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.

NO. 119: THE "TALENTS" PARABLE AGAIN

No. 119

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

In this March-April Present Truth, page 30, col. 2, R. G. Jolly makes a puny attempt to nullify our refutation of his perversion of the Talents’ Parable (Azazel means Perverter); and his effort once more gives glaring manifestation (the Epi­phany period specifically “manifests” persons, principles and things) that he is still sorely befuddled by Azazel. At the outset, let us keep clearly in mind that the “unprofitable servant” of the Talents’ Parable is very close relative to the foolish virgins described by Jesus in the first verses of Matthew 25; the one parable follows immediately after the other. We suggest to our readers the Berean Comments on the Virgins’ Parable, noting particularly those for v. 3, “The spirit of the Truth.” The great fault with the foolish virgins is that they lose the spirit of the Truth, the Spirit of understanding (their “lamps gone out”) – just as the “unprofitable servant” of the Talents’ Parable is sentenced to “outer darkness” (V. 30). Now we have a member of the “unprofitable servant” trying to teach us that now since the last Little Flock has been glorified we should follow his per­version of the “faith that was once delivered to the saints,” instead of adhering to the faithful and true teachings of the Star Members! And Brother Johnson says of such in E-4:128 (9):

“The Great Company (who no longer have access to the antitypical lampstand in the Holy) are able to feed upon what they once had while in the Holy; but for the most part they neglect this (as R. G. Jolly has been doing increas­ingly since he was fully abandoned to Azazel in 1950 – JJH) and see only counter­feit light (such as R. G. Jolly now sees in the Talents’ Parable, Epiphany Campers Consecrated, Tentative Justification in the Camp, etc.¾JJH), i.e., such as never was on the antitypical lampstand, and thus partake of unclean bread, i.e., such as never was on the antitypical table. So far as the meat in due season – the advancing Truth – is concerned, they do not partake of it, but reject it, while in the fit man’s and Azazel’s hands.”

We direct special attention to the Berean Comment on Matt. 25:30, respecting the punishment of the “unprofitable servant”: “Sorrow, disappointment and chagrin in every sense.” And it is this same class that R. G. Jolly now declares have “entered into the Joy of the Lord”! Here again, he offers clear and gross revo­lutionism against Parousia Truth when he declares he now has “the joy of the Lord” in direct contradiction of Brother Russell’s Parousia teaching that he should be experiencing “Sorrow, disappointment and chagrin in every sense.” (Even if he were cleansed, as he claims to be, he would consider his past performances more soberly and hesitate long before he attempted to tamper in any degree with the Star Members’ writings.) Just this year 1965 we came into possession of a letter from an erstwhile Youthful Worthy brother, who once enthusiastically embraced Parousia and Epiphany Truth – according to his effusive testimonies at many conventions – but who has now forsaken that Truth (a brother well known to R. G. Jolly); and this is what he says: “I have lived a rich and full life and am at peace with my God, myself and with the world.” His statement of “peace with God” is an identical twin to those crown-losers who now claim to possess “the joy of the Lord.” For all those who still retain the spirit of understanding it should not be at all difficult to perceive that there is something sadly amiss in both instances. Certainly, only one befuddled by Azazel would be bold enough to attempt merger of these two contrasts in extreme punishment and reward. This would be unbelievable were we not witness to it! As Brother Johnson so aptly stated, When these people fall into the hands of Azazel, they talk all sorts of nonsense; and here we have another classic example of nonsense in the extreme – “the joy of the Lord” for the profitable servant, and “sorrow, disappointment and chagrin in every sense” for the unprofitable servant becoming merged into one.

R. G. Jolly makes reference to E-6:226. Why does he not go a little further to p. 229, where Brother Johnson says we should “remember that the slothful and wicked servant represents the Great Company”? And, while these “still retain the robe of Christ’s righteousness, they have spotted it badly” – by their perversions of teach­ing and practice, as R. G. Jolly has done since 1950.

