NO. 124: THE JULY-AUGUST PRESENT TRUTH

No. 124

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

As promised in our September issue, we now consider certain features of the above paper, in which R. G, Jolly indulges in his usual name-calling - ”Chronic faultfinder, opposing errorist,” etc. -in a desperate effort to retain in “the snare of the fowler” those of his readers that he has persuaded not to read our papers. (See Acts 13:8-10) Indeed, we are quite happy it is not necessary for us to indulge in name-calling. All we have to do is tell the truth about RGJ; that is more than enough! As we have previously quoted, “You can fool some of the people all the time, and all the people some of the time,” but it needs no argument that we never fool the Lord any of the time. Nor have the members of the “great multitude fooled Him any of the time, notwithstanding all their loud professions and claims of “great works” (which will be burned). When they said “Lord, Lord, open to us” (Matt. 25:11) He knew them not. He is now manifesting His rejection of that Class (in this Epiphany period) by their “strong delusion” (See 2 Thes. 2: 11-­also Berean Comments) And by such tactics, “Offenses needs must come, but woe unto him, through whom they come.” (Luke 17:1) To such the Lord pronounces the sentence, “There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt, 25:30--See Berean Comments).

On pages 50-52 R. G. Jolly treats of “The Parable of the Pounds,” as though we were in the Parousia and have no additional special Epiphany light on the subject ­as though he were one of the crown-lost leaders in Little Babylon who refused Epiphany Truth. He refers to “a considerable class” and then proceeds to classify the “wicked servant” as the “foolish virgins the Bride’s companions, a great multitude, not wholly copies of God’s dear son,  those who all their lifetime were subject to bondage through fear of death.” (“They were loyal to God, but they did no more than maintain their loyalty,” Bro. Russell says--Question Book, p: 309) All this nomenclature is scriptural and correctly applied, but why stop there? Why not clearly describe the “Great Company” so clearly and superbly described by Brother Russell in many places -and especially by the Epiphany messenger in Volumes 15 and 4? Why not also classify them as the “unprofitable servant” of Matt. 25:30; and why not explain that the word ‘‘wicked’’ in Luke 19:22 is from the Greek word “poneros,” meaning “Bad malignant, miserable”? And why not explain, too, that this same word “poneros,’’-is translated “evil” 38 times in the New Testament? We know that he would probably have done this before 1938 -so, if he is the ‘cleansed’ Levite leader he claims to be, why shouldn’t he remember this pertinent Epiphany Truth? But above all, why did he not include the following from the Epiphany Messenger in his treatment of this Pounds Parable?

“Remembering that the slothful and wicked servant (of this Pounds Parable--JJH) represents the Great Company, we can see how, from the standpoint of speaking of a part of a thing for its whole, the pound can be taken from the one and given to the other. In the first place, that part of the pound that consists of acceptableness of the human all for sacrificial purposes is taken entirely away from the Great Company (Note: They have no part in the sacrificial service -sin-offering ­and most certainly no part in the Star Members’ prerogatives, something they didn’t even have when they retained their crowns---JJH); for its humanity ceases to be a part of the Lord’s antitypica1 Goat … Henceforth lacking essential features of the pound, they may be properly spoken of as having their pound taken from them (which the Scripture corroborates--JJH) …as long as they retain their place in the Great Company, they still  retain the robe of Christ’s righteousness; but they have spotted it badly (especially by withholding Present Truth and perverting both Parousia and Epiphany Truth as R. G. Jolly is now doing--JJH). The Lord gives the pound taken from the slothful, to the faithful servants...a notable and over­shadowing instance in which the Lord took away both the pounds and the talents from the Great Company in the Truth as a class, and gave them to the Little Flock as a class....giving these to the Little Flock for Jordan’s first smiting from 1914 to 1916” (E-6:229,230 -And this is something That Servant didn’t make clear - the Truth on the subject not being revealed to him. It was for the Epiphany Messenger.)

Having omitted the foregoing very vital and clarifying substance of the Pounds Parable, he yet has the brazen effrontery of Azazel to state in his first paragraph on p. 60:

“It is only as we hold to ALL (emphasis by RGJ himself!) the Scriptures as expounded by the two Messengers and harmonize them properly that we have the fulness of the Truth.”

In the person of R. G. Jolly we have the only leader of any Truth group anywhere (so far as we know) who admits he is a crown-loser, thus self-evidently confessing that he has had his pound taken from him. Yet this same crown lost leader (who lost his pound .. as qualified by Brother Johnson in the quotation aforegoing from E-6 :22.9) ­now hurries to tell us he knows all about it (?) in producing this article with the most salient Epiphany Truth omitted -all the time claiming that he is “holding fast” to both Parousia and Epiphany Truth! Only one befuddled by Azazel would attempt such a performance. Truly, Fools (foolish virgins) rush in where Angels fear to tread! Understand, of course, had this been produced by a crown-lost leader in other groups -who never claimed to have received Epiphany Truth -then we couldn’t “find too much fault” (except their refusal to accept the Truth). Yes, indeed, he is “holding to ALL the two Messengers’ taught”! And we readily recognize that he is doing so when he omits vital points on the Great Company (clear Epiphany Truth) as he “smooths” the way for himself and others of his kind. We recognize, of course, that he is smarting under the crushing refutation we gave him on the Talents Parable; and we realize only too well that he was prodded to his present attempt with the “pound” by Azazel in an effort to humiliate him still further. And we urge our readers to believe we make this latter statement in sympathy, and without rancor or malice.

Nevertheless, in this connection we believe it in order to impress upon our readers that R. G. Jolly admits he has lost his pound -admits that he is a part of the “unprofitable servant” of Matt 25:30, cast “into outer darkness” (error) ­admits he failed in full faithfulness to smite Jordan in 1914·16 -admits he was forced from the Holy and away from the Lampstand, the Shewbread and the Golden Altar in 1938, thus receiving the first feature of his fit-man experiences (unfavor­able circumstances) -admits he has lost his anointing (the spirit of understanding) ­all of these things being part and parcel of his open confession that he has lost his crown. And with all of this, Brother Johnson -as late as 1943 -openly published that he was not then yet cleansed; yet seven short years later he claims (by his acts) to have emerged from his “captivity in the dungeon” (See Ex. 12:29) with all the answers to all the questions, and just about every answer wrong. It is little wonder his failures have been so pronounced; that his humiliations have been so acute (as in the Talents controversy, and now in the Pounds debacle, etc.). And this will continue to be his portion until he makes open confession and recants with that “godly sorrow (that) worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of” (2 Cor. 7:10 -See Berean Comment), or is eventually forced from the Household completely.

THE EPIPHANY CAMP IN THE FINISHED PICTURE

In the sub-caption as above on page 61 R. G. Jolly offers some more of his “profane, empty declamations” (2 Tim. 2:16, Dia.); so we would begin by asking just one simple question: Are we now in the finished Epiphany, or are we not? If he knows whereof he speaks, then surely he should have an-answer for this, but we opine he will not publish one, because if he does he wil1 find himself. In a quagmire of confusion whichever way he answers. Furthermore in the very quotation he gives from E-10:672 why does he not include the following? “Non-Truth Great Company and youthful Worthy brethren and new ones not yet consecrated are to be won for the Truth, some of whom will be won before Babylon is destroyed and others of them afterward.” Quite often he resorts to the evil of quoting from the Messengers, or from Scripture, citations that definitely disprove his con­tention, so we now quote what Brother Johnson said early in the Epiphany of similar would-be somebodies!

“Why do they so often quote passages to prove points positively disproven by those very passages? Is it not because they are in Azazel’s hands, and are thus blinded by him, and at his direction palm off his errors on the dear unsuspecting sheep of God’s Flock?

And we must remember, too, that this is the first time in Gospel-Age history where we have a self-admitted crown-lost leader, loudly contending that he is ‘cleansed,’ and at the same time revolutionizing against great light -having both Parousia and Epiphany Truth at his disposal, He admits that he has been removed from the “more than conqueror” Class; but by his perversions and ‘gazing’ clearly manifests that he is not yet of this “conqueror” (cleansed Levite.) Class, Brother Russell explains ----- these two classes on p. 138, Question Book: “A conqueror is one who finally triumphs. The Great Company class will all be conquerors”, except those who will die the second death.....To be more than a conqueror is to do something more, something greater, than to enter eternal life by the skin of the teeth,  (It seems that Brother Russell classifies all Great Company as entering eternal life by the skin of the teeth. (JJH) A more than conqueror does something special.  For instance, the Lord Jesus not merely kept the law, but additionally he laid down his life, sacrificially. So he was more than a mere conqueror.” ­

And be it noted, that prior to his manifestation in 1938, RGJ was equally emphatic with Brother Johnson in his description of crown-lost leaders in other groups -quite blissful in his ignorance that he was really talking about himself.   Prior to 1938 he was much more busily engaged, as a Pilgrim under the Epiphany Messenger’s supervision, with crown-lost leaders than we now are engaged with dis­cussing him and his errors (and, be it further noted, that: he was apparently very clear on Tentative Justification, the Camp and the Court, etc., before 1938 ­but unfaithfulness makes one forget formerly-held truths, See E-13:488, bottom). But what a reversal we see in him now! Time after time he attempts to minimize, or pervert Scriptural denunciations of the Measurably Faithful Class -for himself chiefly, as well as for any others of that Class that may now agree with him. Instead of carrying on with the Epiphany Truth and manifestations (for the special benefit of his ‘kinsmen’), he is now just as busy in attempting to replace himself in the “good and faithful Servant” Class -in the “faithful unto death” Class (Rev. 2:10 having exclusive application to the Litt1e Flock) -attempting to seize for himself a “cup”-an exclusive privilege of the Star Members -See E-8:l92, 193; E-9:383; E-10: XXIV, appendix;··”E··U:1.91.), and offering “strange fire” (false doc­trine· See E-U: 190, bottom, and p, 191) in such usurpation. Certainly, all of this now makes his position much more precarious than those of his “kinsmen” who err through ignorance (of Epiphany Truth particuarly), “From anyone to whom much is given much will be required.” (Luke 12:l.8--Dia.) And our Lord’s words apply with equal force to those of his partisan Great Company and Youthful Worthy supporters who now en­courage him in his wayward course.

Then he makes passing reference to E-10:114, but even he does not have the audacity to quote the complete context, which we now do as follows: “Another and still stronger reason that J is the “he”of verse 10 is this: that the message of v. 11 will not be due-until Oct. 1954, when the Epiphany. begins to lap --into the Basileia, Kingdom; for 1954 is the date that the last member of the Great Company will get his first enlightenment that will bring him into the Truth by Passover, 1956: after 1954 no more Youthful Worthies will be won (Note: This one clause is all RGJ seizes upon to support his “house built upon the sand”--JJH); and after 1954 no more persons will enter the tentatively justified state. (This one clause alone makes a shambles of the entire three pages RGJ offers to “prove” his points--JJH) Hence the exhortation: “He that is unjust (the tentatively justified, who are not actually justified, not just), let him be unjust still (remain tentatively justi­fied, and not consecrate); and he that is filthy (the impenitent Sinners, who in no sense are clean), let him be filthy still (remain in his then condition); and he that is righteous (Levites of the Great Company and youthful Worthies, who, being in the Court, are righteous), let him be righteous still;  and he that is holy (Priests are holy, since they are in the Holy), let him be holy still.” Certainly, when we come to a time when no more consecrations are possible for Gospel-Age pur­poses, it would be useless to exhort the tentatively justified to consecrate (This refers to the 1954. date, now much stressed by RGJ--yet he is not only urging such to consecrate as “useful” even here in 1965--11 years later--but he also is trying to bring new ones to accept his newly concocted tentative justification in the Camp!-JJH) and sinners to repent, for the tentatively justified and the sinners could arise no higher from their standings before God under such a condition (yet it is only since 1954 that RGJ is building his Epiphany Camp “in the finished pic­ture” with his Consecrated Tentatively-justified (?) Campers--JJH); hence, only at such a time could the first and second exhortations of v. 11 be given, but, of course, the exhortation for the Great Company, Youthful Worthies and Priests to continue faithful will remain appropriate as long as they are in the earth. Thus the nature of these four exhortations, coming in the order in which they come in v. 11, proves that these exhortations will be given by the Epiphany messenger; for in the order given they will not come until from 1954 onward (even though the Epiphany Messenger died in 1950 -four years before these predicted events should occur-­RGJ is offering this citation to ‘prove’, his 1954 date--JJH).”

Of course, only one befuddled by Azazel would select one lean and isolated clause from such copious declaration to ‘prove’ his point -which reveals the desperation in which he now finds himself; and only one befuddled by Azazel would have the temerity to emphasize that we should have “ALL from the Messengers” to keep in balance our beliefs, as he himself ignores completely about 95% of the foregoing quotation; and as he ignored the Epiphany clarification of the Pounds Parable. As we have previously stated, it is the interpretation of Rev. 22:10-11 that governs in this matter, the date 1954 being only incidental and subordinate to the interpretation. We ourselves accept the entire interpretation as correct; but, since the interpretation did not operate at 1954 (anymore than it operated in 1950 at the demise of the Epiphany Messenger), we believe it is only the most elemental of Scriptural exegesis that should cause us to recognize the mistake in the date-- just as was true of Brother Russell’s mistakes when his expectations did not materialize in 1914-1915 as to the length of the Time of Trouble (the same also being true of the Epiphany Messenger on his 1954 date as respects the length of the Time of Trouble: the Epiphany and the Time of Trouble are identical). “Are we now in the “finished picture” of the Time of Trouble? In 1954 just nothing occurred to verify that date as the end of the Time of Trouble; therefore, one befuddled by Azazel would continue to stress such a date, and refer to a quotation which di­rectly contradicts his present contention. Does he claim that no Great Company can now lose his standing, and no Youthful Worthy can be remanded to the Camp, to parallel the Saints condition in 1914 with 1954-56? Does he also claim we are now in the fin­ished picture of the Time of Trouble? We doubt that even he is so befuddled by Azazel that he would make such a claim. But, since the Time of Trouble and the Epiphany are identical, we should - when speaking of “the finished picture” -be able to sub­stitute Time of Trouble for Epiphany any time we discuss the subject. Let R. G. Jolly try that in his discussions under review; then his Levitical nonsense will be manifest to all.

And, since he insists upon considering “ALL Scripture” pertaining to any given subject, why does he continue to ignore Psa. 46:1-3; Elijah’s whirlwind ascent into Heaven; and Zech. 8:10 -”Before those days hire for man could not be obtained, and hire for beast was there none. And neither to him who went out, nor to him who came in was there success by reason of the danger, Yea I let all men loose each one against his neighbor,” (Rotherham) Here is Brother Johnson’s comment on this latter text:

“The connection shows that this is to occur after the foundation of the Church beyond the vail was laid, but before the glorified temple would be completed. Hence, it evidently refers to the time of Anarchy after Armageddon).”(E-6:630, par. 1) Yet, RGJ has his temple completed not only before Anarchy, but more than fifteen years before the violent features of Armageddon have even commenced! And he is the one who is counseling that “ALL Scripture” should be considered on any given sub­ject! Of course, all of this is in keeping with the course of his “kinsmen” of the past, those crown-lost leaders who perverted every Stewardship doctrine entrusted to them by the star Members. (See E-8:192, past middle) He is now very much occu­pied in perverting (Azazel means Perverter) Brother Johnson’s Stewardship doctrine: The Epiphany and its relation to the Epiphany Elect -with his “changing laws” (doctrines) of the Court and Camp. Also, new doctrines are “gazing” for all but Star Members. See E-l0 XXIV, appendix; and Moses, Aaron and Miriam –Type and Antitype in Chapter 2 of Epiphany Vol. 9. He is also completely silent on the Sam­son picture (see Berean Comment on Judges 16:30), although we have repeatedly empha­sized Brother Russell’s clear explanation of this type as a decisive contradiction to his present contentions.

CONCERNING TENTATIVE JUSTIFICATION

And with similar Azazelian trickery he accuses JJH of That Evil Servant’s tactics in handling the subject of Tentative Justification (accuses us of that which he him­self is most guilty), stressing that we use a quotation from 1920 to bolster our views. Even if that were true -which it is not -that 1920 quotation is repeated in Brother Johnson’s publications of 1938, with no change whatever suggested by him. Thus, anyone would be justified in naming that as a 1938 quotation – a fact that anyone not befuddled by Azazel would know, as it is elemental. However, we now offer a number of other citations from both Messengers that completely disprove his entire “house built upon the sand” -the “house built upon the sand” being the Great Company structure because it has been built by the “unprofitable servant” of Matt. 25:30 and the “wicked servant” of Luke 19:22.  Our first reference is from E-6:713: 

“These two arguments prove that the New Covenant must operate after faith (tentative -JJH) justification ceases to operate, i.e., after the Gospel Age.”

If we are now in the Epiphany as distinct from the Gospel Age (as RGJ now claims, with which, however, we do not agree, as we believe the Epiphany is the last special period of the Gospel Age, just as the Epiphany Messenger taught), then faith justi­fication is no longer in operation -no longer available for anyone -according to the above citation. We now offer something from E-11:167, 170:

“Only during the Gospel Age can our Lord’s merit be appropriated by faith alone (thus, if the Gospel-Age picture in any sense is completed, as RGJ now contends, then faith -tentative -justification must be a thing of the past--JJH) ....there will be no more faith justification working during the Millennium….When this (Gospel) Age ends Christ’s merit will cease to be an imputable thing.”

