No. 16
My dear Brethren: Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!
Inasmuch as numerous requests have come to hand for elucidation on past comments, we now offer some questions of general interest.
Question: What is the antitype of Aaron standing naked for a short time in the court of the Tabernacle, as shown in Lev. 16:23‑24?
Answer: As Brother Johnson so well explained, Garments in the Scriptures symbolize three things: (1) Graces of the Holy Spirit; (2) “Dis”‑graces; (3) office Powers. Inasmuch as the risen Christ is fixed in character, the first two of these points could not apply; but the “Office Powers” certainly can apply. When the last Saint has left the earth, the linen garments of sacrifice will have been forever put away. According to the type, they next put on the garments of Glory and Beauty, at which time they would proceed to “bless the people.” But they cannot proceed to “bless the people” immediately after putting aside the linen garments of sacrifice. Why? Because the Great Company and Youthful Worthies will not yet have finished their course; and, until the merit that reckonedly and tentatively imputed to these two classes has been returned, that merit cannot be used to seal the New Covenant, which sealing must precede the donning of garments of Glory and Beauty incident to blessing the people. Therefore, the time of waiting between doffing the linen garments of sacrifice and donning the garments of Beauty is typed by the High Priest standing naked for a time in the court after completion of all the Atonement Day sacrifices. In that interim the Christ will be complete as the Mediator; but they will be without the “Office Power” to fill that office until the returned merit allows them to put on the garments of Glory and Beauty which they must wear before any blessing can take place.
Question: Inasmuch as St. Paul had striven all his life to keep the Law of Moses strictly to the letter, how could he say in 1 Tim. 1:15, “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief”?
Answer: It is true that St. Paul adhered to the Law of Moses to the best of his ability, as his statement in Phil. 3:6 (Dia.) clearly declares: “As to that righteousness which came by law, I was irreproachable.” Yes, he had indeed been a “Pharisee, an Hebrew of the Hebrews”, which meant he had never been a drunkard, had never been immoral, never a thief, etc.; therefore, he had never degraded to the level of the “beggarly elements”, who, concerning righteousness, “cannot discern between their right hand and their left” (Jonah 4:11). As we see it, there is only one way in which we can reconcile St. Paul's statements: In Acts 7:58 it is stated that Paul (then named Saul) “held the clothes” of them that stoned St. Stephen to death, thus making him equally guilty with the perpetrators of that act. Therefore – so far as we know — Paul is the only member of the Body of Christ who was guilty of the murder of another member of that same Body. Thus, among the Body Members that deed would make him the “chief sinner”.
It is now December 1, and there is still no November Present Truth. In 1951 it was reduced from one each month to one each two months; now it seems there isn't even one in three months. Can it be that R. G. Jolly had his November Present Truth through the printer's shop, then had to re‑write it because some more of his nonsense became apparent to his co-laborers? We wonder.
With this letter comes the Christian love and assurance of our prayers to one and all – May the Lord bless thee and keep thee".
----------------------------------
December 1, 1956
An Open Letter to Raymond G. Jolly:
In view of some things you said at the Chicago Convention October 26‑28, I feel obliged to address this open letter to you:
1. In substance, this question was submitted – “Should we continue to invite a brother to our meetings when a brother from the Philadelphia Bible House is our speaker if that brother interrupts the speaker with his own opinions during the discourse?”
Your Answer: Please report to me any brother who lets the brethren be that unruly. I am going to ask that brother why he didn't keep order. My dear brethren, any one that goes forth should maintain order in the Church where he is serving...... The one who interrupts might not know any better; but the speaker should keep order.
I consider your answer as set out above 100% correct; and I commend you for finally coming to see the Truth on this point of order in the Church. However, your claim that Sister Hoefle was disorderly at the Winter Park meeting on March 15, 1955, if true, placed you in the identical position in every detail to the situation described aforegoing – yet you did not give her the benefit of the corrective instruction you now advocate; i. e., if she were guilty as you charged behind her back. Certainly, the obligation now rests heavily upon you to write the Winter Park Class an explanation in harmony with your own advice which you gave the brethren assembled at Chicago.