R. G. Jolly seems to believe that the support of one of his Evangelists adds strength to his “Strange, unreasonable dreams” (See Berean Comment for Matt. 25:5); but this Evangelist merely reveals that his thinking is on the same shallow and confused level with that of his leader (for which R. G. Jolly is largely responsible: it is the leaders the Lord holds more responsible). In his letter he says “even the restored world of mankind will eventually enter into the joy of the Lord.” Why doesn’t he include horses and dogs, too? They also will experience a certain joy under the benign Kingdom conditions. Even he is forced to admit that the Great Company and Youthful Worthies ‘‘will not enter into the joy of the Lord on the same plane as the Little Flock”; but that’s the only “joy of the Lord” that’s under dis­cussion in the parable. Therefore, he is simply setting up a straw man here – a char­acteristic of all “mis”-leaders when they find themselves on the losing end of an argument. Brother Johnson often accused That Evil Servant of just such tactics.

And R. G. Jolly adds more dust to confusion at top of p. 31, col. 2, when he tries to stress his “comma” after “overcomers.” Is he trying to tell us here that the Fully Faithful Youthful Worthies are not classed as “overcomers”? In fact, is he inferring that the cleansed Great Company are not classed as “overcomers”? Even he should know they are portrayed with palms in their hands – an evidence of eventual victory (after going through the “great Tribulation”). He should know, too, that, when the Little Flock and Great Company are contrasted in such instances, the Fully Faithful Little Flock should be qualified as “more than conquerors.”

Then he goes on to say, “Anyone should know better than to think he would represent Matt. 25:31 as referring in the parable directly to the Great Company or the Youthful Worthies.” Clearly enough, he himself didn’t “know better” when he injected his error into Brother Russell’s superb article as reproduced in his Nov-Dec. PT. He just found that out after reading our February paper. Just go back and note what he actually did: At the top of p. 83, col. 1, he switches from the Little Flock to “the Great Company and Youthful Worthies, the last two classes of God’s elect.” Then, beginning the next paragraph, he begins, “Consequently, WE.” If he was really, honestly, that shoddy and unreliable – without really intending what his language clearly states – then he’s still deserving of all the “fault-finding” we have published against him.

Let us note his opening sentence of the paragraph in question: “Consequently, WE have had many and severe storms of opposition, and still there are doubtless more severe trials to follow.” If he were speaking of the Great Company and Youthful Worthies only “in principle” here – as he now claims –, is he informing his readers that the Little Flock in Heaven (since he claims all of them are glorified) may still expect “more severe trials” than any they ever had in their earthly pilgrimage? Even he isn’t so befuddled by Azazel that he would make such a claim. Clearly enough, his language is descriptive only of the last two classes he mentioned in his preced­ing paragraph – the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies. He here is guilty of injecting a gross perversion (Azazel means Perverter) into Brother Russell’s superb article; and our February paper exposed his revolutionism so clearly and conclu­sively that even he “got the point.” His flimsy discussion of his “comma” is now merely an attempt to whitewash himself – to throw dust into the eyes of his readers; so we now suggest to the Evangelist mentioned aforegoing that he go back to that Nov-Dec. PT, p. 83, col. 1, par. 1, and read it again carefully. Then he should consider it his present explicit duty to write R. G. Jolly another letter – for publication in the Present Truth – to reveal our error in this matter – if indeed there is any error to be exposed.