Also the following by the Epiphany Messenger: “The fact that all Israelites of the camp who left Egypt at the age of 20 years and upwards, except Joshua and Caleb, died in the wilderness under God’s disapproval (Heb. 3:7 – 4:2) demonstrates that the camp represents, for the Gospel Age, those rebellious nominal people of God, who though desiring some harmony with God, either never attain or else cease to retain even Tentative Justification, i.e., in the finished picture, those who are less than tentatively justified.” -(E-6: 195. bottom) “It does not allow for any symbolization of that condition in which unconsecrated believers are – a condition by far more important than that typed by the Camp (the Court condition is the only place where Tentative Justification is pictured, which Brother Johnson tells us is a “condition by far more important than that typed by the Camp” -JJH) ...One’s journey from the Camp to the Gate cannot at any stage represent a real faith in Christ as Savior, inasmuch as the Court curtain represents things connected with faith -the outside of it a ‘wall of unbelief’ in Christ’s righteousness to those outside, the inside, of it a ‘wall of faith’ in Christ’s righteousness to those inside.” (E-6:l99) We have been very pronounced in presenting this Truth against RGJ’s errors on the Camp: No place in the Camp to symbolize Tentative Justifica­tion, much less consecration!

Tentative Justification and the imputation of Christ’s merit in this Gospel Faith Age are inseparable; and let us keep in mind that every word Brother Johnson ever wrote about either was after we had come into the Epiphany (he was the Epiphany Messenger!), which he himself emphatically declared to be the last special period of he Gospel Age. ­

R. G. Jolly complains about our use of something that Brother Johnson wrote in 1920, so we observe that the above was published in 1948. But even the 1920 piece was published in book form in 1938 without alteration of any kind, so the 1920 date is just as applicable as the 1938 date – and just another evidence of R. G. Jolly’s desperation for some talk when he has nothing to say. Further, in corroboration, we now quote from E-4:322 (9): 

“During the transitional period -between the Gospel and Millennial Ages -those Levites, the tentatively justified, who will not consecrate lose their tentative justification, i.e., cease to be tentative Levites and are put out of the Court.” Tentative Justification and Leviteship are synonymous, and when one loses one he loses the other.­

The following from ‘‘What Pastor Russell Said,” p. 312, is also directly to the point: “‘At the close of this Age there will no longer be a tentative justification.”

At the bottom of p. 61, col. 2, R. G. Jolly quotes Brother Johnson to the effect that “The Epiphany Camp in the finished picture is the condition of the loyal tenta­tively justified.” While Brother Johnson in other places describes such people as merely the “faith justified,” we need not argue the point here. Had Brother Johnson stated himself here, as he has clearly done in other places, he would have said, “the loyal former tentatively justified.” But he resorted to a common practise of refer­ring to this Class in terms formerly applicable to them -much the same as many of us referred to “Judge” Rutherford long after he had vacated his judge’s office. Here again R. G. Jolly is resorting to a twist that is prompted by desperation. In this reference by R. G. Jolly there is not the slightest hint that such “loyal justified” will be a consecrated class; that is something R. G. Jolly himself has injected into the picture -and it is on this point that we now take issue with him -on the quasi-elect in the finished Epiphany picture being a consecrated class. However, we first qualify this statement with Brother Johnson’s comment in the June 1945 Present Truth, p. 96, top of col. 2:

“During this Epiphany time the faith-justified who have been the Gospel-Age Levites are by the lapsing of their faith justification remanded, the untrue ones among them to the Epiphany Camp, the untrue ones among them without the camp.” A question would now be in order: Does R. G. Jolly understand the meaning of the word ‘lapsing’? In previous papers we have detailed that “the truly repentant and believing” of those remanded to the camp are exactly the same characters as they were while in the Court, their remanding to the Camp being only because of their failure to consecrate -that they lose their tentative justifica­tion (the Grace of God) when leaving the Court; and the above citations from Brother Johnson clearly support our position on this, but in no place does Brother Johnson support R. G. Jolly’s contention that this Class becomes consecrated (while sin is in the ascendency -during the time when such consecrations would bring “elect” rewards) after their ejection from the court -or that there is any other kind of persons consecrated in the Camp in the finished Epiphany picture (because the Camp then holds all those persons who could not win out under such adverse condi­tions, so they await the Kingdom opportunities for all Restitutionists -See Epi­phany Vol. 12, p. 526; also pp. 187,188, 218, 319 and 320). And we might add that Brother Russell’s teaching did not support J. F. Rutherford’s Jonadab Class either (although the Witnesses still “contend for the faith -”false doctrine” - once delivered to them by J. F. Rutherford!). Much of R. G. Jolly’s conglomeration he received from his “cousin” Krewson, who now leaves him to defend the error, as he goes com­placently on with others of his individual pet errors.

We believe it well to emphasize here that there is fundamentally no difference at all in the tentatively justified in the Court of the large Gospel-Age Tabernacle, and the unconsecrated tentatively justified in the Epiphany Tabernacle; and on this Truth R. G. Jolly seemed very clear before 1938, And during the Gospel Age any who deserted their true repentance and belief would then lose their tentative justifi­cation and be forced from the Court -just as would be true in the Epiphany. How­ever, we know of no Scripture that places a time limit for possession of this “Grace of God”; it probably differs with different individuals. And from this we can safely conclude that some tentatively justified in the Gospel-Age Tabernacle were continued in their Court position over into the Epiphany; the mere change of time would make no difference to such until their allotted time to utilize the “Grace of God” had been consumed. He should remember that Tentative Justification is a con­dition -not a place -and is typified by the Court; and when the Court condition is no longer available for entrance, then the Tentatively Justified condition is no longer available. A mere babe in the Truth should be able to recognize this point,

But the situation will be different in the finished Epiphany picture – at the end of the Time of Trouble – at the end of which every individual will be forced from the Court who has not consecrated (forced from the condition where it is possible to make consecrations before New Covenant opportunities are available – See E-4:406); and, until that occurs, it could not properly be said we have reached “the finished picture” (the beginning of the end of the Time of Trouble). However, with R. G. Jolly’s present contention -although he has not said so in so many words ­if there could be no more consecrations to Youthful Worthiship after 1954, then all those tentatively justified who had not consecrated by then would automatically have been forced from the Court into his present Camp, leaving only the consecrated in his present Court. And, when such a situation arrived, it would automatically force all others from the Camp. Does R. G. Jolly contend this is the situation NOW? And is it his contention that his (fictitious) Camp now contains only two classes of tentatively justified -the consecrated and the unconsecrated? And, when will it be finally determined that his present unconsecrated have “received the Grace of God in vain”? In his fully-abandoned condition (Without supervision and restraint of the Star Members) he is overworking his “besetting sin” of making types and pictures (See his letter in Nov. 15, 1910 Watch Tower--”I began with the help of Strong’s concordance to delve into the meanings of words. I sought to make pictures and draw types from nearly every chapter in the Bible,” he said of himself).

TYPES PROPERLY APPLIED

In E-3:232, top, Brother Johnson offers this conclusion: “When Biblical types are antitypically fulfilled, there is to be found a most remarkable and soul-satisfy­ing agreement between the type and the antitype; and this agreement leads to in­creased faith and good works.” Such was certainly true of all antitypical inter­pretations given us through Brother Russell and Brother Johnson; and it is quite apropos that we now present one from Brother Russell that is so pertinent to our subject:

“The person seeking God draws near as he enters the Gate and comes to the Brazen Altar, He sees this Altar and what it means. To him it means that he is a sinner….He recognizes that the sacrifice was necessary to make atonement for sin....Now, the Court represents all the believer’s experiences in Justifica­tion, from the time he enters the Gate, coming into the Court, passing the Brazen-Altar, till he comes to the Door of the Tabernacle. It is Tentative Justification, from the time the individual begins to take the first step.” (Question Book -412-415) Here we have an antitypical interpretation that presents logic and strong appeal to everyone “who is of the Truth.” It certainly is soul-satisfying!

But let us now compare the foregoing with R. G. Jolly’s presentation of Justification in the Camp. Has he offered one bit of proof by way of securing such Justifi­cation? No, indeed he has not! And he hasn’t given it because he doesn’t have any. His Justification in the Camp is pure invention (picture-making and fictitious) on his part -a fit companion for Romanism’s Pergatory, which also finds no true support in the Bible. Both of these aberrations are the cunning work of Azazel – both pro­duced by those befuddled by him, and believed by those similarly influenced. RGJ’s Campers do not pass through any Gate anywhere (except those he has forced out in his “picture” of 1954) -they do not consider the Brazen Altar in their course -they do not observe the Laver as they approach the Door of the Tabernacle. They simply arrive at their Justification and Consecration out of thin air; and we are offered now a tangible illustration of Brother Russell’s conclusion that it is the Great Company who “fight as one that beateth the air.” (1. Cor. 9: 26 -See Berean Comment) Any “rooted and grounded” in Parousia and Epiphany Truth could not be carried away for long by such ‘‘wind’’ (See Eph. 4: l4, and Berean Comment).

On page 62, col. 2, par. 1, R. G. Jolly reaches the pinnacle of Levitical non­sense and confusion when he says “Brother Russell used the term ‘household of faith’ in two senses: one for the consecrated, and the other for the unconsecrated be­lievers.” Yes, indeed, he did! But, did he ever say those believers in the Camp were among the justified Household of Faith -anti typical Levites? The Household of Faith is not pictured (as RGJ ‘pictures’ his Campers Consecrated) in the Camp. In Tabernacle Shadows, p. 55, par. 2, Brother Russell makes himself very clear when he states “all believers, the entire ‘household of faith’ – the Levites,” (It is only those who have no inheritance in the land who belong to the Household of Faith; and only those who consecrate in the Court, and continue faithful therein -will remain of the Household of Faith.) Thus he makes it very clear that only those within the linen curtain were the true “Household of Faith” the Levites.” There is no Levitical standing shown anywhere in the Camp – Gospel-Age or Epiphany Camp. There­fore, we are forced to describe his comments on page 62 as errant nonsense and confusion, and is a clear demonstration of the extremes to which those go who forsake any of the Truth with which they were once sanctified; truly, they become “leprous”! Let us remember that during the Gospel Age -as also in the Epiphany, the last spec­ial period of the Gospel Age -there are millions of believers in the Camp, but they are not “truly repentant” believers who accept Jesus as their Savior (who apply the saving “blood” of our Lord for their personal cleansing – available only in the Court during the Gospel Age, including the Epiphany--tentative or actual). In Vol. 8 Brother Johnson states that in the very broad sense we may include in the “Church” all who make any profession of Christian belief; yet he also often uses “the Church” in exclusive reference to the Little Flock. And in no place does he include the en­tire Church among the justified--in the Court or in the Camp. However, in the fin­ished Epiphany picture (at the end of the Time of Trouble) -when the truly repentant believers are remanded to the Camp, it will then contain the “truly repentant.... but unconsecrated Jews and Gentiles” -just as taught by the Epiphany Messenger in E-10:209. But until such time, the Camp contains those rebellious against present- day requirements for obtaining “peace with God” that the Household of Faith enjoy (the Levites- the tentatively justified in the Court). R. G. Jolly, not discern­ing this difference, makes himself ridiculous in the statements now being reviewed-­a clear proof that the oil in his lamp “has gone out.” (Matt. 25:8)

In this connection, it is nothing new to see those in error accusing those faithful to the Truth of being drunken, as evidence the Jews at Pentecost accusing the Apostles of being “full of new wine.” (Acts 2: 13) This is more noticeably true in the case of Hannah being accused by Eli in 1 Sam. 1:14: ‘‘‘How long wilt thou be drunken?” And note Brother Johnson’s comments on this thing in E-13: l4--”The crown--­lost leaders (typified by Eli--JJH) denounced the faithful as errorists, and exhorted them to give up their errors.”

What a familiar ring the foregoing offers to R, G. Jolly (also a crown-lost leader) now putting forth the accusation of “opposing errorists,” etc.! And, if Brother Johnson were here now, R. G. Jolly would be denouncing him - instead of us just as he did actually do in 1938 (See E-10:585 and 646). We believe Brother Russell’s comments in the July 1, 1916 Watch Tower, Reprint 5916, are a fitting complement to the above:

“Those who have been teaching errors will soon be ashamed (Isaiah 66:5), while the fire of this day will only manifest the truth to all. No power, no tongue, no pen, can successfully contradict the truth, the great Divine Plan of the Ages. It is strong before its enemies and before all who make assaults upon it, and ere long the folly of its foes shall be made known to the whole world. “There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. “ (by the Great Company -See Matt. 25:30 and Berean Comments--JJH)

And to this we would add the words of Solomon in Proverbs 10:5, 9 & 13: “He that gathereth in summer is a wise son; but he that sleepeth in harvest is a son that causeth shame. He that walketh uprightly walketh surely: but he that perverteth his ways shall be known. In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found: but a rod is for the back of him that is void of understanding.” And we would counsel all to “Be ye not as the horse, or as the mule, which have no understanding,” (Psa. 32:9)

                                       Sincerely your brother,

                                        John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

-----------------------

CORRECTION: -On page two, par. 1, of our August paper we inadvertently stated the period of the Judges as 430 years. It should read 450 years

………………

BROTHER BAXENDALE HAS FINISED HIS COURSE “WITH JOY”

My dear Brother Hoefle: May grace, and peace be your portion through our Redeemer!

Our dear Brother Baxendale died July 12. Sister...and I traveled to Oldham On July 9, staying with Sister.....and then went to see Brother Baxendale the following afternoon and evening. Although he suffered a good deal of pain at times, he was happy and ready to go when it was His will. He told us he had no malice or hatred in his heart toward any, but loved them all. It was very touching, because so many misunderstood him -and because, too, he stood out against false doctrines and arrangements. He did his best to sing Hymn 171 and one of the nurses joined in.  Sister Baxendale was told that he was often in prayer. Another hymn he tried to sing was Count Your Blessings. Sisters-----visited him, too -and we were glad we went also. We went home the day he died, but there was a letter in the post asking if Brother----would take the service. So 1 replied that I would. Sister went also, arriving Oldham July 15 and then on to Eccles, Manchester Friday, July 16. The funeral service was evidently in blessing, for Sister Baxendale asked for a copy.... Sister----was able to pass on some tracts and they were gladly received. Some day it will bear fruit to His Honour and Glory. In all this, our dear Sister Baxendale was a good example of carrying out a Christian faith. “We sorrow not as others, who have no hope.” The following day, July 17, Sisters----and I went to Glossop to see Sister-----,et al. we were warmly welcomed and had a very nice time together. Found them appreciative of your monthly papers. They sent a spray of flowers in memory of Brother Baxendale; also Sisters------and ourselves. In all there were 17 who want us to return be­fore the winter sets in. Sister----joins me in love to yourself, Sister Hoefle and all the dear ones assisting you.

Your brother by His Grace --. (JGD) (ENGLAND)

NOTE: - Had the above information reached us before our September paper was com­pleted for mailing, we would have included the name of Brother Baxendale along with that of Sister Condell and Brother Roach, as we believe those observa­tions in our September paper apply equally to him, He, too, was valiant in defense of the Truth he loved -a “good soldier” in the “good fight” of faith. JJH

………………

 Epiphany Bible Students’ Ass’n

Dear Sirs:

After reading your papers on The Resurrection and Where Are The Dead. I am requesting, if possible, you to send me The Three Babylons and What Is The Soul. Thanking you,--------(CONNECTICUT)

………………

 Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace! You will be interested to know that we recently went to a Jehovah’s Witness Convention, and were able to get out quite a number of the Three Babylons tracts. This was very appro­priate for the occasion, as the afternoon topic was on Babylon. It was reported there were Over 11, 000 there. Brother----drove us right in front of the place where the crowd was greatest. Some thought the tract was especially designed for the meeting (which it was!), while others were very rabid -saying “I’m a Jehovah’s Witness and don’t want to read anything else,” (about the same attitude of some in the LHMM group who are just as rabid toward us, if not moreso). We could have told them that they wouldn’t have much success if they received the same answer, and attitude, from Baptists, Methodists, etc. But we didn’t bother to answer them. Several brought the tracts back and said they had had one and read it before -which they may have; that they wanted none of us! They are indeed a sect-bound rabid group, generally speaking - with their leaders incul­cating in them the Satanic lie that their organization is the Lord’s organization on earth -and to look elsewhere might mean their eternal annihilation. One person asked me if we were of the Dawn. I said, Certainly not! When I did several came up and took the tracts.

We believe this is a good work toward Little Babylon, and we are getting much the same treatment from Little Babylon that the Parousia brethren got from Big Babylon under That Servant.

Our warm Christian love to you, with the prayer that your work in the Lord will continue to prosper, By His Grace, -----­

NO. 123: TEN YEARS IN RETROSPECT

No. 123

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

On August 15, 1955 we distributed our first paper against the sins of teach­ing and practice of R. G. Jolly and others of his “kinsmen”;  and little did we realize then the work that lay ahead of us. However, we humbly make open con­fession of gratitude to our good Heavenly Father for the strength that has been ours to keep up “the good fight” – physical, financial and spiritual strength, combined with the faithful and steadfast cooperation and encouragement of many faithful brethren, both in our own house and among those scattered throughout the United States and many foreign countries. Thus, all our “needs” have been met on every occasion. At the time of Brother Johnson’s funeral in October 1950 we entertained not the slightest desire, nor the faintest expectation that our sit­uation would change so drastically in five short years and would continue as it has over the past ten years. Prior to 1950 we believe the testimony of many good and faithful brethren would attest to our general course toward God’s people in an earnest endeavor to “follow after the things which make for peace, and the things wherewith one may edify another” (Rom. 14:19), so that our present acti­vities are not of our own choosing – “for necessity is laid upon me” (I Cor. 9:16) to pursue the course that has been ours over the past ten years. However, during the years since 1950 we had entertained the fond hope that R. G. Jolly would even­tually repent and recant of his present deflections – as he seemingly had honestly done after his 1938 debacle with Brother Johnson; and, while clearly enough our charitable appraisal has been awry up to now, we yet have not abandoned all hope in this respect.