2. At the Friday‑night Business Meeting you stated you “rejoice in all things” – including the sifting experiences; and you specifically mentioned the 1908‑11 sifting. If Brother Johnson has given us the Truth on the 1908‑ll sifting on pages 165‑170 of Vol. E‑14, then neither Brother Russell nor Brother Johnson agree with your statement about it. On page 170 it is stated that Brother Russell “sought by most self‑denying labor and by humbling himself..... to the dust before God”; and that leading brethren “sought to assuage his grief.” Certainly, this gives no hint that he was “rejoicing” during that sifting. Nor is your statement in harmony with Paul's words in 1 Cor. 13:6 that “love rejoiceth not in iniquity.” Nor is it in harmony with Ezek. 33:11 – “I have no pleasure (do not rejoice) in the death of the wicked.” Also, it would be interesting to have your explanation of how Jesus “rejoiced” when He wept at the tomb of Lazarus. (Luke 11:35) And how was He rejoicing as He wept over Jerusalem because of the sins that had been committed there? Or what rejoicing He displayed in the agony of Gethsemane, and throughout that night, and the next day on the cross? The Bible gives not the slightest hint that Jesus or any of the brethren “rejoiced” that Judas, when manifested, was the “son of perdition”; and certainly no one with “the spirit of a sound mind” could “rejoice” in the heinous crimes or the human depravity that we see everywhere about us. I know from personal conversation with you that you did not rejoice in 1937‑38 when you were a manifested crown‑loser nor did I rejoice over your loss; and I sincerely hope you do not rejoice over others losing their crowns. All Scripture must be read in the light of sanctified reason; otherwise, all sorts of nonsense may be “proved” by the Bible. The Bible says God can do all things; yet it also says it is impossible for Him to lie. It is stated in Prov. 10:12 that “love covereth all sins”; yet Jesus said that a sin against the Holy Spirit would never be forgiven (covered) — Matt. 12:31. Indeed, your teaching on “rejoice in all things” is loose and perverted and very misleading.
3. You said Brother Johnson indicated, while he was yet living, that the next great sifting would come from the Youthful Worthies. Where did he indicate anything like that? Certainly, you know full well that the sifting that cane after his death involved almost exclusively New Creatures, and affected Youthful Worthies very little. Nor is your claim in harmony with Brother Johnson's comments under the Nov. 14 Manna text.
4. You said the Great Company developing Truths were all brought out by the end of the 80‑year period that came to a close in October 1954. Will you please point out just one such Truth that you published in the Present Truth between 1950 and 1954 that Brother Johnson had not fully clarified while he was here? Or, are you contending that the “purification” was completed by 1950?
Also, in that same statement you said those truths would have to appear by October 1954, because they would be prima facie error if they were presented after that date. With this I am in full agreement. Then you proceeded to declare that the contention of one Youthful Worthy sifter that the abandonment to Azazel of the last Great Company Group (those in the LHMM) was accomplished on October 22, 1950 is prima facie error because it did not appear until 1955. I am forced to conclude you are again guilty of wilful falsehood when you make such a statement, because this matter has clearly set out on pages 9 & 10 in my writing of March 27, 1956 as follows:
“R. G. Jolly belittlingly states re our statement of the last Great Company developing truth to appear in the 80‑year period – `it is appearing rather late – in his Nov. 15, 1955 circular.' Well, well!! He loudly and repeatedly has contended — and correctly_so – that `classes of individuals are frequently represented in their leader or leaders!' But now – with his usual sleight‑of‑hand – he tosses that teaching out the window because it seems to suit his convenience. On January 18, 1954 the following statement was sent to him by this `Sifter':
“`When you recognized that the last Priest had left the earth, you should also have recognized that the last act of the High Priest on the Day of Atonement, before removing his linen garments, was to deliver Azazel's Goat into the hands of the Fit Man (Lev. 16:20‑24). It seems to me that the awful realization of your appalling position should have caused you to prostrate yourself before God and the Brethren. But, instead, you began to assert yourself with emphasis; those who could not immediately agree with you were `stubborn and self‑willed! I know of my own knowledge that your attitude caused some to leave us. Perhaps their leaving was `for good'; perhaps `they went out from us because they were not all of us.' I say, Perhaps! But, perhaps the words of Jesus should be considered here, too: Offenses indeed must come, but woe unto that man by whom the offense cometh. Seemingly, you learned little or nothing from observing the terrible course of That Evil Servant, who immediately began `to smite his fellow‑servants' (his equals).'”
When you juggle the truth and inject gross falsehood, as you have repeatedly done in the above and other matters, you may consider yourself quite clever as you deceive and mislead trusting brethren; but I remind you that you are not thus fooling the Lord in the slightest degree. He has said He will not “be mocked”, so there is certain to be a day of reckoning. So far, my protests to you along this line seem to have influenced you not at all; and, if you do not speedily make an honest effort to cleanse yourself, to remove yourself from “darkness and the shadow of death”, then your eventual lot will appear with the Epiphany Jambres – an end from which there is no recovery. My prayer is that this letter may arouse you to your precarious position, and that you may eventually “stand in the congregation of the righteous.” This is my only motive in addressing you as I have. Please know I do not “rejoice in iniquity”; nor do I find anything but regret and sorrow in having to expose your sins to the gaze and consternation of brethren near and far. “He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” — Prov. 29:1.
Sincerely,
John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim
--------------------------------------------
Letters of General Interest
Oregon.....
Dear Bro. Hoefle: When the brethren turn against you and say untrue things, it is indeed a bitter experience and hard on the flesh. I have had some personal experiences along that line;........... When first I read the May Present Truth I remarked that I bet there was sure a lot of trouble brewing to have brought forth that article, but had no idea what was behind it......... I re‑read the May Present Truth article and very carefully read all of the letters you sent, and want to assure you that I approve the stand you have taken against this slander........... But more than that I rejoice at the stand you have taken for the Truth and for upholding the last two Star Members. It seems to me this slander relative to the money, your lack of “harmony”, etc., may well be the Lord's overruling providence to bring about the action you took in your letter of August 8 to Bro. Jolly. Though it is hard on the flesh, the lord will surely bless you richly spiritually......... Knowing so well your great knowledge and keen understanding of the Truth, your opinion has always carried a great deal of weight with me...... I am sure many of the other friends have this same opinion of you, and therefore it is all the more important that for the sake of the Truth and the brethren you make your position clear. No doubt by so doing you will keep many in the L.H.M.M. from being misled........ With Christian love, Sister ________
Oklahoma.....