It requires no argument that all moral beings in a sinless Universe will exper­ience great joy; but “the joy of the Lord” in the Talents’ parable goes arm in arm with “the narrow way” that leadeth unto life, to which few attain (Does R. G. Jolly now claim that he and his cohorts are on the narrow way?). If R. G. Jolly can stress the difference between “the narrow way” of the Very Elect and “a narrow way” of the secondary elect, then with equal propriety there is the same pronounced distinction between “the joy of the Lord” (in the Parable under discussion) and “a joy” that is the inheritance of all righteous moral agents throughout the Universe. Nor do we adhere to the criticism that we are “fault-finding” or splitting hairs – any more than Brother Johnson was guilty of such when he attacked That Evil Servant on this very same Talents’ parable (it is indeed ‘strange’ that R. G. Jolly continues to be guilty of so many of the aberrations of which That Evil Servant was guilty). His attempt now is just as pronouncedly erroneous as he endeavors to merge the “good and faithful servants” with the “unprofitable servants” as was That Evil Servant when he attempted to merge Elijah and Elisha by claiming they were one and the same, the only difference being in the work they were doing. That Evil Servant also claimed that “the time element” was the only difference involved – exactly as R. G. Jolly now does with the Talents’ parable. Our present criticism is merely companion to our expo­sures of his other gross revolutionisms on Tentative Justification, Consecrated Epiphany Campers, his fractured 40-year parallel, his ridiculous “overlapping” of his Epiphany­-Basileia, his futile failure of his Attestatorial Service, now more than ten years in duration in contrast to the complete success of the 25-month Attestatorial Service of the Little Flock, and many other items (as companion to J. F. Rutherford’s “Millions” proposition, his Jonadabs, and many of his other aberrations, which only accented “My Lord Delayeth,” just as does Epiphany Campers Consecrated). Therefore, we con­sider no apology whatever in order for the fault we have found with him. His con­tinued tampering with the Star Members’ writings will continue to bring to him “Sorrow, disappointment and chagrin in every sense” until he makes open correction of his evils before all God’s people – his evils as a teacher and ‘mis’-leader (“Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear” – 1 Tim. 5:20; and such ‘sinners’ should repent before all if they would have God’s forgiveness before all). Very many of J. F. Rutherford’s partisan supporters also accused Brother Johnson of “chronic fault-finding” and hair splitting when he attacked the former’s perversions of this same Talents’ parable and other similar items.

In our February paper we believe we clearly defined “the joy of the Lord” – the same being his present glory, honor and immortality – and that such “joy of the Lord” is the reward only of The Christ (the “profitable servant”). In that article we also raised the question of who R. G. Jolly now has for his “unprofitable servant” in the parable. This he has still ignored completely, because he is at total loss for an explanation. We gave Heb. 12:2 and Phil. 2:8-11 as ample proof of our own contention; but we now add a companion text: “Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into His glory?” (Luke 24:26). What is the Lord’s “glory”? Is it not His present glorious character, and divine nature, and regal exaltation? Surely, these are “the joy of the Lord” – a “joy” which He shares with His Bride –­ and with none other.

Comes now a corroboration from Brother Russell in Parousia Vol. 5, p. 118: “For the joy that was set before Him He endured the cross, despising the shame. (Heb. 12:2). This joy before Him we may reasonably suppose, was: .... A joy that the Father had promised Him; not only a return to spirit glory that He had with the Father before the world was, but a more excellent glory – to be exalted far above angels, principalities, powers and every name that is named, and to be made an asso­ciate in the Kingdom of the Universe, next to the Father, – on the right hand of the Majesty on high (“in my Father’s throne” – JJH); and partaker of the divine nature, with its inherent or immortal life.

“But this joy set before our Lord was made contingent upon His full obedience to the Father’s will.... under conditions that would be distressing, painful, humiliating; .... the ignominious death of the cross.... By this means He ‘made perfect’ His title to all the joys set before Him.... and ‘being made perfect He became the author of everlasting salvation,’”

Just a few simple questions should be enough here: Could any part of the fore­going possibly apply even “in principle” to the Great Company? Could any stretch of the imagination ascribe to that Class a “full obedience to the Father’s will”? Is it not their very disobedience (for which there is no excuse, as Brother Russell states it) that loses all this “joy of the Lord” for them?

The question now becomes pertinent: Could the reward of the good and faithful servant apply even “in principle” to the Great Company? Certainly not! To attempt such a construction makes a shambles of the entire parable, which is clearly contrast­ing the profitable servants with the unprofitable servants – contrasting the Little Flock and the Great Company. R. G. Jolly’s ruse here is simply some more of his double-talk – Azazelian nonsense – a “doubleminded man” manifesting himself by his double-talk. And, as Brother Russell so clearly explains, “This is the class which will fail to be accounted overcomers and will fail to obtain the great prize of joint­heirship in the Kingdom. This is the class that will be obliged to go through the great tribulation, to the intent that in that tribulation they may learn lessons which will be valuable to them” – lessons which R. G. Jolly has not yet learned, or he would not now be perverting the Truth of the Talents’ parable, and many other Parousia and Epi­phany truths. The reward of the good and faithful servants is “joint-heirship in the Kingdom,” the same being “the joy of the Lord” – a thing forever lost to the unprofit­able servants. That is why Brother Russell did not offer the slightest hint that the reward of the good and faithful servants would apply “in principle” to the unprofit­able servants. Such an attempt would void the entire point of the parable, would be Azazelian double-talk, which we never find in any of Brother Russell’s writings. It is akin to saying that Saint and Sinner in the final analysis really mean the same thing “in principle.”