Nor would we claim that during that time we have avoided all mistakes, be­cause such is not the case. Hindsight is always better than foresight; but the Lord has allowed His most faithful, capable and prominent people of this Gospel Age to make distressing mistakes, so it hardly seems reasonable that we should be spared. Thus, we accept the failings of the past as among the ‘‘all things for good” (Rom, 8:28) – although we just as readily declare that they have not been “for best.” But we express gratitude, too, that none of our mistakes have been degrading in character, or unjust toward those with whom we have to do; there­fore, we confidently declare with the great Apostle Paul, “I am free from the blood of all men.” At no time have we made the mistake of disfellowshiping brethren to cover up our slanderous actions toward them; nor have we made the mistake of slandering or disfellowshiping any who have honestly and decorously disagreed with our teachings.

Neither have we attempted to restrain our readers from reading the writings of others.  Rather, of those who have the time and inclination we have heartily encouraged them to place our paper side by side with other opposing works, then determine for themselves wherein lies the truth – to “prove all things, and hold fast that which is good.” And in similar spirit we have never counseled those in sympathy with us to “avoid them” that do not agree. Instead, we have encour­aged those well instructed in Parousia and Epiphany Truth to seek out those in other groups in an honest effort to “show them a better way.” Over these past ten years many have disfellowshiped us for no other reason than that their leaders instructed them to do so. Certainly, this is to their shame, and gives clear proof that they are sadly among “the unstable and the unlearned” – so much so that they lack the ordinary courtesy of a commonplace greeting upon meeting. Such a course is morally and Scripturally wrong – is quite contrary to Brother Russell’s teaching in Vol, 6 – but in exact harmony with the conduct of J. F. Rutherford toward Brother Johnson and other faithful brethren.

This “path of error” (Jas, 5:20, Dia.) was first advocated among Truth people in 1917, at the beginning of the Epiphany, when J. F. Rutherford stressed the “avoid them” policy toward all who resisted his evils of teaching and practice (See E-6:513). It presents vivid reminder that we are still in the Epiphany, which is ‘‘making manifest the counsels of hearts” (1 Cor. 4:5), and offers sad evidence that there are yet many of like mind as was JFR, who were once instructed in Parousia and Epiphany Truth. And, while we may take solid encouragement in noting that these are forced to “avoid” us because of their own incapacity to defend their beliefs, yet it is a truly sorry spectacle to see that so many we once considered “established in the PRESENT TRUTH” (2 Pet. 1:12) must now be de­scribed by St. Paul’s words in Heb. 5:13, Dia.: “Every one partaking of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness; for he is an infant.” A paragraph from That Servant in the July 1, 1909 Tower (Reprints 4429) is very fitting to the case:

“If others lose their hold and claim that they can no longer thus see with us, our pity should be for them that the light that they had has gone from them. Let us not smite the blind, but rather be kind and generous toward all. The greater the number of the blind, the greater is the blessing and privilege of those who do see. Let us remember the Master’s words, ‘If the light that is in thee become darkness, how great is that darkness.’ Such are in a more pitiable condition than the world who never saw. Let us remember, too, that all kinds of blindness are more or less contagious and let us guard our spiritual sight as one of the most precious boons given of the Lord.”

The true power of God’s people lies in their sound understanding and skillful handling of the Word of Truth, which is able to refute all the gainsayers – “eloquence and wisdom, which none of your adversaries shall be able to gainsay nor resist.” As we have refrained from advancing any new doctrines, we have never been forced to pervert or completely cast aside any of the Harvest Truth that has been provided (by the last two Principal Men) for this “evil day”; whereas, those who have not adopted this course have been forced to offer “strange fire” (false doctrine), and to cast aside large portions of that Truth which once sanctified them. In more than one sect of Little Babylon do we hear vociferous acclaim of adherence to Brother Russell’s teachings, all the while they are forced to ignore completely large parts of the Parousia Volumes and Watch Towers articles – ­just as many since 1950 are doing with Brother Johnson’s teachings, all the while they are forced to ignore large parts of the Epiphany Volumes and Present Truth articles.

Those who have invented a quasi-elect consecrated class – in direct repudia­tion of Brother Johnson’s clear teachings (See E-lO:209) – can no longer teach large parts of Epiphany Volumes 4, 5, 10, 11 and 12; as they must likewise abandon large parts of Volume 3 because of their perversion of the Elijah type. Also, because of their complete disregard for the “abandonment process’’ of Azazel’s Goat, both the “cousins” must now tacitly ignore substantial parts of Vol. 15 (See E-15:519, 527). Yet these people unashamedly insist they adhere closely to the Epiphany Messenger’s teachings – such claim being nothing more than open and blatant fraud. (The legal meaning of Fraud is – Misrepresentation of a material fact, or concealment of a material fact.) And for such a course they are without excuse, because we ourselves have repeatedly directed their attention to Volume 15, and other basic and fundamental Parousia and Epiphany Truth, and have stressed its Scriptural veracity and our own harmony with it – ­the only response from them being the charge of “sifter, errorist,” etc., hurled at us.

Justification is one of the fundamental doctrines of the Bible, being as it is inseparably linked with the doctrine of the Ransom. The two cannot be separ­ated, it was this thought that prompted us to produce the Justification article in our No. 120 on June 1; and the ardent response that has since come to us from many sources has encouraged us in the belief that there are still substantial numbers of faithful brethren who “continue in the things they have learned, and have been assured of, knowing of whom they have learned theme” We are assured that many are solidly confirmed in their rejection of Campers Consecrated – just as all of us were persuaded of the non-existence of J. F, Rutherford’s “Jonadabs” by Brother Johnson’s annihilative refutations. And being blessed by the Lord of a clear understanding of Justification and kindred doctrines, it has never been necessary for us to resort to any of the spiritual “witchcraft” (especially de­ceptive false teachings) that is so prevalent on every hand. And for this we are also deeply grateful.

The worst culprits of all in claiming to be what they are not are the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their claim of adherence to the teachings presented by Brother Russell has no foundation whatever in fact; rather, they have perverted, or totally denied, every Harvest Truth he proclaimed. As one outstanding example, they have twisted the Bible chronology out of all recognition to the way he pre­sented it, their claim now being that “the six thousand years are about up.” Thus, they are almost one hundred years wrong on the chronology; in fact, they are even wrong on the way J. F. Rutherford gave it some forty years ago. At that time he and his associates published a commendable defense of the true chronology against the 19-year error that the PBI-Dawns attempted to Inject into it. Whether he then later gave them their present error we do not know. This one Instance of “believing as Brother Russell did” is an identical twin to the average nominal churchgoer who claims also a wholehearted belief in the Bible, all the while he ignores or distorts the major part of it. Their perversion of the chronology has also forced them to abandon completely the “parallel dispensations.”

It is well that we keep clearly in mind that it is the crown-lost leaders and their like-minded Youthful Worthy associates during this Epiphany period who have been the chief offenders in the perversion of the Harvest Truth (Azazel means Perverter) – and we refer now specifically to those who once claimed to be in “Present Truth.” It has been the crown-losers all during the Age that have done the same thing with the Stewardship Doctrines of the Star Members – with all of them loudly proclaiming their rigid adherence to the very Truth they were mutilating.

During the Parousia most of those who were sincerely “established in the Present Truth” (2 Pet. 1:12) were so thoroughly schooled in its various features that they had no difficulty in refuting all the gainsayers; none of them were forced to run away from their opposers – rather, it was just the reverse: The gainsayers soon learned they were up against the razor’s edge when in conflict with the “Russellites,” and few of them needed more than one such experience to make them very wary thereafter. But today we see just the reverse: Those most loudly claiming they are in full harmony with Brother Russell or Brother Johnson need only to see those of us approaching, who really do adhere closely and faithfully to the Harvest Truth, for them speedily to change direction and quicken their steps to avoid contact. We have had many such personal experiences from various groups. Truly, “Every one who does vile things hates the light, and comes not to the light, that his works may be detected. But he who does the Truth comes to the light, so that his works may be manifested that they have been done in God.” (John 3:20,21¾Dia.)

By this recitation we do not mean to set forth the belief that everything has been wrong that these crown-losers have done.  True, they have all been “double minded” (See E-15:519, bottom, and p. 520, top); and we here once more stress the fact that the evils they have committed have been motivated by that part of their double minds that fostered the designs of Satan – such evils being usually in their relations to God, Christ, the Little Flock, the Youthful Worthies, the Tentatively Justified, and with one another – those specifically in the House­hold of Faith. And such evils have not been clearly apparent to the unskilled eye of the world about them. Rather, the world generally has been much more im­pressed by their good deeds, because many of them have wrought mightily in “re­proving the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment” (John 16:8) – they have preached vociferously against immorality, against the tobacco and alcohol evils, drug habits, etc. To all outward appearances they have been ‘agin sin’ – ­so much so that the great bulk of Christendom has mistaken them for the Very Elect, even as they gave misjudged second rating to those who will actually be first in Kingdom honors.

And let us not overlook that the Good Word of God specifically charges those who now receive the chief honor from “the unstable and the unlearned” are the very ones who all during the Age have “hated and cast out their (fully-­faithful) brethren” (Isa. 66:5). We have the assurance, too, that all those of “good and honest heart,” skilled and well-schooled in Harvest Truth, are not misled by the clamor of the majority, but rightly discern the “profitable ser­vants” from the “unprofitable servants.” The clear evidence is however, that the “great multitude” and their numerous followers have been consistently wrong – ­just as wrong as was the crowd before Pilate who kept shouting, “Crucify Him.” In this our day many worldlings are much impressed with the profuse quoting of Scripture by the Witnesses – notably so, the Russian atheist Commune – such not having the discernment to realize that almost every text they quote is partially or completely perverted or misapplied. Satan himself has also quoted Scripture in the same erroneous fashion. (See Matt. 4:6)

As we observe the situation presently before us, we are so often impressed by the words of Jesus: “Many will say to Me in that day, Master, Master, have we not taught in thy name? and in thy name expelled demons? and in thy name performed many wonders? And then I will plainly declare to them, I never approved of you. Depart from Me, you who practice iniquity.” (Matt. 7:22,23 – Dia.) This point is so clearly revealed in the situation with Israel (typing Christendom) and their King Saul, whom they chose in favor over the noble and fully-faithful Sam­uel, and shouted with gusto, “Cod save the King!” (1 Sam. 10:24)

To illustrate this clearly: For the past 35 years we have been very well acquainted with a member of antitypical Saul, and were invited to attend a testimonial dinner for him some fifteen years ago. The President of Chrysler Motors Corporation presided at that meeting. Also present were Edgar A. Guest, world-famous poet, as was also Detroit’s leading preacher, known throughout the United States, along with many other outstanding citizens of the locality. This member of antitypical Saul had been heralded by certain prominent people as ‘‘One of Detroit’s two most useful citizens”; and during his acceptance address that evening he made quite some play on his great performance in 1926, at which time he had raised $6,5OO,OOO for the YMCA there. And during all that time the members of antitypical Samuel were not even noticed by the people who were shouting, ‘‘God save the King!”

It is indeed a sad commentary that the world’s standard of values is so much askew. “Bond-servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not ....as men-pleasers, but in sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord.” (Col. 3:22, Dia.) Even in the case of Jesus Himself the Jews certainly shunted Him to the background in favor of the preachers of “the letter of the Law.’’ ‘‘When we shall see Him, there is no beauty that we should desire Him.” (Isa. 53:2) And all during the Age His faithful followers have received similar treatment, the plaudits of the multitude going to the “preachers of righteousness,” with very little being accorded those who truly did “bear witness unto the Truth” (John 18:37), and “followed in His steps.” (1 Pet. 2:21) There have been notable exceptions, of course, such as Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer, John Wesley, and a few others of whom, because of their special ministry, the world also took some note.

During the past ten years some have resented our efforts, but that is to be expected. We would “think it strange” if it were not so. But others have heard us gladly, so that the number of our brethren whose eyes have been opened to “the pestilence that walketh in darkness” (Psa. 91:6) has steadily increased, the num­ber at present being more than double what it was in 1955. And, while this in­crease brings a certain satisfaction, we take far greater pleasure in the quality of those who have wholeheartedly responded. We mention specially Sister Condell, of Jamaica, and Brother Roach, of Trinidad – both of whom were among the most highly regarded of Epiphany brethren before their open denunciation of R. G. Jolly. And we could make mention of quite a few other similar cases of brethren still living, which precludes mention of their names – brethren whom Brother Johnson mentioned to us personally as standing high in his good estimation as fully-faithful. And, if they were among the fully faithful up to 1950, then they are yet so, regardless of any other rating a self-admitted crown-lost leader and his ‘cousin’ may now give them. It is not our wish to place a strain upon modesty, yet we feel impelled to record here – as did the Apostle Paul in defense of his ministry – that at no time did Brother Johnson ever offer the slightest hint that we were among the unfaith­ful or the measurably faithful. Rather, on at least one occasion he wrote us after this manner: ‘‘Because of your faithfulness, I do many things for you, my dear brother, that I have not done for others.” In reverse fashion, however, manifested crown-losers have quickly proceeded to besmirch the fully faithful when no longer restrained by the Star Members – notable examples of such calumny resting on the doorstep of J. F. Rutherford, R. G. Jolly, et al.

However, It is well that we keep in mind that this is the day of small things, and that “there is no restraint of the Lord to save by many or by few.” In some instances we have continued to send special articles (after a period of waiting) to sect-bound brethren who have requested their name be removed from our mailing list; and in a few cases we have had gracious response, once they realized the true situation – although getting much private and public reviling from our opponents for our course, the very same course that was pursued by the Epiphany Messenger toward such brethren. However, we have of our own volition removed quite a few names from our list, and have declined to add some who have made request through others, realizing from their ‘fruits’ (conduct) – the lack of courtesy and appre­ciation of the Truth we uphold and defend – that we can do them no good in their present condition. And this will continue to be our practice as we receive silence on the part of some, and indifference and ingratitude for the good we have tried to do them. As Brother Russell has pointed out, we are not looking for wolves, dogs, etc., but only for the lambs and sheep – neither are we “greedy of filthy lucre.” Our only ambition is “to be faithful to the Lord, the Truth and the Brethren,” as we endeavor to “quit ourselves like men” in the “good fight” of faith we are waging.

Brother Russell stated his case nobly and well when he counseled that each of us should proceed in the Lord’s service as though the whole responsibility rested upon us individually, but consider in our hearts (in His “rest”) that the entire responsibility rests with the Lord. This is our own attitude, and we ponder in this connection the parable of Jesus as most fitting to the occasion: “The King­dom of the Heavens resembles a dragnet, being cast into the sea, and enclosing fishes of every kind; which, when it is full, they draw to the shore, and sitting, down, gather the good into vessels, but throw the useless away.  So will it be at the end of the Age. The messengers will go forth, and will separate the wicked from among the righteous; and I will throw them into the furnace of fire; there will be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.” (Matt. 13:47-50, Dia.) It should be noted that the words in the last clause of the foregoing are identical to those Jesus stated regarding the “unprofitable servant” of Matt. 25:30, the same being the Great Company. And, since the Great Company are factually a “great multitude,” it should not surprise us at all to see them attracting many who think as they do; truly, “Birds of a feather flock together.”

Once seeing this situation clearly, it should not disturb us in the least. Rather, let us all the more determine to “Walk as children of light (Truth).... You were indeed formerly darkness, but you are now light in the Lord.... The fruit of light is in all Goodness, and Righteousness, and Truth.” (Eph. 5:8,9 – Dia.) “All things being reproved are manifested by the light... Therefore, awake, 0 sleeper! And arise from the dead, and the Anointed One shall shine upon thee.” (Eph. 5:13,14 – Dia.) And to this we would add some very appropriate comments by Brother Russell, found in Reprints 3142:

“It is not the approval of the ‘wolves’ in sheep’s clothing or without it, that is to be courted by the under-shepherd. He will, however, have the approval of the Chief Shepherd, sheep who have their senses exercised by reason of use.... And since the holy Spirit gave special warnings that in the end of the Age evil men and leaders astray” would wax more and more bold .... is it not due time for all the sheep to recognize these facts, and not to be deceived by ‘feigned words’ and ‘fair speeches’?.... Not only did the Apostle Paul thus direct the under-shepherds, but he points out the advisability of this to the flock, since it is thus that the Chief Shepherd leads and feeds and keeps His flock.... Let us stand fast, therefore, in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free – allow­ing no one to pen us up by human creeds; neither allowing any to lead us out be­yond the bounds fixed for us by the Chief Shepherd, into liberties, licenses and speculations that He never authorized (such as Campers Consecrated, tentative justification outside the linen curtain – Christ –, errors on the general doctrine of justification, gross perversion of the truth on all elective classes and free grace salvation for Restitutionists, errors on the time, length and purpose of the Epiphany, etc., etc. – JJH). Let us abide in Him, keeping ourselves in the love of God, as saith the Apostle.”

Sincerely your Brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

------------------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – It is my understanding that all in the Court in this Faith Age are Levites; that the Tentatively Justified consecrated, as well as the unconsecrated (in the Court) are also Levites – although ‘tentatively’ so; but that the Great Company are actually Levites. If this is true, then couldn’t it be possible there would be a Class of the Tentatively Justified in the end of this Age in the Epiphany Camp, although not Levites?

ANSWER: – You are right that all in the Court are counted as Levites, although Brother Johnson did not mean the Tentatively Justified consecrated, or unconsecrated, when he referred to transitional Levites and Levitical error here in this Epiphany; he especially meant crown-losers, a fixed class of Levites – that is, fixed after they have cleansed themselves in the ‘great tribulation’ and washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb (Rev. 7:14).