Dear Brethren: Yesterday morning when I found that....... I would have some uninterrupted time...... I studied the Epiphany Solomon article more thoroughly than I had previously. I looked up every Scripture and Volume reference, and gave it a prayerful and critical going over. Though I was pretty well convinced of its truthfulness from previous readings, you can be sure that I am now. It is a splendid article and a remarkable revelation. It is so clear that I don't think of a question I need ask now concerning it. The Lord seems to have blessed my hours of study. One can see the Lord's leading in Brother Hoefle's explanation, and I thank Him for using Brother Hoefle to bring these truths to our attention........... With warm Christian love to you both, Sister ________
New Jersey...
Dear Friends, And I do think that you mean to be friendly and helpful in sending me your literature from time to time. However, I am asking you to send no more as I do not agree with what you consider as Truth or “new light” nor do I care for your reasoning concerning Bros. Jolly, Gavin or Eschrich. The latter has asked for forgiveness and if the other two have not or deny that they've repeated rumors to your detriment, I think it would be well to let the matter drop....... A.Y.W. cannot demand one of a higher class (G.C.) to go according to Matt. 18:15‑17 .... Sincerely, Mrs. M. S.
Ohio........
Dear Bro. Hoefle:‑ Grace and peace in our dear Lord's name! We have put off writing you for so long, but it's not because of ingratitude on our behalf, but just too much to do...... Your letters have been acceptable here, and I look up every reference you have given. We appreciate them very much, and the others have asked if they should send some money to help pay the cost of sending out these letters....... Have never neglected the study of both Parousia and Epiphany volumes, and delight in so doing. The Manna each day is most helpful, and how much we love the time spent on it. May God bless you as you View and Re‑View that which is being presented as Truth. In the love of the Truth, by His Grace ‑Sister ________
Michigan.......
Dear Bro. and Sr. Hoefle:‑ Grace and Peace! I have greatly appreciated the letters that you have been sending to me the past year and I am enclosing $.... to help out on the postage in sending out these letters to the brethren; and I know that some one should do this work in pointing out conditions in the L.H.M.M. It is a sorry spectacle when one is not able to testify now in Conventions unless you are on the list. I wonder what Bro. Johnson or Martin Luther would say of this. You sure have Bro. Jolly over the barrel on the 1000‑year question, which I thought from the beginning.......... You will find in the new Book Vol. 17, The Millennium, on page 124 where Bro. Johnson in treating of 1 Cor. 15:20‑26 has in brackets very plainly after “then comes the end”.... has it the end of the Little Season, which is a very good point ....... and let Bro. Jolly try and get around that if he can. Any one with common sense from the context of the Scripture should know that it would be after the Little Season that the Christ would deliver the Kingdom to the Father.......... The reference that Bro. Jolly uses in the Question Book on the Little Season has reference to the Mediator only........ With much Christian love, Your Bro. In Him, ________
Scotland.......
Dear Bro. Hoefle:‑ 2 Peter 1:2. We gratefully acknowledge all the typewritten sheets you have sent us and pray that the Lord will bless all your efforts to understand the revelations of Truth that has been given to us by Brothers Russell and Johnson. It has been a joy to read the Scriptures re the small Solomon and the volume citations. We are sorry you have had to suffer so much misunderstanding and misrepresentation – 2 Tim. 3:12‑14; yet, we rejoice that you have been exposing the errors of power‑grasping and combinationism in the Evil Epiphany Solomon. Brother Johnson pointed out that the Lord would raise up defenders of the Truth and we are glad to remember you in our prayers.... ......In closing, thank you very much for your labor of love and may you be kept in the love of God. Our love to you and Sister Hoefle. Yours in His grace & service, Brother and Sister ___________
England........
Dear Bro. Hoefle:‑ Greetings in His name! We are writing to notity you of change of address, and we thank you for your correspondence, which we find interesting and instructive. And we pray that the Lord will bless you in your work. Again thanking you..
... Yours in Him, Brother and Sister __________ Psalms 91.
Tennessee.......
Dear Brother:‑ We are behind you 100% with your word of Truth. I know Bro. Jolly; he has been in our home. Pray for us, and continue to send us your papers. Brother__________
Pennsylvania.......
Dear Brother Hoefle:‑ I wanted to write to you long already when I got my first paper from you, but simply put it off from time to time. I want to tell you that I see the Truth as you see it, and I want to thank you very much for what you have sent so far and I am looking to you for more, my Brother....... I hope you keep us posted on the error that is being taught at present..... I hope to hear from you from time to time and thank you very much. With much Christian love, Sister________