Nor should such nonsense surprise us, for R. G. Jolly has been very insistent that the “sinners” (the Bible designation for the Great Company) are now to be con­sidered the “us,” the light, the salt, as those terms properly apply to the Saints. Now he goes a step further, right here in this Epiphany period, when they are being “manifested” and attempts to restore them to the “good and profitable servants” in this Talents’ parable, from which Brother Russell and Brother Johnson both properly declare, with strong Biblical proof, they have been forever excluded – disinherited, in exact fashion as was Esau, who “afterwards, when he wished to inherit the bless­ing (which was once his, but which he bartered away, as R. G. Jolly has done with his ‘pearl of great price’), he was refused; for he found no place for a change of mind, though he sought it earnestly with tears – Heb. 12:17, Dia.). Further, he is the only leader known to us who openly admits he is a crown-loser, has been openly mani­fested as such, and who now admits he has been forced out of the Holy – away from the Candlestick, away from the Shewbread, away from the Golden Altar – and is contend­ing there are no longer any Saints on earth – that he has now taken their place as the Lord’s mouthpiece, and is propounding a new doctrine (Campers Consecrated, in the Camp with nominal Christendom) in direct contradiction of Brother Johnson’s clear teaching that such things are forbidden to him – and to all others like him.

There is only one feature of the Talents parable that was not clear to Brother Russell, and that is its Epiphany application. During the Parousia the Truth section of the unprofitable servant did not go “into outer darkness,” as v. 30 says they would do as their punishment. This was reserved for the Epiphany – after all brotherly favor and fellowship of the World’s High Priest had been withdrawn from them – when every crown-loser must go “into outer darkness – ERROR, REVOLUTIONISM – to make manifest” to the Fully Faithful that they are of the unprofitable servant class. And even in the Epiphany this did not occur with those in the Epiphany Movement until they were abandoned to Azazel in 1950 – since which time R. G. Jolly himself has been experiencing his full abandonment to Azazel – as is now so clearly revealed in his treatment of this Talents’ parable – and is leading his trusting followers with him (just as did That Evil Servant and other “mis”leaders have done since 1917).

It is a proper observation that lower minds can never fully comprehend the superior intelligence of higher beings. This is measurably true even of different classes of human beings; thus, the axiom, “Genius speaks only to genius.” By this process of reasoning, none of the lower animals can anticipate a perfect man’s emotions – joy, love, honor, etc. “For Adam there was not found an help meet for him” – Gen. 2:20. Nor can perfect man arise to the intellectual level of angels ­nor angels to the intellectual level of Divine beings. Thus, none of them could fully approach the “joy” of immortality (the ‘joy’ that was set before Jesus and His Body Members) any more than we now fully comprehend it. “It doth not yet appear (is not clear to us) what we shall be.” Therefore, by a process of pure logic, it is simply Azazelian nonsense to inject the “unprofitable servant” into “the joy of the Lord Christ”; and R. G. Jolly’s Evangelist now stands guilty before all in his attempt to encourage R. G. Jolly in his perversions (Azazel means Perverter).

Repeatedly have we stressed that all who encourage R. G. Jolly in his wayward course – either openly and positively, as does this Evangelist, or tacitly by mere silence to “love the praise of men” – become partaker of his sins. And all such not only are not helping him, but they are actually contributing to his downward course, and are certain to experience some of the ‘tribulation’ of the Great Company – ­a “certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation” in a modified form. Not only does the Great Company experience “outer darkness” while in the clutches of Azazel, but they don’t understand the Truth as due, nor retain that which they did have, as do the fully faithful Youthful Worthies – nor will they (the Great Company) do so until they are fully cleansed. (See E-4:129)