But, until that time, the Great Company are portrayed as specially “leprous” when they teach error or corrupt arrangements in their ministry toward each other and the tentatively justified (See E-4:276, 32). The Tentatively Justi­fied unconsecrated and the Youthful Worthies are, as you suggest, only ‘tenta­tive’ Levites, because they can lose their standing in the Court and be remanded to the Camp without experiencing the second death – which is not true of the crown-lost Levites. If the latter leave the Court condition, they are eternally lost. But we must remember that Levites and the Court type Tentative Justifica­tion, and when one ceases to be a Levite, and is remanded to the Camp, he also ceases automatically to be Tentatively Justified (See E-4:322). We must remember that Tentative Justification is for Gospel-Age purposes. The faithful Youthful Worthies, however, are different from the unconsecrated Levites in the Court ­they retain their standing and will be of the Gershonite Levites in the Kingdom. The unconsecrated Tentatively Justified who fail to consecrate while in the Court, lose their opportunity for consecration until the Highway of Holiness is opened up for Restitutionists, when remanded to the Camp, and leave the Household of Faith entirely in the end of this Age –  in the finished picture of the Epiphany. They will have their opportunity under the New Covenant in partnership with the true quasi-elect Jews and Gentiles of former times.  These true quasi-elect are antitypical Miriam – the believing Jews who in the Old Testament times were not faithful enough for Ancient Worthyship.. and believing Gentiles during the Gospel Age who, while faithful unto death in justification, did not consecrate (See E-11:293). These are the quasi-elect – the unconsecrated – as set out in no unmistakable terms by the Epiphany Messenger. However, the faithful Youthful Worthies will have the “Better Resurrection” in partnership with the Ancient Worthies described in Heb, 11.

As to there being a tentatively justified Class in the Camp, there is no such Class, except those referred to as respects their former standing in the Court. If they retain their good character qualities, they will have the same position of those during the Gospel Age who were faithful unto death in their justification – although bereft of the Grace of God which once sanctified them for consecration for elective purposes in the Faith Age. These are referred to as the “truly repentant and believing, but not consecrated Jews and Gentiles” (E-10:209). There is no ‘narrow’ way in the Camp; and absolutely nothing to show a consecrated class In the Camp in this Faith Age.

Another Reason why they cannot consecrate now (in the Camp) is because Jesus’ merit does not extend to the Camp – tentatively or in any other way. And without that merit no one can be acceptable to God in consecration in this Faith Age! If we keep the Tabernacle picture in mind, we won’t go too far astray. “The Bullock was slain in the ‘Court,’ which we have seen typified the condition of faith in and harmony with God, the highest attainment of the flesh, the human nature. Jesus was in this condition, a perfect man to God” – the bullock in the type (Tabernacle Shadows, p. 54, par. 3). ‘‘And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin-offering which is for (represents) himself, and make an atonement for himself (the members of His body – the under priests) and for His house (all believers, the entire ‘Household of Faith’ – the Levites).” (Tabernacle Shadows, p. 55, par. 2) So Jesus did not offer Himself for any one outside that Court during this Faith Age (including the Epiphany period and the “finished picture”); but only for those in the Court – the Household of Faith. “During the Epiphany (those who fail to consecrate in the Court –JJH) cease altogether to be of the Household of Faith, having used the grace of God in vain” (E-4:406). The Epi­phany Messenger’s teaching is directly opposite, and antagon­istic, to what R. G. Jolly teaches – namely, that his Campers Consecrated ARE of the Household of Faith. and are walking a ‘narrow’ way in the Camp! But we have the blessed assurance (in the faithful teachings) of both Messengers that this Is just some more Levitical error and nonsense – “leprosy.”

-------------------------------------------------------

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: “The peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus”! (and Rom. 8:6)

Your issues of June and July have been gratefully received, and I thank you in the name of our dear Lord for His Truth.......... I enjoy your July item, as I can pass it on to my Israel friends. The Jehovah’s Witness item is of great interest in Israel, and since 1959 this group has been of great interest to a group of Israel students – I mean on the JW you are writing about. To inform you, in 1959-61 The ........ of the Hebrew University has a group of scholars who study the various aspects of the existing relations between the United States and Israel. Professor M------, the Director... also directs this study group....... As a member of this, Dr. J------- has been assigned to study the relations between the various Protestant groups, etc., and specially in this connection Dr. M------- was studying the attitude of Pastor Charles T. Russell, to the Problem of the Restoration, and to the emergence of the State of Israel. I kept visiting the office of Dr. M-------, as I was well acquainted with Dr. W------- same office rooms. Our Six Volumes and Towers I placed in their service, until now I am a visitor on these and other Truth items. I feel this article, in the light of history of our day, may be welcome – as I am sure it will be. If you would mail three or four, I shall see to it that they get into the proper hands, as I shall call their attention to your letter to our free brethren.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses are at work here, but can’t get any following – since 1958 just a little group. But the Arab country they are welcome, and make – we are told – many friends, only because of their teachings against Israel, Gentiles – all churches – Yes, even Bible Students of all kind of groups, have made themselves ob­scured. Too bad they have not heeded Brother Russell’s advice (specially not to preach Christ to Jews, nor to try to convert a Jew). Brother Russell had learned well how to make friends with Jews, and not to pull the “veil” before God Himself will remove the veil – except those who are inquiring or called of God even now ­but this is my own observation by experience; it remains to be seen.

A special calling remains in Israel, and those of the Elijah still remaining well may be able to understand. But here in Israel our God is present in the hearts of remaining true Israel, searching for faith and Truth. But we have to receive the key to this Truth...... I am sure is taking place in Israel, for the Truth will again come from Israel. To be of comfort in Israel is my calling for quite a few years – ­making friends to meet God’s remnant (Acts 3:25). Will mail you a book if you will receive it for your labors – a little appreciation from Israel.

Somehow I felt an urge to write this letter.... and yet am so very busy in my little service in Israel, as I am being blessed just following His leading me. I am richly blessed to meet God’s Israel He is calling..... Your letter of July 1 may be a special blessing to Israel Watchers in Zion, as the JW’s in the Arab lands have given them in their hatred a “Bible” answer for the complete annihilation of Israel. So I hope your letter in the proper hands here will give the Truth for and from Israel.  God bless your mind and heart! (Prov. 16:1,2,3)

------- (ISRAEL)

.....................................................

The following is a copy of our letter to a Jehovah’s Witness re our No. 121.

Dear Brother ------- Christian greetings!

It is my understanding that you called by with the specific intention of visiting with me, and I am quite sorry I was not here; but I am told that about the last remark you made when leaving was that you are in complete harmony with the teachings of Brother Russell. You may be sure I am very glad to hear this, because that is my own position, and it certainly makes you and me brethren “in the faith, as we have been taught.” I would be quite happy to have another visit from you most any time if you will telephone me first, so I will be sure to be here. Or, I could call to see you if you would rather have it that way. But for now, I quote below a paragraph from the July 1, 1916 Watch Tower by Brother Russell, which will offer an excellent basis for discussion when we meet:

“The Apostle Paul in his writings lays special emphasis upon the fundamental importance of correct doctrinal teaching. It made no difference whether Paul or Apollos or even an angel from heaven taught anything, it must be in harmony with the foundation doctrines which had been given them by the Lord. (Gal. 1:6-12) He assured the church that what he had taught them was from God, and that even if an angel should bring them another Gospel, it would be a proof that such angel had de­flected from loyalty to the Lord. That Jesus Christ died to secure the redemption ­price for Adam and his race is the foundation doctrine of the church, which was received from Jesus Himself and from His faithful mouthpiece and which was shown in the Divinely-given types of the law. Whoever taught this fundamental truth faithfully was a real help to the people of God. Yet even such a teacher might help them to build, even on this proper foundation, a faith and character structure which would not stand the tests of the great day of the Lord; for the fire of that day would surely prove the nature of this structure. Consequently, both teacher and pupil would suffer loss and be saved only ‘as through fire.’”

With this comes my Christian brotherly love and cordial good wishes for your spiritual welfare, with the hope that this may be the beginning of a mutually help­ful Christian relationship.

Sincerely your brother,  John J. Hoefle (July 5, 1965)

.....................................................

NOTE: – From the Sister’s letter, quoted on p. 8, it would seem the Witnesses are also setting aside the Scriptural Truth concerning the Jew – as they have done with about every truth in the Bible. Isa. 2:2,3 is so clear it seems incon­ceivable that those once instructed in Brother Russell’s clear teachings concern­ing the Jews could now go so far astray: “It shall come to pass in the last days (of this Gospel Age, into which we have already entered) that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains (above and dominating these present Gentile Governments – mountains) .... and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall say, let us go up to the mountain (Kingdom) of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob (often in the Old Testament “Jacob” is used to desig­nate the natural Jews – in contrast with Israel, the spiritual, or Gospel-Age chosen people of God – true Christians)... for out of Zion (spiritual Israel) shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem (from the resurrected Ancient Worthies).” This is stressed by-St.  Paul in Rom. 1:16: “The power of God for salvation to every one believing; both to Jew and to Greek” – “first to the Jew, and then to the Greek.” (Rom. 2:10)

These Scriptures clearly ascribe a priority to the Jew, regardless of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ claims concerning themselves – and regardless of R. G. Jolly’s claims ascribing a priority to his present Campers Consecrated (above all other quasi-elect, including the Jews!).

.....................................................

The July-August Present Truth arrived late, as usual – some days after we had mailed our August paper, and a few days after this September paper had been prepared for the printer. However, we assure our readers a detailed and conclus­ive answer to the July-August Present Truth by October 1, D.V.

NO. 122: THE SONS OF JEBUS

No. 122

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

In Gen. 10:15-20 it is reported that the sons of Canaan (the same being the grandsons of Ham, and the great grandsons of Noah) were Sidon, Heth, the Jebusite, the Amorite, the Girgashite, the Hivite, the Arkite, the Sinite, the Arvadite, the Zemarite and the Hamathite. This record is repeated substantially verbatim in 1 Chr. 1:13-16. In Gen. 15:19-21 ten nations are given as the inhabitants of Canaan, whose terrain Abraham and his seed would eventually inherit. But in Ex. 3:8, in Josh. 11:3 and Judges 3:5 six nations are listed as the ones with which the Jews would contend in battle in Canaan, the same being given below with the meaning of the names and their Gospel-Age antitypes:

1. Canaanites (merchants) – Worldliness;

2. Hittites (fear) – ­Cowardice;

3. Perizzites (inhabitants of the plains) – Siftingism;

4. Jebusites (threshing floor) –Erroneousness;

5. Hivites (villagers) – Sectarianism;

6. Amor­ites (highlanders) –Sinfulness.

   In Numbers 13:29 it is stated the Amorites, the Hittites and the Jebusites are “such as dwell in the mountains.” We believe the reason for giving only six names in Ex. 3:8, Josh. 11:3 and Judges 3:5 is that the number six in the Scriptures is the num­ber of evil or imperfection; and the character portrayals given above just about encompass all the major evils with which God's people have had to contend in this Gospel Age.

   However, the purpose of this treatise is to consider mainly the Sons of Jebus, the Jebusites, of whom this is written in Josh. 15:63 – “As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out: but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this day.” While the warriors of Judah launched the main attack against the Jebusites, they did so in behalf of Benjamin, as the warriors of Benjamin were few in number. Before the Jews entered Canaan the chief stronghold of the Jebusites was called “Jebusi, which is (now) Jerusalem.” (Josh. 18:28)

   As all Truth people learned from Brother Russell, the two sons of Jacob and Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin, the same being typical of the Gospel-Age Little Flock and Great Company. But the Tribe of Benjamin had the Jebusites in their very midst all the years of the Judges; these “uncircumcised” occupied the stronghold of Zion “unto this day.” Thus, being completely surrounded by Benjaminites, they could not get out; nor could their enemies get in. Consequently, the Israelites were offering asylum and protection to their own enemies. And what Is the Gospel-­Age application of all this? Why, it simply reveals very clearly that the Great Company (antitypical Benjamin) during this Age have been the main protectors and preservers of antitypical Jebus – “ERRONEOUSNESS.”

   In proof of the foregoing, we need only consider the antitype of Numbers 7, in which the princes of the twelve tribes typed the crown-lost leaders of this Age. And it has been the crown-lost leaders who perverted (contaminated with error) the twelve stewardship doctrines that were fathered by antitypical Jacob. It is they who nurtured the errors that built Great (and Little) Babylon; it is they who perverted into sects the various Little Flock movements that arose dur­ing the Age. It is error that has been at the bottom of every sifting – error of teaching or practice, but usually both, And all of this had its beginning with “your brethren that hated you, and cast you out” (Isa. 66:5). Thus, all during this Age antitypical Benjamin has fostered and protected the erroneous procedure that led God's people astray – encompassed the antitypical Jebusites round about, and built up Great (and Little) Babylon.

   The obnoxious condition continued in the type all during the period of the Judges – 450 years; and for the 40 years of Saul's reign as king; and for 7½ years during David's reign. David then determined this had gone on long enough; but the Jebusites had occupied the hill country for so long they considered it impregnable – they sneered at David's army. “Except thou take away the blind and the lame, thou shalt not come in hither,” they said (2 Sam. 5:6) – inferring that even a lot of cripples could repel any attack against Jebusi. But the Lord was with David, as he had been with Joshua; and the promise was still sure that the “victory that overcometh the world, even your faith” would once more assert itself in David's case. And in short order “David dwelt in the fort, and called it the City of David” – Jerusalem (2 Sam. 5:8).

   What, then, is the Gospel-Age application of David's great victory? We believe it centers in Brother Russell, who was the Parousia David in his battles against the errorists. All of us are witness that he overthrew with a strong arm the No-Ransom and Infidelism sifters (errorists) early in the Parousia, and completely vanquished the Parousia Goliath as evidenced in the Evolution theory. So thoroughly did he defeat all the errorists of his day that it could be said every Little Flock developing Truth had been purified of all defilement by September 1914; he had put to rout all the antitypical Jebusites in a manner no one would have believed possible in 1874. The raucous boasting of the Goliaths and all other antitypical Jebusites had been completely silenced. May we repeat once again, God bless his memory!

   JOSHUA'S ALTAR IN JORDAN

   On p. 6 of his paper No. 60 J. W. Krewson again reiterates his error that “the twelve chief graces are typed by the twelve stones set up in the midst of the river Jordan by command of Joshua.” To him “the Scriptures clearly teach this,” he says. Apparently, he has read the fourth chapter of the book of Joshua while in a state of coma if that section of Scripture “clearly teaches” such an interpretation to him – ­either that, or under very dangerous spiritual direction. And, apparently, he didn't bother to read at all the Berean Comment on Josh. 4:9!

   Let us take a careful look at the record in Joshua Chapter 4: Verse 2 the Lord commands Joshua to “take twelve men out of the people, out of every tribe a man.” Thus, those twelve men clearly acted for the whole twelve tribes. And v. 5 tells us each man was to take a stone, “according to the number of the tribes of the children of Israel.” Clearly enough, the twelve stones represented the same thing exactly as did the twelve men; that is, the twelve tribes of Israel. Since things equal to the same things are equal to each other, the twelve men must also type “the twelve chief graces” if the stones type those graces, as J. W. Krewson teaches. Would any one with even a smattering of Present Truth accept such a contention? Let us bear in mind that those twelve men were warriors, with swords by their sides, bent upon the conquest of Canaan; and to set forth such a picture as typical of “the twelve chief graces” is simply transparent nonsense. But, if we have them typifying the Gospel Age Spiritual Israel, armed with the “sword of the spirit,” we have harmony in every detail; and let us not forget that twelve is a Little Flock number.

   Besides, the record expressly states that the men and the stones represented the twelve tribes of Israel; and in no place in the Bible is there the slightest hint that those fleshly tribes would typify the graces of the spirit. Rather, they type the twelve tribes of Spiritual Israel – sometimes the nominal, sometimes the true. And Joshua's act in constructing an altar from those stones is in exact keeping with Elijah's act in doing identically the same thing (See 1 Kgs. 18:32). And Brother Johnson says in E-3:26 (22) those twelve stones in Elijah's Altar typed “the twelve tribes of Spiritual Israel” – “the true Church, the altar.” Note his repetition of this in par. 23, p. 27.

   Furthermore, those twelve stones from the bottom of Jordan would be slimy and mud-covered (the Jordan was then at flood stage – Josh. 3:15; 4:18), which had no tool of man upon them. This is just the exact opposite of the diamonds, rubies, etc., that portray the graces of Spiritual Israel. Such gems are a pleasure to behold, and have received their polishing and formation by the careful application of much tooling by man – just as Spiritual Israel has developed the graces “through much tribulation.” There is a certain symmetry and order to clear Bible exegesis – just as there is always revulsion and disorder to Bible eisegesis; and this distortion by J. W. Krewson is a pronounced example of eisegesis. There is nothing anywhere in the Scriptures to support the type he has attempted to make; it is an excellent com­panion for some of the types R. G. jolly has offered (which is another strong confir­mation of their ‘cousin’ relationship). As further corroboration of our understand­ing of this type, we offer the following from E-11:369:

   ''The altar of stones seems to represent the humanity of the Christ as an abiding condition of the Altar members (“They are there unto this day,” Josh. 4:9 – JJH) as unremovable from that altar, hence the Millennial Altar.” — ­And Joshua leading Israel into Canaan is antityped by Jesus leading Spiritual Israel into the Heavenly Canaan.

   Then further by Brother Johnson:

   “That altar should be accepted by the Millen­nialists as God will have made it, without their trying to shape it by erroneous opinions of their own (not build it of hewn stone, just as was true of the altar built by Joshua – JJH); for such opinions attached to that altar (lift up thy tool upon it) would defile it.” Tools properly applied to precious stones, representa­tive of the graces, accomplish just the reverse: instead of “defiling” such stones, the craftsman's tools “refine” them and bring out their beauty. J. W. Krewson's “erroneous opinion” on Joshua's altar would properly be regarded as such “defiling.”

