 116, col. 1:

But let us notice, dear friends, that there is a way in which sin may come upon us without being at the time a wilful sin, but which later might become wilful sin; for instance, any transgression committed, either in total ignorance or with only a partial acquiescence of our wills, might become a full, wilful, deliberate sin afterward, if we afterward came to a clear knowledge of the truth respecting the subject, and failed to repent of it to the Lord, and to undo so far as was in our power the wrong toward our fellow‑creatures. To consent to a sin clearly and fully understood, simply because at the time of its committal we were in ignorance, and to refuse to make amends for it, and thus to endorse the sin intelligently, would appear to make of it a wilful sin.”

We would recommend that the brethren read the whole article – also Brother Rus­sell's splendid article in August 15, 1916 Watch Tower, Reprint 5938 – Confession of Sin Essential to Forgiveness.” We wish to assure the brethren, one and all, that none would be more happy and pleased than we if the brethren who have slandered and sinned against us would turn from their path of error” and evidence godly sorrow” and true repentance so that they may make an offering in righteousness before the lord. Let us pray that such a condition may speedily be reached. If and when such evidence is produced, then it will be our good pleasure once again to receive them back into brotherly fellowship. But to do so before they manifest such repentance would be to turn our back on the lord's Word, thereby refusing to use the Wisdom from Above”, which is first Pure” and then peaceable.

Question: – In the November‑December 1957 F.T. (p. 94) there is the question – Do the Scriptures teach that all of God's consecrated people have spiritual dis­cernment?” What is your answer to this?

Answer: – In the first sentence of his Answer R. G, Jolly says, The Scriptures teach for all times the due Truth is for all of God's consecrated people to discerns by the aid of His Holy Spirit”; and the additional 500 words he offers are simply an elab­oration of his opening statement. The Scriptures do not teach any such thing; in fact, they directly contradict his sweeping inclusion of all God's consecrated people” – and Brothers Russell and Johnson contradict him, too. 2 Thee. 2:10‑12 says those who admitted not the love of the Truth..... God will send them an energy of delusion” (Dia.); and this frenzy of delusion” has been visited upon antitypical Saul all during the Gospel Age – Especially so here in the end of it. Saul types the crown‑lost leaders up to Armageddon, who have certainly been a part of God's consecrated people” – ­R. G. Jolly himself being one of them. In E‑9‑508 (middle) Brother Johnson says this: The Little Flock leaders .... felt distressed at their (the crown‑lost leaders) ever deeper fall into sin, error and tactical blunders.” Does this sound as though they dis­cerned the due Truth”? No, indeed! These crown‑lost leaders have not only Not discerned the due Truth”, they have actually fought against it – Just as R. G. Jolly has been fighting the Truth on the Abandonment and Cleansing Process of Azazel's Goat. And fur­ther from E‑4‑129(top): So far as the meat in due season – the advancing Truth ­is concerned, they (the G.C.) do not partake of it, but reject it, while in the fit man's and Azazel's hands.” Had his answer stated all God's fully faithful consecrated people”, his answer would have been technically correct, although it would even then need same ex­planation, because it has taken years for some of the fully faithful to discern some features of due Truth; and at no time have all of them discerned the due Truth in the same clarity and comprehension. A comparison of Brother Russell and Brother Johnson with others certainly proves this. And, does R. G. Jolly contend that the crown‑lost leaders in Little Babylon have been discerning the due Truth”? In his very answer to the question we are considering, R. G. Jolly accuses another of mixuptery”; but it is a debatable question which one of them shows the greater mixuptery” in this instance.

The uncleansed Levites have not been discerning the due Truth” – nor will they do so until they are cleansed, at which time they will discern it according to their individual capacity and needs. The crown‑lost leaders may then discern the due Truth” as clearly as the good Youthful Worthies – in keeping with Brother Johnson's teaching in E‑4‑129:

“After the Levites' cleansing, they will doubtless partake of the Epiphany Truths that are for them; for then they will be somewhat like the good Youthful Worthies, who are privileged to see and appreciate everything except such truths as the lord may desire to be limited to the Priests.”

To sum up, then: Due Truth is for all God's consecrated and fully faithful to dis­cern – each one according to his several ability” (1 Cor. 4:2; Matt. 25:15) – R. G. Jolly's answer is only a half Truth; and, half truths are more misleading than whole errors.” He who discerns clearly teaches clearly; and had he clearly discerned the due Truth”, he would not have offered such a foolish answer as a correction” to another's foolish comment. Here again he offers clear proof – as he has done so often over the past seven years – that Jesus knew whereof He spoke when He described this class as foolish.”


Letters of General Interest

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Greetings in the Lord's Name!

Many times I have planned to write you ... the time goes by and I don't seem to do the things I would like to do. But I do want you to know how much I enjoy reading your writings. Mine came Saturday and I have read it over several times. I know our Lord will bless you for your tireless effort to feed the sheep and your work in helping Him. I got the Krewson roll, but after reading about half of it I couldn't go through all those words of nothing.

May our good lord continue to bless you much. Christian love, Sister ---------


 Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and Peace!

All the articles are very much appreciated. You realize words do not always ex­press one’s thought – though they are the best conveyance we have. When I read each article as it comes, I sit and almost tremble with gratitude............

There are so many comments of praise due you for the truths you bring out in your articles, but they can’t be told in writing to do justice without too much writing,... I just long each month to get them. As Sister....... says, it is so wonderful! The lord supplies all our needs – even though the Star Members are gone..... I look forward to your papers as I did to the Present Truth and Watch Tower. I do wish you the best Christmas. Lots of love, Sister ......... California


Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and Peace be yours through our dear Redeemer's Name!

It is a great pleasure to me in sending you these few words. The words of Truth and enlighten­ment received at this time has surely brought joy and peace to my heart.

  Just after the death of our dear Bro. Johnson and these controversies set in, I found myself at the forks of the way. But as the Scriptures declare, whenever we reach these junctures we'll hear the voice behind thee, saying this is the way ­walk ye in it.” And I must say these expositions are none other than the voice of the Lord. It is the Lord that has brought about these shakings, so that those who cannot be shaken may remain. Surely, dear Brother, the Lord is making manifest the hearts of His people!

I have read all your writings and find satisfaction in them. We here have been much evil spoken of for standing for Truth and Righteousness and not following the erroneous teachings of RGJ who has manifested himself as an unclean Great Company.

Dear Brother, may the lord direct you in His service, while you still uphold His Truth and the principles of righteousness. May the Lord bless and keep you and all the dear ones who still faithfully trust in His name. Yours by His Grace, Brother ---------, Jamaica