Again he resorts to his usual name-calling in an effort to soften the condemna­tion that cometh of evil – Revolutionism against the clear Truth that once made him clean (John 15:3); and we opine that he saw this clearly enough before he was driven out of the Holy some 25 years ago, even after he had lost his crown (and certainly much better, too, before the restraining hand of the last Star Member was removed from him in 1950) – although now all his efforts are to establish his position as a Cleansed Levite Leader, just as he sought to establish himself as a Saint on a par with the Lord’s Mouthpiece, when he gave him advice and criticism, contrary to the Truth, and fought the Epiphany Messenger’s righteous course toward the cancerous widow (and actually won the majority of the Class in iniquity with him and against Brother Johnson! See E-10:585). Yes, indeed, he does endeavor to keep the outside of his cup clean! “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extor­tion and excess.” (Matt. 23:25) And he continues with such tactics as he tries to influence the brethren against our righteous course, just as he did with Brother Johnson (when he accomplished much evil with the majority in the Class). Thus, he refers to us as a “chronic fault-finder” (“sifter,” errorist and shyster lawyer) as a cover-up for his many sins of practice and teaching. However, in his attempt to usurp “the joy of the Lord” for the “unprofitable servant,” he produces an identical twin to the error of many nominal preachers who insist upon preaching their members into Heaven at death (no matter what their iniquities might be). And R. G. Jolly knows only too well the “chronic fault” Brother Russell found with such people. Yet he himself now resorts to the ways of his kinsmen in iniquity by his attempt to sugar­pill his adherents with the error that they, too, will “enter into the joy of their Lord,” even though they may not have been too saintly in their covenant of sacrifice. And he attempts this in Azazelian fashion, true to his past performances. (See E-10: 646, top) But to those of our readers who have an “ear to hear” we offer Gen. 49: 6,7: “O my soul, come not thou into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honor, be not thou united.... I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel.”

The Unjust Steward is another parable to the point. After treating the Parable of the Talents (Reprints 5386-87 – Jan. 15, 1914), Brother Russell then treats of the Unjust Steward, and has this to say:

“The parable of the unjust steward (Luke 16:1-9), which impresses this same lesson, was primarily addressed to Jesus’ disciples, in the presence of the Phari­sees and those who sat in Moses’ seat, who were the representatives of the divine order of Things in the Jewish age.... By teaching the people thus, we may get the ill will of the scribe and Pharisee class (for our time the sects of Little Babylon – JJH); but we are getting the good will of the people and of those who are in harmony with God and righteousness. And although we may be excluded from the high functions of the nominal systems, many of the common people are hearing gladly and sympathetically, and are wishing to share their homes with us. So we have homes all over the world, wherever God’s people are; for they have the ear and eye to appreciate the Lord’s Arrangements. Furthermore the Lord Himself will ultimately receive us into ever­lasting habitations..... We are living so as to use our time and strength to the best of our ability to do good and to instruct others to do good.”

There is more on the Unjust Steward in Reprint 5750, Aug. 15, 1915:

“The ecclesiastical powers of today are professedly sitting in the seat of Christ. The masses of the people know nothing better than what their religious rulers tell them.... (and this is true in large degree of the majority in the Little Babylon groups – JJH). They have been to a greater or less extent hiding ‘the key of knowledge’ (Luke 11:52), to a greater or less extent imposing on the superstitions of the people, and taking the people’s money under false pretenses. They should now seek to rectify all this so far as possible by telling the people the truth...... But in antagonizing the interests of the people more and more they are adding to their own distress in the near future, as the Scriptures point out.... We believe that the nominal church clergy and leaders will particularly suffer in the universal overthrow of the present order near at hand – some of them because they have actively opposed the truth; some because of posing as representatives of truth and enlightenment and the liberties of the people, and failing really to stand for the truth which they recognized –keeping quiet about it for policy’s sake. They have failed to conserve the interests which they pretended to serve.

“In applying the words of Jesus to ourselves, they would seem to teach that to whatever extent we have the mammon of unrighteousness, worldly goods, we should be inclined to be liberal rather than penurious, according to the measure of our ability (help the ‘needy’ – don’t refuse them and influence others to do likewise – JJH). We take it that the Lord is showing us here that we as his followers have more or less of means, opportunity, influence, etc,, and that we should use these talents He has given us in forwarding His cause. And if in our presentations of truth a certain amount of denunciation any be met with, we should rather let the matter go unnoticed and seek to be generous, so far as is compatible with fairness to the Lord and the spirit of His Word.” (Many of the Lord’s people fail to see the ‘talent’ of means)..