   In close harmony with the comments of Brother Johnson, and with our own addi­tional analysis as given aforegoing, is Brother Russell's own interpretation of the Joshua altar:

   “A man from each of the twelve tribes was selected; each one was to carry a stone from the midst of the Jordan to the shore, and these twelve large stones were to be set up as a memorial, a reminder to Israel­ites for coming generations of how the Lord had brought them over Jordan. (Josh.4:2,9)

   “It was not necessary that the priests should remain in Jordan, and die there, on behalf of the delivered Israelites, in order to complete the type, for instead, by the Lord's direction, twelve stones were placed where they stood, representing the twelve tribes of Israel – representing the 144,000 out of all the twelve tribes (Rev. 7:1-8) who constitute the royal priesthood, and who become dead with Christ, according to the flesh, that they may live with Him as new creatures, partakers of the divine nature, and participators with Him in the great work of blessing all the families of the earth.” (Reprints 3085/3086)

   We all make mistakes; Brother Russell and Brother Johnson made mistakes. But mistakes made by “good and honest hearts” are always corrected when the mistake be­comes apparent. It is only when such mistakes are persistently repeated that they become reprehensible, and cause the erring one to become “leprous” – as is now clearly manifest with J. W. Krewson's repetition of his perversion (of Parousia and Epiphany Truth) after we clearly revealed his folly in the matter in our papers Nos. 59 and 70. It is extremely distressing to note such meddlers constantly on the prowl for “new light” to set aside completely, or to pervert the true “shining light” that has come to us through the Laodicean Star; and we urge our readers to consider some of the farewell address of the same Joshua who ordered the construction of the altar in Jordan:

   ''If ye forsake the Lord, and serve strange gods, then He will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that he hath done you good.” (Josh. 24:20) And observe, too, the Berean Comment on this verse: “Typifying that God will send strong delusions to those who receive not the love of the Truth,” as prophesied in 2 Thes. 2:11.

   If J. W. Krewson has the audacity to answer the foregoing, it would not surprise us to see his favorite “sleight-of-hand” as his excuse: “What one does through another, he does himself”! He may tell us that Brother Russell would see the error of his typical interpretation of Joshua's altar if he were here; but, since he is not here, he's now using J. W. Krewson to make the change for him. Most of us are aware of the intricacy and difficulty obtaining with most types; but this one of Joshua's altar seems to us at least to be one of the plainest and least intricate of any of the types; thus, it is difficult indeed for us to comprehend the sort of thinking that attempts to pervert it. It has been the pronounced tendency of the Jehovah's wit­nesses to “go and do likewise” all during this Epiphany period. They, too, have vitiated some of the simplest truths in their unsalutary urge for “new light” (“much speaking” – Matt. 6:7; “profane, empty declarations” –2 Tim. 2:16, Dia.).

   By this let none conclude that we are against new light; definitely, that is not our position, for we rejoice in any advancing Truth that any brother may by God's Grace present to His people. But in all of it we repeat again that advancing Truth does not set aside Truth already revealed, as some deceivers would have us believe; but it must be in harmony with, and add beauteous superstructure to that Truth we have already “learned and been assured of.”

   OTHER VAGARIES

   Many of J. W. Krewson's expressions on the Bible are in keeping with his explana­tion of Joshua's Altar in Jordan. Often his statements are completely misleading; often some of them are outright revolutionism (and repudiation of the Star Members' faithful teachings). Some he has forsaken because of our annihilative refutations against him; but when he does so, he just remains silent on his past errors – giving the Truth at times, as though that were his position all along. He made the statement in one of his previous papers, “Error must be defended – Truth can stand for itself.” In our Jan. 1, 1959 No. 43 paper, we completely annihilated such an UNSCRIPTURAL contention. Now he claims to be a champion himself, and a defender of the Truth!

   Another instance is his article on page 75 of his paper No. 62 – “The Way, the Truth and the Life.” We shall not detail the many slipshod and misleading state­ments of that article, some of which impinge his former statements (although that doesn't matter to him, because he counts upon the sluggishness of his readers – ­just as do the Jehovah's Witnesses), or directly contradict them. But here we shall confine our observation to his last two paragraphs on p. 80, and the two at top of P. 81. The definitions he offers are definitely inadequate. Why does he not apply the “Way – Truth – Life” to the Gospel-Age and Epiphany Tabernacles? Clearly enough, if he did so, it would leave no room at all for his quasi-elect consecrated, or for 'cousin' Jolly's Campers Consecrated. In those Tabernacle pictures Jesus becomes the “Way” only to those who come through the Gate (the “Way” into the Court). He becomes the “Truth” only to such as present themselves at the first veil (the “Truth” entrance into the Holy for Gospel-Age new creatures, and the “Truth” to the Youthful Worthies in an accommodated sense). Then Jesus becomes the “Life” at the second veil (the same being the acquisition of the Divine Nature by the Gospel-Age Fully Faithful, the spirit nature for the Great Company, and the spirit nature for the Ancient Worthies and Youthful Worthies at the end of the Little Season).

   The foregoing presents an elevating and convincing definition of the Way, the Truth, and the Life as embodied in our Beloved Lord – portrayed in the Tabernacle type – although it leaves no room at all for Faith-Age consecrations in the Camp. It will be noted, J. W. Krewson states on p. 80 that “Jesus is the exclusive means of approach to God,” which statement is certainly the Truth (but does it fit with his “strange fire” – ­false doctrine – and his other contentions?). Let him offer one iota of proof anywhere that such 'Approach to God” is shown in the Camp. In due time we expect to analyze other vagaries presented by him, particularly his “Jambresian Folly” on pages 91-98, which applies most forcefully and clearly to J. W. Krewson himself. His slanderous falsehoods offer solid reason why the Lord has permitted him to make the many blunders that he has made in teaching and arrangement.

   In this same No. 62 paper he reiterates his revolutionism and repudiation of the Epiphany Messenger's clear teaching on the Worthiest having no part with the Great Company in the sin-atonement for the world's willful sin (See his pp. 79,83). He often gives citations to Epiphany teachings that have no bearing on his conten­tion whatever. On p. 77, bottom, he cites his readers to Epiphany Vol. 12, p. 274; but on the next page (p. 275) is Brother Johnson's clear teaching that the Worthies have no part or parcel in the sin-atonement for willful sins (as JWK claims they have): “Finally, the Great Company sufferings in relation to sin-atonement are for the willful sins of the world in sin-atonement and thus differ from those of the Church; and they differ from those of the Ancient and Youthful Worthies, which Worthies do not suffer at all for sin-atonement, which again, makes their sufferings differ from those of these three classes.” (E-12:275) Yet in this same paper he deplores revo­lutionism and the 'setting aside' of Parousia and Epiphany Truth! Even if we didn't have Brother Johnson's clear statement, in direct contradiction to J. W. Krewson's contention (that the Worthies share with the Great Company in the sin-atonement for the world's willful sins), we would know from fundamental teachings of the Truth that the Worthies could have no part or parcel in sin-atonement for willful sins, or any other sins. Let J. W. Krewson present further comment on this that he is right and the Epiphany Messenger is wrong, after which we shall offer further elaboration and refutation on his gross revolutionism of Epiphany Truth.

   He also offers persistent revolutionism against the teachings of both Brothers Russell and Johnson regarding the final departure of the Gospel-Age Elijah. Both Messengers clearly taught from Psa. 46 that the whirlwind ascent of Elijah into Heaven (2 Kgs. 2:11) typified the departure of the last members of the Body of Christ in the very violent features of the Time of Trouble. If his Present Truth (?) of the Apokalypsis is so convincing, why does he not clarify this subject? Repeatedly have we presented this question, but we receive complete silence from him as our answer*

   THE GOSPEL-AGE ELIJAH

   The last of the Old Testament writers had told the Jews, “I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord” (Hal. 4:5); and the Jews had been so much impressed with this prophecy that they were constantly on the alert for the physical re-appearance of the ancient Elijah, not realizing that this was one of those “dark sayings” they could not understand. But when John the Baptist appeared Jesus said he was that Elijah that had been promised (See Matt. 11:14, Dia. and Matt. 17:20). And, just as John had been the ''messenger'' (Mal. 3:1) to announce the personal Jesus, so the Christ Company in the flesh has been announcing the second coming of the Lord all during the Age, with the larger and much more ominous “great and dreadful day.”

   But, as Brother Russell explained, the specific characteristic by which all might recognize antitypical Elijah would be that as God's mouthpiece he would seek to reform the world – just as the first Elijah repeatedly endeavored to reform Israel, the rulers as well as the people. Jesus Himself was the leader and forerunner of the Gospel-Age Elijah, as is clearly revealed in his statement to Pilate, “I testify to the Truth” (John 18:37, Dia.). And all during the Age His lesser brethren have also witnessed to the Truth against the evils in Church and State. Some of these leaders are still household names today – such as Luther, Wesley, Cranmer, et al; while others have receded into obscurity (except to such of us who look for them) – names such as Claudius of Turin, Berangar of Tours (France), Peter Waldo, Marsiglio, John Wyclif, John Huss, John Wessel, and others.

   All of the members of the Gospel-Age Elijah, and particularly the leaders among them, were outraged at the evils and crimes committed in the name of religion; all of them protested and attempted reform, as did Elijah; and all of them received the same treatment as did he at the hands of his “brethren.” From the time of Abel to this our present day it has been common practice for evildoers to praise the dead saints, even as they have crucified the living saints of their own day. The Jews repeatedly chanted “Abraham, Isaac, Jacob,” as they vexed and abused the great and magnanimous Moses. The later Jews lauded Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses, as they murdered their own prophets in resentment against the Truth spoken against them. And the more of truth there was in their message, the more they were hated and abused, Jesus Himself being the outstanding example. “We have Abraham as our father,” they said (Luke 3:8); “they have Moses and the prophets” (Luke 16:29). Then they proceeded to crucify Him – much the same as their ancestors had done to Zechariah, their faithful priest (2 Chr. 24:20-22).

   It is a proper observation that the Jewish ritual established under Moses, and many of the Christian units that originated with the Gospel-Age Star Members, have all progressed through three stages: Priesthood, Priestcraft and Priest- “graft.” Aaron was a faithful and fully consecrated priest; so were many of his successors. But, by the time of Zedekiah, “the profane and wicked prince,” he was encouraged in his evil ways by the priestcraft then in charge to abuse the faithful Jeremiah. Such priest­craft is usually actuated by that worldly wisdom which knows not God. As we said in the Jebus pages, Jerusalem was considered impregnable against the puny weapons of that day; thus, it was only “logical” worldly wisdom that those mercenary priests should advise Zedekiah to give no heed to the pessimistic Jeremiah. Nobody had ever taken the city – just as no one had been able to take Tyre – so why should any one take it then? But Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar; and Zedekiah fell with it, along with his “experts” in priestcraft.

   Later, when Cyrus allowed the Jews to return, they returned to the evil ways of their fathers; and by the time Jesus appeared, their priesthood was scraping the very bottom of the dirty barrel. The Law had clearly stated that the animals for sacrifice should be “without blemish”; but the priesthood of Jesus' day had strained that to an extremity never intended by Moses. It is said they had as many as 70 faults with which to reject sacrificial animals – even a wart on its belly, or some such, be­ing sufficient cause for rejection. What, then, would the pious Jew do who had traveled several days to reach the temple for his purification? The answer was quite simple: Those priests, who would not accept his animal, had one in the yard behind the temple that they would sell to him “at a reasonable price.” Then, they would take the original animal in trade, transfer it to the stack pen, and sell it to the next Jew who came similarly with his animal. Little wonder Jesus thundered at them, “My house shall be called a house of prayer, but you make it a den of robbers.” (Matt. 21:13, Dia.; John 2:13-17) Yes, Priest-“graft” was in its heyday!

   There is no need for us to detail the Priest-“graft” of the Roman Church, and others; our readers are sufficiently familiar with the facts. But a word would be “in season” here concerning the Jehovah's Witnesses, because we believe J. F. Ruther­ford converted the saintly Parousia Movement, developed by That Servant, from a true Priesthood to a degraded Priest-“graft” in less time than any other instance in human history. He was quick to see the possibilities of “slave” labor – trusting brethren going from house to house, standing on street corners, etc., selling his books at a handsome royalty to him. And his henchmen have given no more heed to the Elijah of our day (Brother Johnson and other faithful brethren) than did their ancestors give heed to the Elijah of years past. Nor should we “think it strange.” Nor should it surprise us if we receive similar treatment (because, “If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you” – John 15:20; and, if we would be faithful in “bearing witness to the Truth,” we are certain to receive persecution – 2 Tim. 3:12); but we may take consolation in the fact that we are in the fraternity of the Elect Company. Thus, ''we glory in tribulations” also (Rom. 5:3-5); and therewith may we be content. The more nearly we testify of Truth, the more likely are we to receive the “reward of the prophets.” May we be content with such things as we have; the writings of the Laodicean Star are indeed our rich inheritance. But the Truth they gave is to some a “savor of life unto life, and to others a savor of death unto death; and who is sufficient for these things?” (2 Cor. 2:15,16) Their books are like mirrors: If a mule looks in, we should not expect an angel to look out!

   ELIJAH THE TROUBLEMAKER

   In their attempts at reform, both the typical and antitypical Elijahs have been accused of being the troublemakers, agitators, sifters, seditionists, etc. Ahab and his Baal-worshipping Jezebel were the most wicked pair ever to rule Israel. “Ahab did evil in the sight of the Lord above all that were before him.” (1 Kgs. 16:30). Yet it was Ahab who had the gall to charge Elijah: “Art thou he that troubleth Israel?” (I Kgs. 18:17) And in identical language the Priest-“grafters” hurled the accusation at Jesus: “He stirreth up the people”! (Luke 23:5)

   So also “that woman Jezebel” (Rev. 2:20), and her murderous paramour, “The Holy Roman Empire,” made repeated charge against the Gospel-Age Elijah that they, too, were ‘troubling’ “this present evil world.” They raised doubts, caused divisions, agitated the troubled waters, was the contention. Thus, it is a sage observation that the wise man adapts himself to his surroundings, but the fool tries to adapt his surroundings to him; and thus we progress! The evildoers have always been the cause of the trouble, but they have invariably blamed the righteous for the trouble. The antitypical Jebu­sites (the errorists) have themselves always been at the bottom of every division in the Church, but they have always accused their fully-faithful brethren of causing the uproar (and they prevailed, because they were the ones to take over after each Star Member finished his course: They were able always to keep the majority, so they ac­cused the righteous of being 'sifters,' because they resisted their errors and did cause other faithful brethren to ‘sift’ – leave the majority; and the “unstable and the unlearned” always were convinced that the Fully Faithful were the ones who “caused divisions among you,”). This clear record of history should certainly teach us some­thing; but it is a sad observation that so few, so very few, have learned anything from it.

   Therefore, “Let the peace of the Anointed preside in your hearts.... Let the Word of the Anointed dwell in you richly.... Whatever you may do, in word or in work, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” (Col. 3:15-17)

   Sincerely your brother,

   John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

   ------------------------------------------------------------------

   LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

   My dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace be yours!

   I have desired to write you a few lines before now; didn't even know that I would be alive until this time. I am thankful to the dear Lord that He has spared me to see this time that we are living in – such as never was on the page of Jamaica's history.... It is really a fulfillment of our Pastor's teaching, as made clear in Parousia Vol, 4.

   I have also observed how the Lord is using you mightily in defending His Truth, and to encourage His faithful people..... I am still here with Sister ------- Oh, she is very kind and helpful to me! If I am not privileged to write to you again, may the dear Lord bless and keep you in His service! Here comes my warmest love to you, Sister Hoefle – also Sisters Wells and Dunnagan, and to all the other dear ones with.

   Yours by His Grace, Sister ------- (JAMAICA)

   ...................................................................

   Dear Brother Hoefle: Loving greetings through our Beloved Lord!

   This little note is to let you know of my temporary change of address. The way has been opened for me to visit...... I have a grandson who is planning to give up his present work for one that will pay much more...... I meant to give him your review of the financial world, but have misplaced it..... If you think it advisable, would you send him a copy? His address is....... May you both continue to feel our Lord's favor and love!

   Faithfully yours ------- (MARYLAND)

    ..................................................................

   Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in our dear Redeemer's name!

   Let me thank you for the papers for March, April and May. Thank you for all the encouragement that you both have given me in your letters.... Brother and I are endeavoring to study to make ourselves approved unto God. We both do earnestly look forward to the papers, for they are interesting, inspiring and full of rich food – which I feel (as a newcomer) that every sincere believer ought to find from them........... In my humble way I see as I understand it, that you are doing what Paul exhorts the elders to do in 1 Pet. 5:2,3.......

   With warm Christian greetings and love from Brother and myself to you both, and to the brethren among you. Jude 21,25.

   Your sister in the Faith ------- (TRINIDAD)

   .........................................................................

   ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

   In harmony with the Epiphany Messenger's arrangement to honor the memory of That Wise and Faithful Servant at this season, we designate Sunday, October 17 through Sunday, November 15, which includes four weeks and five Sundays, for our SPECIAL EFFORT in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle. As Brother Johnson has pointed out, the fully faithful will participate in this “good fight” unto its completion. Let others, who do not appreciate this arrangement, follow the ''will-o-the-wisp,” of their various Levitical groups, but let all the faithful Epiphany-enlightened brethren “Continue in what they have learned and been assured of” from the Laodicean Star. By so doing we not only honor their memory, but we also serve God in His appointed way.

   Our Nos. 1, 2 and 3 may be used in service at Church doors and individually; and our No. 5 as follow-up toward interested individuals. Also, our No. 4 – Three Babylons – may be used in connection with the various Levitical groups wherever opportunity permits. Order your literature in time. All free – and postage prepaid, of course. If you have need of other Parousia and Epiphany literature in your witness work, let us know about that.

   Wherever two or three can meet together (October 31, or some other date during this period, if more convenient), a Memorial service in remembrance of both Messengers would be a blessing. We should honor those whom God honors (See John 12:26); and as we join together in service and in Truth, let us join together in prayer – God bless their Memory!

NO. 121: THE ROMAN CHURCH AND ITS LITTLE "TWIN"

No. 121

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

With the great upsurge in recent years in activity and increase in numbers, we believe it timely to offer some comparisons between the Roman Catholic Church and the Jehovah's Witnesses. In this we do not cherish the hope of influencing many in either of those organizations; our purpose mainly is to enlighten our own readers on a number of points. However, we strongly urge our readers to offer every courtesy and civility to any Witness they may meet -bearing in mind that at least some of them are members of the Household of Faith. Thus, those members would be our brethren -confused and misguided brethren, yes, but brethren nonetheless. Therefore, the words of St. Paul would be quite appropos: "let us do good unto all men as we have opportunity, and especially unto them who are of the Household of Faith." Hence, if occasion should arise, we counsel our readers to present this paper to such Witnesses as may have a "hearing ear"; and we shall be happy at all times to provide more copies of this issue free. This do "in meekness … perhaps God may give them a change of mind, in order to a knowledge of the Truth" (2 Tim. 2:25, Dia.)--even as we also have received the Truth, "through the goodness and the philanthropy of God," Tit.3:4,Dia.

The first point of similarity between these two systems is their claim to ancient origin. The Roman Church claims to be the first Church of the Christian Era in point of time. "Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my church," say they, "and our Popes are the direct successors to St. Peter. To us are committed the keys of the Kingdom." And in identical fashion the Witnesses claim to be the first Church of origin in the Harvest period -the successors to Pastor Russell, the "Channel" for the "advancing Truth" of this latter day. All other groups that have arisen since 1917 from Pastor Russell's movement are simply dissenters (Protesters) from the Truth -a part of "That Evil Servant" of Matt. 24:48-51 (according to them), etc. Their claim has the same familiar ring as does that of the Roman Church against the dissenters -the real Protestants -that have arisen since Martin Luther's deflection from them.

The second "twin" resemblance between the two systems is found in their claim that they adhere scrupulously to the Truth as offered by their progenitors -all the while they do the very opposite. It is no exaggeration to declare that the Roman Church has counterfeited, or perverted, every major feature of God's Plan of the Ages; and it is no exaggeration to declare the Witnesses have counterfeited, or perverted, every important feature of the Harvest Truth as explained by Bro. Russell. And the tragic feature in all this is that it is almost impossible to find a laymen Catholic who really knows what he believes -just as it is well-nigh impossible to find a lay Witness with a clear and comprehensive understanding of their beliefs. It is purely a matter of credulity in both sects--close the eyes, open the mouth, and swallow what is put therein by those who "sit in the Chair of St. Peter” -all the while contending vehemently their adherence to the teachings of their respective founders.

In our paper No. 120 (copy free upon request) on Justification we made the charge that the perversion by the Witnesses of the doctrine of Justification had forced them also to reject completely the book "Tabernacle Shadows of the Better Sacrifices," the basis of all important Harvest Truth. Hardly had we completed that paper on Justification when we entered the home of a Witness, who immediately declared they adhere closely to the teachings as propounded by Brother Russell. In only a matter of minutes, however, the lady said one of our associates had recently given her "that book, which is against the Witnesses' teachings." When shown the book it proved to be "Tabernacle Shadows"; but the lady did not even know the frontispiece carried the inscription, “Written by Charles T. Russell in 1879"--although she claimed to have accepted the Harvest Truth in 1915 from Brother Russell's ministry. In fact, that book contains the foundation truth for every one of the six volumes of Studies in the Scriptures that came from the pen of Brother Russell in the years following 1879 (although the Witnesses no longer use these books either). Here, then we have direct proof that their claims of adherence to Brother Russell's teachings are hollow and completely without foundation (just as all error is without foundation)--just so much "strong delusion." Their "new light" has replaced the basic structure of the Harvest Truth as given to us by "that Wise and Faithful Servant" (which the Seventh Volume, distributed by the Society in 19l7, expressly states is Pastor Russell).

And let us consider, too, the "twin" similarity of their claims regarding those who reject them. The Roman Church -at least until 1799 "issued great swelling words" concerning the fate of the "heretics": Theirs would be eternal damnation in Eternal Torment. Question not our teachings, they said; Reading is doubt, Doubt is heresy, and Heresy is Hell (the lake of fire and brimstone)! And the Witnesses offer exact "twin" to their older and greater "twin" in their explanation of the Parable of the Sheep and Goats (Matt. 25:31-45), a parable which they claim is having its fulfilment in this our day. Note what they say:

"The goats who are to be executed as cursed persons will include the religionists who stay inside Babylon the Great till she is destroyed forever; also the religionists who are the modern-day part of the composite man of lawlessness, the son of destruction; also, the symbolic tares, that is, the weeds, the sons of the wicked one (Matt. 13:25-30); also, those political kings, their military commanders, their cavalrymen, the freemen and the slaves, the great and the small, all of whom are lined up at Armageddon, but not on the side of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords--Rev. 19:18-2l. (Truly, "the Witnesses will not only have stirred up antitypical Jehu--conservative organized labor--to bring the Roman and Greek Catholic Churches gradually to their destruction in Armageddon, but will have done the same with him as to the Protestant Churches"--; and will also have stirred up Jehu against the political powers that be -See 1 Kgs.9:l.-37--JJH) The goats would also include those husbands and wives who have believing marriage partners but who, in spite of the good example of their believing marriage mates, are found to be still unbelievers (in Jehovah's Witnesses!) in the day and at the hour of the execution of God's judgment against this enemy world; also, the children of a believing parent or-the children of believing parents (fathers and mothers), -which children were once holy -as minors, as unresponsible – children – but who have grown up to responsible years and have refused to become dedicated, baptized believers by the time that divine execution upon the goats begins. In other words, at the time of the execution of the divine judgment the goats would be all those persons, young and old, who have not become sheep and who have not been gathered into the one fold under the one shepherd, where the small remnant of the Shepherd's spiritual brothers are." (The "one fold" in this quotation refers to Jehovah's Witnesses, of course!)

Clearly enough, this means all who are not aligned with the Witnesses when Armageddon occurs. And say they, all such "go into the symbolic everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels (Matt, 25:41)...Such goats...being destroyed by fire, they will have no resurrection."

This "Gospel" (their "Good Tidings”) must bring some of their adherents great joy and as much comfort as did the Roman Catholic Church offer to their faithful adherents in connection with their relatives and friends who did not, and would not, become "dedicated" Catholics; but many of these adherents remain in their respective organizations through fear of the wrath of God (which would prove to be more terrible than described for others for themselves should they depart), as they bask in the promise of bliss for themselves as they stand afar off and enjoy the destruction of their former friends, relatives, and even their own "undedicated" children- in many instances their only sin being they are just unable to accept the "Channel" teaching. A real happy day that is to be for all the faithful "dedicated" and the "remnant”! All of this has the familiar ring of the Roman Church (particularly during the "Dark Ages") prior to 1799, when they were vehemently pronouncing doom upon all who did not accept them (and had the "heretics" burned at the stake, or put to death in some other torturesome manner)--the Roman Church and the Witnesses once again "twins" to the letter!

Consider, Brethren, the case of the poor Heathen: Because it has not been their good fortune (1) in this present "drive" to hear about the Jehovah's Witnesses, they, too, must go into "the symbolic everlasting fire"; they will have no resurrection, (Even should they reach these Heathen, their "Tidings" would be about as joyous and comforting to them as were the Missionaries from Christendom, who taught them they could be "saved" themselves if they accepted Christ, but that all those of their relatives and friends who hadn't -and didn't do so here and now -would spend an eternity in torment.) And the Witnesses make such contention all the while they quote 1 Tim. 2:4--"God will have all men to be saved, and come to a knowledge of the Truth." Apparently, the Witnesses would have us believe this statement does not mean quite what it says! It would seem that God makes statements and promises that are on a par with politicians' statements and promises (according to the Witnesses' understanding and teaching on this text). And in this they also mimic their great "twin," who also thought to "change times and laws" (Dan. 7:25).

Another similarity of the "twins" is their gloating over the great numbers who accept them. The Roman Church makes great play upon the multitudes who follow them (even though our Lord called His followers a "little flock")--more by far than any of the 'heretic' protesting sects in Christendom. So also the Witnesses boast of their superiority in numbers over any of the sects in Little Babylon (those religious groups that have developed since Brother Russell's death). One of our readers questioned a Witness who had been recently baptized, asking why he went with the Jehovah's Witnesses (since it was apparent he didn't know what he believed). His reply: One of the members took him to New York to one of their Conventions, and when he saw so many people who had accepted them, he knew all that many people couldn't be wrong! So he joined them and was baptized then and there. He was told that he should join the Roman Catholic Church if he thought numbers are the criterion, as they have a hundred times more members than the Jehovah's Witnesses.

"NEW LIGHT" A FRANTIC NECESSITY

It is a fair and proper appraisal that much of the "new light" (actually mud splashes of error) that the Witnesses' leaders have produced has been actuated by a frenzied effort to cover up some of their colossal blunders. When eight of their leaders were sent to Atlanta prison in 1918, they quickly ascribed this to "persecution" -all the while it was simply their pathetic blundering attack on patriotism, at a time when the United States was at war, that contributed largely to their incarceration.  In that debacle they themselves sadly distorted secular truth—not religious truth; thus, were outside the pale of the inspired counsel to "preach the word."

By the Grace of God, they were released from Atlanta in 1919, after which they were greatly extolled for "suffering for righteousness" -which was partly true, of course. World War I did give their Babylonish opponents an opportunity to compensate for the wounds the Truth had inflicted upon them all during the Harvest period under Brother Russell. "A bond has been created between those eight brethren that will continue throughout all eternity," said C. A. Wise, Vice-President of the Society, and Executive Director when J. F. Rutherford and the other seven were in prison. But hardly a year had passed before Frederick Robinson (one of those eight men) deflected, denying many cogent truths he had at least supported by his silence, and he embraced Universalism -some of the "pestilence that walketh in darkness." He teamed up with a man named Knock, who was a member of antitypical Balaam, advocating "Concordant-Versionism." A little later another of those eight men, George Fisher (who supervised the writing of the Ezekiel section of Volume Seven, The Finished Mystery) left them; and we ourselves received a letter from him then in which he stated: "Any one that does not recognize J. F. Rutherford as That Evil Servant of Matt. 24:48 is just that much out of Present Truth."

At the Cedar Point Convention in September 1919, Joseph F. Rutherford, flushed by his unexpected release from Atlanta (through the Petition drive, which dumped a whole freight carload of names on the Washington lawn demanding -and accomplishing-the release of the eight brethren), was going to "do great works, win great numbers, gain great favor." With a million dollars he would break the Devil's back in one year, he said. His slogan then was "Advertise the King and Kingdom"; and he did it with all the fanfare of a high-pressure worldly Sales Convention--in sharp contrast with our Lord's methods. (Be it remembered he was one of those who considered Brother Russell a 'bungler' -and he would now put some real zip into the Harvest work.)

At that Convention he announced The Golden Age magazine, and his plan would gain 4,000,000 subscribers in one year. We then took his own figures, analyzed them with some of our own figures -to show how impossible were his calculations -and we immediately became very unpopular with the Society brethren. However, within one year instead of four million clamoring subscribers -the Golden Age was so little noticed that the newsstands would no longer allow it space, even on consignment.

About that time the "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" drive was also organized. The Ancient Worthies would be back by 1925 (an elect Class taught by Pastor Russell and detailed in Hebrews 11 in the Scriptures, which the Witnesses no longer mention-and concerning which their new adherents seem to know little or nothing), the Kingdom would be set up, and the people then living would not need to die (a much more desirable prophecy, and actually less error, than what they teach now: Now, according to them, most of the living will not only die--those not associated with the Jehovah's Witnesses--but will die eternally, never to be resurrected, or awakened, according to their latest "new light"). The Witnesses still have the same closely-related spiritual flapdoodle under a different label -instead of 1925 as the deadline, it's-now Armageddon --and they-still fool the same kind of people,-"the unstable and the unlearned."

With the complete collapse of the Golden Age Drive, the 1925 date, and other fundamentals, it was imperative that much "new light" be brought forth to divert the attention of “the dear brethren" from the tremendous bungling failures of the past six years. Thus, their "new light" told them there was no such thing as Tentative Justification; "Tabernacle Shadows" was just a mass of error; the "new light" on Rev. 10:6 (“there should be time no longer") was produced (this "new light" based upon the very faulty and erroneous translation of the King James version, in a frenzied attempt to offset the 1925 debacle). The pyramid was no longer "the great stone witness in the land of Egypt" (Isa. 19:19, 20); and all those who denounced the past bungling errors were a part of "that evil servant." It worked then, and it still works with a certain type of people -just as their Roman "twin" still uses the words of spiritual "Witchcraft," --"Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my church." (Spiritual witchcraft means especially deceptive false teachings-I Sam. 15:23--such as the deceptive twist given to Rev. 10:6).

It is well to recall at this point that the debacle of 1925 was the result of their erroneous calculation respecting the seventy Jubilee Cycles. They had offered a mathematical calculation, which indisputably' "proved" that the Ancient Worthies would be resurrected in 1925 and would establish the Kingdom. (Now, it seems, the Ancient Worthies aren't needed for the establishment of their Kingdom!)

J. F. Rutherford even 'sweetened' the hoax by building a palatial residence in California, which would serve as a sort of 'Hitler hideaway' for him, but which would await the occupancy of the Ancient Worthies (mentioned in Hebrews 11) when they returned from the grave in 1925. This mathematical certainty (?) created an unbelievable frenzy of activity to "Advertise the King and Kingdom" (much the same as had occurred in the previous 100 years with the Adventists, who had offered positive fixed dates for the Lord's second advent, when "every eye would see Him"). But, when 1925 arrived, and not one scintilla of evidence appeared to "prove" that date, it then developed a second frenzy of activity among J. F. Rutherford and his leading subordinates to present a great array of "new light" to 'sugarpill' the terrible blunder, and to set new goals and objectives for the "faithful." 'that "new light" gradually evolved the present Armageddon deadline to join them or else--or else be numbered with the "goats" and be forever lost. Truly, Figures don't lie, but liars do figure!

JUSTICE GROSSLY DISTORTED

Much of what we say herein has been instigated by reading the March 15; 1965, Watch Tower, and we quote now from page 167 respecting Cain:

"Cain was the murderer who spilled the blood of righteous Abel. Jesus thus classed Cain in with those Scribes and Pharisees who were liable to the judgment of Gehenna....The Sacred Scriptures hold out no hope of a resurrection for Cain." (Yet in this very paper we now review the Witnesses stress God's Justice·-"an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, life for life.")

There is nothing whatever in the record to show Cain was encouraged to his evil deed by anything other than his own envious murderous disposition. Therefore, if Cain's death is now eternal, Justice has been fully satisfied in the death of Abel -a "life for a life." How, then, shall we reconcile this with Jesus' words in Matt. 23:35--"Upon this generation (living at that time) may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias"? Why should the generation in Jesus' day atone for Cain's sin if Cain himself had fully atoned (paid) for that sin by forfeiting his own life forever? All Truth is harmonious with itself, with all Bible texts and with God's Character; and the foundation of His throne is JUSTICE. Error is never harmonious with itself, with Scripture and with God's character!

And how can we reconcile the Witnesses' contention re those Scribes and Pharisees also suffering the fate of Cain, when St. Peter said to those very Jews (Acts 3:17); "I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers"? Likewise St. Paul's statement (1 Cor. 2:8), "Had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory"? Furthermore, how shall we reconcile the Witnesses' contention re eternal oblivion for the Scribes and pharisees with Jesus' words (Luke 13:28), “Ye shall see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob sitting in the Kingdom (the Ancient Worthies of Heb, 11 occupying earthly visible rulership of the Kingdom at Jerusalem), and you yourselves cast out"? And also with the words of Jesus (Matt. 26:64): "Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man Sitting on the right hand of power"? If those Jews are forever gone, just how will the words of Jesus be proven true? Certainly, they didn't see these things then! And, if those people did those things, "through ignorance," just when will they come to "an accurate knowledge of the Truth" -the heritage St, Paul says God has arranged for all? And, if all must come to a "knowledge" of what the Witnesses teach, which “new light" will save them -the "new light" they offered 45 years ago, or the "new light" they are offering now, or perhaps the "new light" they will present in the years ahead?

THEIR OWN BIBLE, TOO

Not to be one whit behind their "twin," the Jehovah's Witnesses also must have their own Bible! We use the words "own Bible" advisedly, for such it is not even a reasonable translation, but a mere paraphrase, in many instances simply expressing what the Witnesses' writer believes the text should mean. Their Catholic "twin" established the precedent for this late in the 16th century, when their "Douay" version was produced, the history of which the Catholic Encyclopedia records after this fashion:

"It became of the first importance for the English Catholics to be furnished with a translation of their own, on the accuracy of which they could depend, and to which they could appeal in the course of argument. The work of preparing such a version was undertaken by the members of the English College at Douay, Flanders."