Note the Berean Comment on Luke 16:10 – “The Lord’s method is to advance only him whose zeal, faithfulness and patient perseverance have shown themselves in little things.” Had the Great Company been faithful in the ‘little things,’ as diligently as they have been in the ‘big’ things pertaining to their fleshly minds (such as making a name for themselves, seeking large numbers, etc.) they would not have lost their crowns. Also see Berean Comment for Luke 16:8. Furthermore, these Great Company leaders are among those described in Isa. 66:5 – “Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name’s sake, said, Let the Lord be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed.” Also, “When the wicked are multiplied, transgression increaseth; but the righteous shall see their fall.” (Prov. 29:16)

‘‘For, lo, they that are far from thee shall perish: thou hast destroyed all them that go a whoring from thee. But it is good for me to draw near to God: I have put my trust in the Lord God, that I may declare all thy works.” (Psa. 73:27,28)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

­LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace!

Did you get the ... check I sent on March 5? Please send me a few of the “Two Salvations” tracts. Thank you! “Let the floods clap their hands: let the hills be joyful together Before the Lord; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.” (Psa. 98:8,9) “These are the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which the Lord God of thy fathers giveth thee to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth. Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree: And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. Ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God. But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall ye seek, and thither thou shalt come: And thither ye shall bring your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices and your tithes, and heave offerings of your hand, and your vows, and your freewill offerings, and the firstlings of your herds and of your flocks.

By His Grace -------  (CONN.)

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

My dear Brother Hoefle: – Greeting of Christian love in our dear Redeemer’s Name!

Your letter of Feb. 26 came to hand.... and was received with much apprecia­tion; and let me thank you for the papers for March and April, which, among other things, mentions the date of the Memorial for 1965 ....

Re report on the working of the Class, I think it quite proper that I give you an idea of the working of the Ecclesia, since our dear Brother Roach has gone beyond the veil. Well, the Class is not different in anyway from how it was working while Bro. Roach was with us in the flesh – except for the meetings he used to keep at his home at Belmont. You know every little Ecclesia is mistress of its own affairs, so in the month of November, as customary, we held our nomination and one month later we had election of officers.... Our meetings are held on Sundays at Tunapuna from 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.; and St. James from 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on Tuesdays from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. at Arouca – and from 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in Morvant. On Wednesdays St. James from 7 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., to visit or meeting at Sister ------- Sat.... Continue to pray for us as we continue to pray for you all. (2 Tim. 4:22)

By His Grace, -------  (TRINIDAD)

CORRECTION:

March paper No. 117, p. 1, par. 1, line 8, we referred to “the strangers ­of the Baltic Provinces.” The word “Baltic” is an inadvertence, and should read “Black Sea Provinces.” Please correct accordingly.

NO. 118: SOME THOUGHTS FOR THE MEMORIAL

No. 118

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

Once more we observe the memory of Him who perished on the cross; and, while it is good and proper that we “consider Him” at all times, it is especially appro­priate that ‘‘we stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance” at this Passover season, lest any should “eat and drink unworthily” of the bread and the cup. And, in doing this, it is not our thought to replace the Passover chapter in Volume 6, or some appropriate thoughts by Brother Johnson. When the typical lamb was gath­ered in on Nisan 10 and held by the Jews in close proximity until Nisan 14, it would certainly have the effect of arousing in them a “good conscience,” as they painstakingly put away all leaven from their domiciles. And so it should be with us.

“Let a man examine himself.” And let this be done without “outward show” if the full blessing is to be had. It has been aptly stated, “The most difficult thing: To know thyself; the easiest thing: To advise another.” The reason so much advice is worth nothing is because it comes for nothing, although experience gained from a good and honest heart over the years of the Christian walk should qualify us to “strengthen the weak hands, to uphold him that is falling, to strengthen the feeble knees.” (job 4:3,4) Thus, we make attempt again this year to offer some appro­priate comment to the benefit of all our readers – the “hoary heads” long in the way, or to those newly come with us.