Their first edition was published in 1582, reprinted at Antwerp in 1600 and 1621; and the fourth edition was issued at Rouen in 1633. Then it was allowed to rest for almost a century, when a fifth edition, with some slight changes appeared in 1728. A sweeping revision was produced by Bishop Challoner in 1749-52. "His object was to meet the practical want felt by the Catholics of his day of a Bible....with notes more suitable to the time. The changes introduced by him were so considerable that according to Cardinal Newman, they almost amounted to a new edition -to call it any longer the Douay or Reimish version is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and modified until scarcely any verse is as it was originally published." Clearly enough, the "accuracy" of 1582 was not 'accuracy' at all by l749--just as the "accuracy" of 1920 is no longer 'accuracy' with the Witnesses in 1965!

To give our readers some practical ideas on the foregoing, we mention Gen. 42:38--"Jacob said....if mischief befall him (Benjamin) by the way in which ye go, then shall ye bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave." "The grave" in this text is from the Hebrew Sheol, the same occurring 65 times in the Old Testament -31 times translated grave, 31 times translated Hell, three times translated pit in the King James version. It actually means the death state, oblivion. But the Catholic-translation states it thus: "Then shall ye bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to Hell." Knowing that Jacob is in the Sacred record as beloved of God ("Jacob have I loved"--Rom. 9:13), the Catholic translators were alert enough to recognize how ridiculous it would be to have Jacob contemplating eternal torment for himself (over his sorrow in losing Benjamin) as his fate after death, so they made this footnote: "This word sometimes means Hell, and sometimes means the grave." However, they offer no authority for such a statement. And, realizing the inadequacy of their comment, the statement has been revised in more recent editions to read: "To that place where the souls remain."

Another instance of their erroneous application is Ec. 9:10--"Neither work, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge shall be in Hell, whither thou art hastening." In this text the King James version translates Sheol as "grave."

In many places the Witnesses' Bible is even more extreme than the Roman Douay; in fact, much of their Bible would be better described as an expression of religious fiction, their translation of Phil. 2:8-11 is an excellent illustration: "the death of the Cross" is rendered by them "death on a torture stake.” No reliable lexicon extant offers any justification for such a construction; the expression is purely a piece of fiction, designed to convey the thought that Jesus was not crucified, but was impaled. (In due time we hope to treat of this, and many other perversions, of which there are legion even in the one Watch Tower of March 15, 1965.)

However, one more example should have our attention here: On page 192 they advertise one of their latest pieces of "new light": "All Scripture is inspired of God and Beneficial." The expression has its base in 2 Tim. 3:16, a text we have treated in detail in our paper No. 96. Briefly, we would here state that the word "is" cannot be found in any of the older manuscripts. It should read, "All Scripture given (not "is given") by inspiration (God in-breathed)" – thus, "all Scripture that is God-Inbreathed is profitable" Scripture in the broad sense is anything written; but, even if we accept the narrowest Webster construction as applying to our King James translation of the Bible, the Jehovah's Witnesses' statement is still transparent nonsense. There are many words, phrases, and often whole sentences in the King James version that all scholars of any note agree are not in the original text, or so badly distorted by the translators that they make a shambles of the true thought. Thus, it is not even a truthful statement to declare that "all Scripture" found in the King James Bible is "by inspiration"; quite a lot of it is "by imagination," or "by aberration"--just as is also true of the Witnesses' Bible. And in all of this it seems the Witnesses are also –Closely mimicking their older "twin," because they already have produced a 1961 "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures" -probably also "more suitable to the time" and more readily adaptable to their "new light" of more recent years.

The danger of such presumption should be apparent, even to the novice. If the compiler be permitted to ignore completely the original Hebrew and Greek wording, offering merely what he believes the original inspired text to mean, such a position can lead to no end of mischief. The Lord, knowing aforetime that such "Evil Men and Imposters will make progress for the worse" (2 Tim, 3:13, Dia.), had a special warning placed in the last book of the New Testament: "If anyone add to the words of this book, God will add to him those plagues written in this book. And if anyone take away from the words of the-book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the word of life, and out of the Holy City"--Rev, 22: 18, 19. Surely, the Witnesses have been much tormented with "those plagues written in this book," and we predict yet much more similar torment as their future portion. Well may we consider, "The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of this prophecy"--Rev. 19:10, Dia.; and let us remember, too, that some of "the plagues in this book" of Revelation are those "seven vials of wrath" detailed in Revelation 16, the same being those Volumes of Studies in the Scriptures produced in large part by Pastor Russell, but no longer being of any practical use to the Witnesses (as these Volumes make null and void all their manufactured "new light").

Their Bible is quite in keeping with much of their other "new light" they have discovered in the past fifty years--their "new light" this year often making completely obsolete their "new light" of last year (and with this in view we need not be surprised to see another translation of the Bible by them to replace their 1961 "new translation"), often the double-talk of a man in a drunken stupor. Therefore, it is little wonder that C. A. Hise, mentioned aforegoing, made the statement about 40 years ago: "Brethren, I don't know myself any more! Things are changing so fast that we no longer believe this year what we believed last year; and we probably won't believe next year what we believe this year." Yes, they are "ever learning, but never able to come to knowledge of the Truth." (2 Tim. 3:7). Today they have a "Remnant" which is the result of one piece of "new light" (chicanery) after another. Their first expression on this matter came in March 1918, when their "new light" discovery declared their "Remnant" would allow no more; the select number was then sealed.

This was later negated by other "new light,” which placed the date at 1923 (if we remember correctly). But later on another flash of "new light" gave them the date 1931 -with none of them at all sure now that their "new light" on this subject is final and determined--the postponements of 1923 and 1931 having been prompted by the "requirements" of the time. And we could cite instance after instance ad infinitum similar to the foregoing, but we spare you -for the present, at least. Perhaps more of this in a future paper.

Odd, isn't it, that Pastor Russell needed no new Bible to deliver such telling blows at the errors of Great Babylon? Indeed, he took their own "sword" (as did David with the Philistine Goliath—1 Sam. 17:51) and gave them such "plaguing" that the prophecy was almost literally fulfilled toward them, "They gnawed their tongues for pain"--Rev. 16: 10.

THE TOWER OF BABEL

In conclusion, we would offer the Bible explanation for such turmoil that applies not only to the "Twins" discussed herein, but to many kindred situations during the Age. In Gen. 11:4 men said to one another, "Let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto Heaven"; but God confounded their language. Wherefore, the "tower" became known as Babel, or Babyl, meaning "Confusion," And this same plague of "confusion" has been visited upon each group during this Gospel Age who would declare they had exclusive access to the Tower to Heaven -that is, Salvation can come only through them. The first so plagued was the Roman "twin" discussed aforegoing; and in lesser degree the same occurred to all the Protestant sects who made similar claim. And the last pronounced group to arise has been the Little "Twin" of the Roman Church -the Jehovah's Witnesses -who now tell us Salvation cometh only through them - all outside their organization being the "accursed Goats" (that is when Armageddon occurs). They arouse much tumult about "Babylon the Great" –all the while they themselves have more confusion, in a shorter period of time, than any other organization on earth today. They are the modern-day Apostles of Babyl (confusion) in about every utterance they make; and they use the magazine Watch Tower to manifest and broadcast their confusion.

When Brother Russell named his journal the Watch Tower, it was truly "Mizpah"..Watch Tower, Height (of the Watchmen) -and never once in all his glorious ministry did he ever declare that he alone, or his select group of adherents, held the "keys to the Kingdom" -never were all "lost" who did not join him. His "Mizpah" was indeed a channel of Truth; whereas, the Witnesses' Watch Tower has become a real Babyl since 1917. Thus, there was no "confusion," no "Babyl," during his life; a confusion of "new light" developed only after his death when the claim was voiced that the ''Watch Tower" and its supporters alone hold the keys of Salvation – another "successor to St, Peter" -they were the Channel.

Therefore, to our readers -and to all with the "spirit of a sound mind" -we offer the counsel of St. Paul (2 Tim. 3:5-7): "From such turn away. For this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women ...ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth"--their "new light" is never the same for very long; no use to learn it this year, because it will be different next year.

"They that forsake the law praise the wicked; but such as keep the law contend with them. Whoso walketh uprightly shall be saved: but he that is perverse in his ways shall fall at once." (Prov. 28:4, 18)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

--------------------------------------

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in our Redeemer's Name!

Your good letter of April 2 was received with much appreciation and thanks. It is helpful to know that you are always ready to encourage us and admonish us to be faithful. We celebrated our Lord's Memorial on April 14... Twenty-three friends partook. Brother ---delivered a most inspiring address quite appropriate to the occasion. The other brethren officiated otherwise.We all join in sending warm Christian love to you, Sister Hoefle and all the friends there.

Yours by His Grace,  ...Secretary-Treasurer (TRINIDAD)

 ……………………….

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings of love in the Master's Name from Sister & myself!

We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ-praying always for you. (Col. 1:3) I have received the June paper, for which I am most thankful, concerning Justification in its two kinds taught in the Bible. I enjoy reading it. Great testings always come to the Lord's people after the death of His special Mouthpiece Servants -even after the death of the Apostles right down through the Age some crown-lost leader always perverted the teachings of the Star Members; and that is just what is taking place in this Day of the Epiphany! Perversion of the teachings of the two last Star Members is what we are seeing in these last days. And so, my dear Brother, we believe that the Lord is pleased to use you to point out the errors to those perverters, and to earnestly "contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints." (Jude 3)

We trust that you and Sister Hoefle and the others with you have been blessed in your celebration. The friends are all in good spirit, though some are not well physically. Loving regards for the dear ones with you. Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen (2 Pet. 5:16)!

Your brother by His grace,...(TRINIDAD)

……………………….

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you!

We are happy to inform you that six of us participated in the Lord's Memorial service. It should have been seven, but due to distance and old age, Sister... found she was unable to attend -so had to observe it at home.

We did and are still enjoying the blessings we received from the preparation and celebration. Your Memorial article was greatly appreciated. It gave us much food for our preparation -also your most inspiring letter of ....  We read Joshua's farewell address with much encouragement from the Lord –since we have proven He has never failed us in anything-no never! We now, dear Brother, commend to you that of Moses to-Joshua and -all Israel, Deut. 31:3-8.

Heartily we join in sending you, dear Sister Hoefle,and the other dear ones with you, our warm Christian love and the assurance of our remembrance of you at the Throne of Grace.

Sincerely your brethren,........... (JAMAICA)

……………………….

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace!

The June writing came and it is excellent. We both agreed that anyone reading it would surely understand Justification so well that he could no longer believe in consecrated Campers. The article is so thoroughly Scriptural and in perfect harmony with both Star Members' teaching on the subject. How could anyone fail to understand? I do not know how many LHMM members read your papers, but I hope many of them do. R. G. J. surely can't answer this one - I mean refute it. Your answer to ... was good-very good! Maybe he is taking heed.

Much love and daily prayers, (KANSAS)

(We hope and trust that the brethren will now understand that Tentative Justification and election go hand-in-hand; that so long as Tentative Justification is available, Youthful Worthiship is also available -as taught by both Messengers"-JJH)

NO. 120: CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION

No. 120

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

The primary power of God’s real people is THE TRUTH; and their secondary power is God’s Arrangement for the proper use of that Truth – in timely application and “rightly dividing” it. Thus, the counsel to “give attendance to doctrine” (1 Tim. 4:13) is sound advice for every time of the Age. And we believe it is proper obser­vation that a clear and comprehensive understanding of the doctrine of JUSTIFICATION in the faith” (which was once delivered unto the Saints –­ the Star Members) – never stray far from the general Truth structure.

There are two kinds of Justification taught in the Bible – Justification by Faith and Justification by Works. Inasmuch as our present Bible is specifically designed for those of God’s people who “live by faith,” it should be only proper that Justification by Faith should receive preponderance of favor for the past, present and future – until Justification by works gains the ascendancy. And at the outset let us understand clearly that Justification by Faith does not actually make us right – it merely reckons us right. Our understanding that we personally are justified is purely a matter of faith with each of us – “according to thy faith so be it unto thee.” And, once one enters into justification by Faith, his fellows will perceive little outward difference in him; such a faith operates in the heart and mind, without pronounced change in outward physical appearance. Time operates upon our bodies much the same as it does on those not so blessed – in due time the grave makes claim upon all. Just the reverse of this will prove true during the Kingdom reign, when a justification by works will actually make right, and all who attain that justification will no longer need fear the grave. But it is our purpose to treat only passingly of this latter; rather, we shall consider that justifica­tion that applies to all God’s people now and past – that which cometh of faith.

Since the time that “Christ brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel,” Justification by Faith has had two component divisions – a tentative justi­fication, and a vitalized justification. And it is herein that much controversy has arisen among God’s people, some claiming there is no such thing as “tentative justification”; others claiming it not only operates now, but will continue to operate even during the period of Justification by works. It is our opinion that those who deny completely a tentative justification for this Faith Age are thus forced to abandon large sections of that Truth which once made them clean. It forced J. F. Rutherford to discard completely Tabernacle Shadows of the Better Sacrifices, so that the Jehovah’s Witnesses no longer include that book in their course of study. And it is difficult to determine just what interpretation those people now give to Jesus’ words: “I say to you, Till Heaven and earth pass away, one iota or one tip of a letter shall by no means pass from the law, till all be accomplished (fulfilled)”—Matt. 5:18, Dia. Clearly enough, Jesus was thus tell­ing us that the entire Law arrangement – of which the Tabernacle with its ceremonies was a major part – was typical, and that all those types must continue until their antitypes appeared to fulfill them – fill them full to a completion.

In a flimsy attempt to justify his rejection of tentative justification, J. F. Rutherford (That Evil Servant—Matt. 24:48-51) made the false claim that Brother Russell rejected the teaching of tentative justification before he died; but this claim is directly disputed in the foreword of Volume 6, Oct. 1, 1916. There Bro. Russell sets forth tentative justification and vitalized justification as separate and distinct, as he also does in the 1909 Watch Tower, p. 360; the 1910 WT, pp. 12, 13, 93, and 246; the 1911, p. 394; the 1912, p. 152; the 1913, p. 92-94; the 1914, p. 67; the 1915, pp. 103-104 and pp. 292-293; the 1916, p. 281. These citations leave no doubt about Brother Russell’s convictions about the teaching of tentative justification. Many others have joined That Evil Servant in the denial of tentative justification; and, since this teaching is a fundamental part of the Old and New Testaments, we are justified in concluding that those who once accepted it before October 1916, but now deny it, must come under the classification of 2 Thes. 2:10,11 (Dia.): “They admitted not the love of the Truth ... And on this account God will send to them an energy of delusion.” In our Lord’s announcement of the sentence upon the “unprofitable servant” (the Great Company) of Matt. 25:30, He stated that He would be “cast into outer darkness” – the “darkness” meaning in this text, as it also does in 1 Thes. 5:5,6 and other Scriptures, – giving them over to error” (See especially the Berean Comment on 2 Thes. 2:11).

Such people are pointedly described in Psa. 107:10,11, as those “that sit in darkness,” the reason for their darkened vision being because they “rebelled against the words of God.” And to such the tribulation of Isa. 30:1 is certain: “Woe to the rebellious children, that take counsel, but not by me” – such as set up doc­trines of their own foolish reasoning, as they reject the “sound doctrine” given by That Servant, whom the Lord ‘bade ruler over all His goods.” Jesus had told the Disciples, John 15:3: ‘Now are ye clean through the words which I have spoken unto you”; and the conclusion must automatically follow that those who reject “the words – which once made them clean would then self-evidently become unclean – ­they become afflicted with antitypical leprosy – “he shall be defiled; he is ‘unclean’—Lev. 13:46. And this uncleanness will remain with that Class until the full end of the Gospel Age – “until the even” (Lev. 14:46) – as the Parable of the Talents also declares. The cleansing will be accomplished with such in “the great tribulation” of Rev. 7:14, at which time they shall experience “the weeping, and the gnashing of teeth” of Matt. 25:30. And until this cleansing is accomplished, we may reasonably expect such unclean ones to cast out (refuse to fellowship) God’s fully faithful people who resist such rebellion (revolutionism). Let us keep in mind that it is always THE TRUTH that produces the separation between the Fully Faithful and the Measurably Faithful. Thus, in controversy, such as the recent controversy on the Parable of the Talents, the “hail” (the hard convincing Truth) sweeps away “the refuge of lies,” revealing those who have received the Truth in the love of it, and those who receive the punishment of “outer darkness – ERROR and REVOLUTIONISM – LEPROUS UNCLEANNESS. Thus, we should “think it not strange” as we see this separating influence operate to a completion – “until the even.”

BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES

While we have great respect for the teachings of Brother Russell, yet we be­lieve that a doctrine so weighty as tentative versus vitalized justification should also be taught in the Bible, and that we should be able to produce a clear “thus saith the Lord” to substantiate our position – and not by one text only, but by at least two or three witnesses. The doctrine of justification, as is true of all major doctrines, is not fully treated in any one place; rather, it is “here a little, there a little.” And it is the failure to consider all that is written on various doctrines that has produced the great falling away since Apostolic times. Therefore, if we find our thoughts disputed by even a single text, we may be sure of one of three things: Either the text is spurious, we have a faulty translation, or we ourselves have the wrong interpretation. “It is impossible for God to lie”; and, since the Bible is the inspired word of God, it likewise cannot lie – cannot contradict itself.

The first “witness” we shall consider in proof is 1 Cor. 7:14 (Dia.): “The unbelieving husband is sanctified in the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother; otherwise, indeed, your children were impure, but now they are holy.” The word “holy” in the text is from the Greek word ‘hagios,’ which means set apart, separate, holy. It is the same word that is translated saints more than sixty times. Clearly enough, a newborn infant could not possibly be a saint, but they receive a reckoned saintly standing because of their saintly parentage; and, since their parents are in the antitypical Tabernacle Court, their children would self-evidently have to be there with them until such time as those children reach an age of accountability and can determine for themselves whether or not they wish to retain their faith justification and continue in the saintly footsteps of their parents.

Recently a booklet came into our possession, in which the writer is very posi­tive that there can be no tentative justification, because, says he, justification must be an instantaneous work. This brother also claims, as did J. F. Rutherford, that Brother Russell changed his mind on tentative justification. This contention is clearly without foundation, as we have already shown; and is simply a ruse in shabby attempt to gain support for his error – an error that will be clearly exposed and refuted in full, as our further comments herein will demonstrate. If he had limited himself to vitalized justification, he would certainly have been right; but such a situation could not possibly apply to an infant that has its holy stand­ing without any mental accord on its own part – theirs is the Grace of God by inheri­tance, and nothing else. And surely no one with the faintest understanding of faith justification would claim that any of such justifications are vitalized. Therefore, 1 Cor. 7:14 indisputably proves a tentative justification; and it is well to note in final summation that we are also clearly faced with two kinds of tentative justi­fication – one acquired by the intelligent desire and cooperation of the recipient, the other by infants acquired through no will or cooperation of their own. Also, it is that justification described in Rom. 5:1 (Dia.): “Having been justified, there­fore, by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ; through whom also we have been introduced into this favor in which we stand.” This tentative justi­fication – standing – is our “introduction” to God, which gives us “peace with God,” but does not give us the “peace of God” until we offer ourselves in accord­ance with Rom. 12:1 to do the will of God, which, if accepted by God, then gives to us “the peace of God which passeth (human) understanding.” Only after that do we actually possess a “living” (Zeal-inspiring) faith.

As our second “witness” we consider Romans 4, starting with v. 3 (Dia.): “What says the Scripture? Abraham believed (had faith in) God, and it was accounted (reckoned) to him for righteousness.” Here again, it is clearly stated Abraham’s faith justification did not actually make him right; it merely accounted, or reckoned, him righteous. Thus, v. 7 – “Happy are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered” – no longer held against them because of their faith justification. Certainly no one who was ever in Present Truth would contend that Abraham and David had justification similar to the justification held by those of this Gospel Age who had come into the Body of Christ – vitalizedly, through a real im­putation of Christ’s merit. But note now particularly vs. 10 and II: “How then was it accounted (to Abraham)? When he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And he received the symbol of circum­cision, as a seal of the righteousness of that faith which he had while in uncir­cumcision; in order that he might be the father of all uncircumcised believers; that the righteousness may be accounted (reckoned) to them.”

All who were ever schooled in Present Truth are well aware that ancient cir­cumcision was a type of the Gospel-Age consecration, the physical circumcision typing that figurative circumcision of the heart that is made when one offers his heart and will to God in consecration. But St. Paul clearly states that Abraham’s righteousness was accounted, reckoned, to him before circumcision – that he might be the father of all who believe – all who experience a faith justification before they present themselves to God in consecration – before they experience the antitypical circumcision of the heart. St. Paul was truly a great logician, and his reason­ing is so clear and direct in this fourth chapter, that it seems unbelievable that any who were once in Present Truth could cast it aside; and then attempt to be­smirch Brother Russell by saying he had also cast aside these compelling Scriptures.

Following his clear exposition of a tentative reckoning, St. Paul then pro­ceeds to say in Rom. 5:1 that this faith justification arranges our “introduction” to God – not an intimate close family relationship, but merely an introduction, which will enable us to gain real intimacy of soul with our Heavenly Father if we follow his appeal in Rom. 12:1 to “present your bodies a living sacrifice” – in con­secration, which we are now in position to do as a result of our tentative, reckoned, faith justification – to “transform yourselves by the renovation of your mind.”

As our third “witness” we offer what we consider the most compelling proof for tentative justification, the same being the Atonement Day type of the wilderness Tabernacle as given in Leviticus 16. The pattern given to Moses in the Mount was emphatic that all the animals used in that service must be “without blemish” (Lev. 1:3) – no visible flaws of any kind. But we now ask, did those animals have their physical perfection as a result of their presentation to Aaron in sacrifice, or were they offered up that day because they were previously found to be perfect? The answer needs no elaboration: They were already “without blemish” when they were selected from among the children of Israel, and were brought into the Court, before they were tied at the door of the Tabernacle – their being tied there repre­senting the consecration and presentation of those who were about to enter the Holy “in newness of life” through an instantaneous vitalization of that reckoned perfection which was already theirs before consecration. And it is this tentative faith justi­fication, this reckoned perfection, that is our “introduction to God” (Rom. 5:2) – ­enabling us to enter into the Holy – into the Divine sanctum – in vitalized justifi­cation – a condition exclusive to this Gospel Faith Age, and exclusive to those only who are “begotten to newness of life” through a direct imputation of the merit of Jesus.

Reverting to earlier statements in the above paragraph, we also point out that every antitype is pronouncedly greater than its type. Thus, Jesus as the antitype of the Atonement-Day bullock was infinitely greater than was the type, requiring only the one sacrifice of Himself to cleanse from all sin forever all those who come to the Father by Him. And the members of His Body were also far greater than their Atonement-Day type as represented in the Lord’s goat. Therefore, if those animals in the type must be “without blemish” (typically perfect) before presenta­tion at the door of the Tabernacle, how much more must this be true of their Gospel-­Age antitypes? God cannot look upon sin with any degree of allowance, thus could never enter into a “covenant by sacrifice” with fallen beings unless the sin barrier were first removed. Therefore, it should be self-evident that He must first pro­vide a way – an “introduction” – for fallen man to come to Him; and this He has accomplished by arranging for a tentative, a reckoned perfection – a tentative justi­fication by faith.

NO MAN COMETH UNTO THE FATHER BUT BY ME

But no fallen human being could arrange for this “introduction” to God by his own skill or merit; it must come through an intercessor, through one who could give him a reckoned perfection – and this He arranged through Jesus – “that He might be just, and yet be the justifier of him who believeth on Jesus.” (Rom. 3:26) And here again the Tabernacle type gives clear confirmation of this by the linen curtain which surrounded the Tabernacle structure and its surrounding plot of ground. The Divine Presence was portrayed by the Shekinah Light that shone forth from between the Cherubim in the Most Holy of the Tabernacle; and none could ever reach that presence except through Jesus – by first coming through the Gate into the Court; and inside the linen curtain, there to be reckoned perfect, righteous (“the fine linen is the righteousness of saints”—Rev. 19:8), to provide proper “introduction” to God at the first veil, and for progress through life’s pilgrimage through the Holy to the Most Holy, where ‘‘we shall be ever with the Lord.”

Some may ask how such arrangement could be true of Abraham, who lived before the typical Tabernacle was erected at Sinai. We answer, It was reckoned to him, and to all with “the faith of Abraham” from Abel to John the Baptist. ‘‘Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and He saw it, and was glad.” And, while none of the Ancients ever had more than a tentative, a reckoned justification, all that they did have came to them through a reckoned standing inside that linen curtain – which gave them a righteousness they could never attain of themselves, “Mine own right­eousness is as filthy rags.”

With this picture clearly in mind, it should now be apparent to all that the Jolly-Krewson claims of a faith justification in the Camp, outside the linen curtain, which (curtain) represents Christ, must be errant nonsense, regardless of how they classify such people in the coming Kingdom arrangement. The “faith of Abraham” is a faith-age faith. Even when the Mediatorial reign begins, and justification by works becomes operative, Jesus’ words will be as true then as they are now: “No man cometh unto the Father but by me.” There will be no Imputation of His merit then – no more justification by faith (although a certain amount of faith will certainly enter into that arrangement, but not the exacting faith for Restitutionists as for those who must exercise faith when sin is in the ascendancy in this “present evil world”) – but He will be the “everlasting Father” until such time as men have regained the Edenic perfection which will enable them to speak with God, as did Father Adam, without an intercessor,

Let us consider also Brother Johnson’s direct contradiction to the Jolly-­Krewson twosome in E-4:406:

“The Youthful Worthies, from the standpoint of having ‘the faith of Abraham,’ are, of course, like him, of the Household of Faith. They are, however, somewhat different from the tentatively justified who do not now consecrate. The latter during the Epiphany cease altogether to be in the Household of Faith, having used the Grace of God in vain.”

Let us remember that the only thing wrong with those who eventually lose their standing in the Household of Faith in the end of this Age (in the “finished picture of the Epiphany”) is their failure to consecrate. Thus, when they are forced from the Court into the Camp, they are in every way identical in character, if they maintain what they have gained, as they were in the Court – “Truly repentant and believing, but not consecrated” (E-10:209). They are not forced from the Household because of character degeneracy, the only fault against them is their failure to consecrate, which in due time forces them from the Court into the Camp. Yet R. G. Jolly offers a direct contradiction to Brother Johnson’s conclusion when he declares in his Present Truth that his Campers are of the Household of Faith. And let us not forget that the real issue in this instance is a proper understanding of Tenta­tive Justification as taught by Brother Russell and Brother Johnson, but which is now cast aside by R. G. Jolly. “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it!-

After That Servant’s death J. F. Rutherford denied the doctrine of Tentative Justification altogether because it stood in the way of his “new light.” The Epiphany Messenger clearly refuted his “new light,” and established the doctrine of Tentative Justification in the Scriptures so unmistakably that no Epiphany­ enlightened brethren need be deceived now. But shortly after the Epiphany Messenger’s death R. G. Jolly perverted the doctrine of Tentative Justification to accommodate – his “new light” of Epiphany Campers Consecrated. We must remember, too, that R. G. Jolly calls his “new light” (false doctrine) ‘Epiphany’ Campers Consecrated, there­by attempting to palm off his “strange fire”; as faithful Epiphany teaching – and at the same time offering the “strong delusion” that we are now in the Basileia! The Epiphany as a period of time (beginning with World War in 1914 and ending with Jacob’s trouble—See E-4:55, bottom) is the last special period of the Gospel-Age, with which all faithful well-instructed Epiphany-enlightened brethren will agree –­ who still accept Brother Johnson’s teaching on the subject. R. G. Jolly’s perver­sion of Tentative Justification also causes him to set aside the faithful teachings of both Messengers on Youthful Worthies. In Epiphany Volume 4, p. 342, Brother Johnson says that “those faithful consecrators from 1881 until Restitution sets in, for whom there are no crowns available, and hence no spirit-begetting for Gospel-­Age purposes possible, will be the Millennial Associates of the Ancient Worthies in reward and service.”

In R. G. Jolly’s repudiation of this Truth, and in his perversion of Tentative Justification (Azazel means Perverter), he in effect now tells the brethren that the above quotation from the Epiphany Messenger (and the teaching of That Servant, too) IS NOT THE TRUTH, but that his Campers Consecrated are privileged to walk “a narrow way” with the Great Company and Youthful Worthies – without a reward of the heavenly inheritance, or of a Kingdom “Better Resurrection” – in fact he says, there’s no reward at all other than Restitution in the final analysis! They will be closely associated with the Worthies in the Kingdom, he says, and will have opportunity to make great progress up the Highway of Holiness. But do not all the quasi-elect (unconsecrated Class) have that same opportunity? Yes, indeed, his perversion of the doctrine of Tentative justification is causing many to go into error. It has forced him to pervert the doctrine of Youthful Worthies as set out in the above quotation by the Epiphany Messenger, as he now denies the privilege of such Youthful Worthy hope to his converts. Great is the responsibility of such ‘mis’leaders! When one does violence to one feature of the Truth, then he must also do violence to other features in order to support his previous error. We would not be faithful to the Lord, the Truth and the Brethren if we did not faith­fully defend the doctrine of Tentative Justification and attack the errors presented by such Perverters (our former brethren), just as did Brother Johnson have to defend this important doctrine against J. F. Rutherford, et al (his former associates).

BECAUSE THEY ADMITTED NOT THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH

It is grievous indeed to note the condition of those who have forsaken the Truth that once made them clean – it is a real ‘spiritual’ oddity, perhaps peculiar to this “evil day.” Some contend they have become “supremely happy” – have obtained a “peace of mind” never before experienced by them after forsaking the Truth that once made them clean. This seems to be pointedly true when they cast away the Truth on Tentative Justification. We mentioned one such instance in our May paper, page 1. Another instance involves several erstwhile Youthful Worthies – at least one of whom had never heard of Present Truth before 1930, one who first became acquainted with Present Truth through the Epiphany Movement – but now casting aside completely the bulk of the Epiphany Truth structure, and now considering themselves in the Body of Christ! And by this experience we ourselves obtain a closer intimacy with St. Paul’s expression in Gal. 3:1: “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the Truth?”

But by far the most extensive example of all is the group known as the Lay­men’s Home Missionary Movement. Many times, since 1950, the Truth on Tentative Justification has been sorely besmirched by this group in its relation to the Tabernacle Court and to their Campers Consecrated. Yet in those very Conventions in which this was done, quite a few have arisen to testify loudly, “This is the grandest Convention I have ever attended.” And we speak now of those who attended Conventions under Brother Johnson, and some even under Brother Russell. Just think of it, Brethren! We hear such people proclaiming that the Conventions supervised by the last two Principal Men of Micah 5:5 (the Laodicean Star) were not nearly so inspiring and elevating as those now provided and supervised by a self-admitted Crown-loser – Conventions where the truth on Tentative Justification is bandied about by the “unstable and the unlearned” in disgraceful and disturbing manner.

In summation, we would observe that the full import of St. Paul’s words comes to us more forcefully with each passing year, “Because they admitted not the love of the Truth....on this account God will send to them an energy of delusion”—­2 Thes. 2:10,11, Dia. And once more we quote the Berean Comment on these texts – ­“Giving them over to error, which they prefer to the Truth. Great delusions are just before us, and some of these may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth.” Those in the Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement certainly had more exhaustive proof on Tentative Justification than any other group on earth today; thus, now “strong delusion” has come upon those “possessing the most light of Present Truth.” Their ‘Peace of mind’ at rejecting the Truth is undoubtedly some of the “strong delusion.” And in conclusion let us consider that advancing Truth does not set aside the Truth already established, as some deceivers seem to think; all advancing Truth must be based upon the Truth already established from the Good Word of God.

“It is needful to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints” – by the Star Members, especially the last two Star Members (Jude 3). And this we do in harmony also with Jude 23: ‘‘And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire” – from the danger of the second death, Psa. 107,10.

“Let thy work appear unto thy servants, and thy glory unto their children. And let the beauty of the Lord our God be upon us; and establish thou the work of our hands (clean from fleshly-minded acts and teachings); yea, the work of our hands establish thou it.” – Psa. 90:16,17

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

...........................................................................

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Christian greetings in our dear Redeemer’s name!

      Enclosed is a contribution to the Lord’s work in which you are so valiantly engaged. May you be abundantly blessed, is the prayer of your sister in Christ ------- (CONNETICUT)

And God’s blessing go with it!

...........................................................................

Our dear Brother Hoefle: 2 Pet. 1:2.

It was good of you to send such a comforting message, dated April 5 (the birthday of dear Sister Hoefle). We trust Sr. Hoefle received a card from Us. It was not fully addressed .... the human element came into it and It was sent from the ------- P.O. The Memorial here, April 14, was the usual three.....

It was a blessed season of fellowship, and Bro. ------- reminded us of our consecration vow and to renew it. It is wonderful to unite in this special way of remembering Him who laid down His life in sacrifice – certainly binding stronger than any earthly ties. Psalm 101:6...... The Lord continue to bless you and for the blessing of His people! Our united love from us all to you and all.

Sincerely yourbrethren ------- (ENGLAND)

...........................................................................

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – Is J. W. Krewson correct in his statement that Christendom generally determines the date of Good Friday as that Friday after the full moon, after the first new moon, following the Vernal Equinox?

ANSWER: – No, he isn’t right about that; in fact, the statement is self-­evident nonsense. If his statement were correct, it would never be possible for Easter to occur in March; it would always have to come in April. one segment of the early apostate church did attempt to establish the rule that it must always be the month of April, but their Idea was generally rejected. The Roman Church and most Protestant Churches use the rule: The first Friday after the first full moon after the Vernal Equinox. Thus, it would be possible for Good Friday to occur just a day or so after the Equinox; and it is not uncommon for Easter to fall within the week following the Equinox. Memory of past Easters will serve the most of us in supporting this conclusion.

Therefore, J. W. Krewson’s statement is totally erroneous, having no support from any record in existence. Yet, this self-admitted “Pastor and Teacher” offers “the immutable rule” on p. 40 of his paper No. 61 for determining the Memorial; and on p. 57, top, of the same paper he has the consummate gall to charge JJH as being the tool of Satan “to teach erroneously on many subjects.” Thus, we now invite him to produce one instance where we have ever uttered such a self­-evidently false statement on any important subject to our readers.

Furthermore, it will be noted on p. 40, where he offers “the immutable rule,” that he says the Truth on the Memorial date is an Epiphany teaching – with which statement we are in full agreement; but let him now hormonize his present state­ment with his former recent statements that the correct Memorial date was a Little ­Flock developing truth.

J. W. Krewson would make an A-1 Jehovah’s Witness – When unanswerable proof establishes any of their “new light” as self-evident nonsense, completely refuted by clear Scripture or secular records, they reverse themselves without flicker of an eyelash, offering other “new light” in place of their erroneous previous “new light.” So also with J. W. Krewson: If, and when, he ever mentions Good Friday again, we may be certain his present error won’t be repeated. Investigation will convince him of the truth of our own statement herein; and that’s the way he’ll put it – just as though that’s always been his teaching on the subject.

...........................................................................

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

Although we do not require any of our brethren to give us a report of their Memorial – the number of participants, and their activity in the Special Effort, we are grateful for the number we have received from Classes and indi­viduals so far. It encourages us to learn of the brethren who are co-laborers with us in the “good fight” of faith.