Being far from the perfection that was originally in Eden, it is probably a correct observation that all of us are inclined to be creatures of extremes, especially so, at the beginning of our induction into the Household of Faith. Therefore, it should occasion no surprise to find some among us much too lax in their appraisal of themselves, just as there will probably be some who are much too severe in their judgment of themselves. Of course, the very purpose of the good Word of God is to remove such extremes, and to equip us with “the spirit of a sound mind.” This latter has a twofold meaning: The honest imbibing of the Truth should produce in all a sounder mind than they had before they were thus blessed. “Thy words are life unto those that find them, and health to all their flesh.” (Prov. 4:22) But the Truth in a secondary sense conveys to all honest recipients the spirit – the disposition – of Him whose mind is perfection, perfec­tion in Wisdom, Justice, Love and Power, and all in perfection of balance with every other quality. And this “spirit of a sound mind” should become more apparent in each of us as we continue to “consider Him” – “the leader and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him, endured the cross, disregarding the shame.” (Heb. 12:2-4, Dia.) Thus are we strengthened against weariness of heart and mind. And those who thus diligently add to their “talents” (See Matt. 25:14-30) are pri­marily and exclusively those who ‘‘partake of their Master’s joy” – the joy of the First Resurrection that is the reward of “the good and faithful servants” – those who become partner with Him in “the joy that was set before Him” as they also faith­fully “endure the cross, despising the shame.” Secondarily, the expression would apply in limited measure – in principle only – to the good and faithful Youthful Worthy servants, as they also improve their talents to the glory of God, making them also “good and profitable servants” for the work that is theirs to do.

EXAMINATION TO REMOVE ANTITYPICAL LEAVEN

Leaven being a type of sin, St. Paul exhorts that we keep the feast “not with the old leaven, nor with leaven of vice and wickedness, but with the unleavened principles of sincerity and truth.” (1 Cor. 5:8, Dia.) And St. Paul further expands on this in 2 Cor. 7:1, Dia.: ‘‘Having, therefore, these promises, Beloved, let us purify ourselves from all pollution of flesh and spirit, perfecting Holi­ness in the fear of God.” These exhortations are addressed by the Apostle to the “Dearly Beloved,” indicating that such were already members of the Household of Faith – those who have “peace with God” and also have “the peace of God which passeth understanding.” All such, of course, “love righteousness, and hate iniquity” (Psa. 45:7), have been anointed with the “oil of gladness,” although in lesser degree than was “our Passover.” However, as our Lord was “anointed with the oil of glad­ness above His fellows” to the extent that He was the one “altogether lovely,” the “Bright and Morning Star,” with a stature which none of his fallen followers have been able to attain, yet among our brethren, our fellow-servants, there have been the outstanding few who have been “anointed with the oil of gladness” above their fellows – “some Apostles, some Prophets,” etc. (Eph. 4:11) for the work of the ministry, for the perfecting of the Saints.... that we be henceforth no more chil­dren, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine.”

All such, of course, cannot be in harmony with the evils and the servants of evil with whom they brush elbows every day – even though they be acutely aware of their own shortcomings, and have a dislike for such in themselves even more than they do in others. These indeed will make honest and sincere endeavor to cleanse themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and mind – to perfect themselves in every good word and work, realizing as they do that the ideal can never be attained in this life, yet they steadfastly continue to “set the Lord God always before them.” And it is for these that the Memorial is specifically prescribed – and for none others. Even new creatures, while they are abandoned to Azazel, should refrain from partaking, as they are not then following the rules set out for them.

For the world in general – the world in sin, in antitypical Egypt – it would be useless even to invite them to cleanse themselves from all filthiness of the flesh and mind – just as it would have been folly in the extreme for the Jews in typical Egypt to invite the Egyptians about them to join with them in slaying and eating their Passover lamb, with bitter herbs, with their shoes on their feet, with their staffs in their hand, prepared for the journey to goodly Canaan land. The Egyptians would have laughed them to scorn – just as the antitypical Egyptians today would like­wise laugh, since they are all more or less in sympathy with the very filthiness which surrounds them, having no wish whatever to be rid of it, having no intimation of how it appears in God’s sight, and having no desire to “perfect themselves in that holiness without which no man shall see God.”

It needs no argument that some men are better born than others. One satirist has put it this way: Some men are born with brains, some with beef, and some with neither. Such worldly thinkers declare that God has created man in His image, and man has returned the compliment. The savages who carve out awesome horrible­appearing totem poles, or other demoniacal figures thereby express their opinion of what they believe God is like. But those who “keep the feast in sincerity and in truth” have set before their minds an ideal of perfection in thought, word and deed. it is well stated that there are three standards of value in the earth today, the lowest of which is things, material objects. By this standard many wealthy per­sonages receive much bowing and homage from their underlings. As one diplomat expressed it, All my life I have made a success by bowing to the right people. The second higher standard of value is persons. Many admire Samson as the greatest of all people who ever lived. Was he indeed not the strongest? Yet he died revel­ing in the destruction of his enemies. Others have the ambition to be a great general, a great ball player, a great prize fighter, etc.; but the prophet Jeremiah states very clearly what should be the ideal of those who “draw nigh to God with a true heart, in full assurance of faith”: “Let not the wise man glory in his wis­dome, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches: But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the Lord.” (Jer. 9:23,24) Clearly enough, by this measure then the third and highest standard of values is ideals; and blessed is he whose God is the Lord. There­fore, “Sanctify the Lord of hosts Himself; and let Him be your fear, and let Him be your dread.” (Isa. 8:13) Thus doing, we shall indeed “keep the feast in sin­cerity and in truth.”

Let us keep in mind, however, that such attainment is not the result of a day, a week, a year; it results from the determined striving of many years, some gain­ing more, some less, depending upon their inheritance and providential circumstances after birth. “Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not, but a body has thou prepared me.... Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, 0 God” (Heb. 10:5-7), is the clear declaration concerning Christ our Passover. Such a perfect body was not the inheritance of any of His “brethren,” those throughout the Age who have kept the feast in sincerity and in truth; in fact, of all of them it is written, some more, some less, that from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores.” (Isa. 1:6) Yet the same prophet in vs. 16-19 gives adequate encouragement to such: “Put away the evils of your doings before mine eyes; cease to do evil; learn to do well.... though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land.” Therefore, it is not the degree of holiness that determines the right of each one at the feast; rather, it is the heart’s intention of each one; and with this standard let each “examine himself,” then “come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.” (Heb. 4:16) And, “if ye do these things, ye shall never fall, for so an entrance shall be ministered unto you into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” (2 Pet. 1:10,11)

But, of such as do not “these things” we are warranted in drawing certain con­clusions. “By their fruits you will discover them” (Matt. 7:20¾Dia.) is the stan­dard given us for discerning between the false and the true, between the hypocrites and the pure in heart. A good tree yields good fruit; a bad tree yields bad fruit, But in this we are to be ever mindful that proper pruning and diligent cultivation will improve the fruit of any tree, and repentance and reformation are sometimes long in coming. Nevertheless, we believe it is a safe conclusion that new creatures that die impenitent go into the second death; and, had the one recorded in 1 Cor. 5:1-5 continued in his “filthiness of the flesh” until the day of his death, those Corinthian brethren would have been fully warranted in concluding such an one as receiving “the blackness of darkness forever.” Charity would no longer apply in such a case. And similar ones here in the end of this Age, who become grossly immoral or gross doctrinal inebriates, especially so of the leaders, are justly classified as an inseparable part of antitypical Jambres; and from such we should turn away.

It has always been the Truth that has separated the faithful from the unfaith­ful; and Truth as due represents the Divine presence with God’s people. The Truth then is the measuring rod by which we discover the fruits of each one; but even in this we are not warranted in conducting an Inquisition, to pry into the inner reaches of others’ hearts to determine if they have properly removed the leaven from their domicile. Let each one “examine himself”; and it is far better that we err on the generous side than that we should “offend one of these little ones.” (Matt. 18:6)

Thus we conclude our thoughts for this Memorial, praying the Divine blessing upon one and all in the preparation for and participation in this year’s “remembrance of Me.” The moon nearest the Vernal Equinox comes new this year at Jerusalem at 2.21 a.m. April 2, thus starting Nisan 1 at 6 p.m. April 1, Biblical reckoning. This brings Nisan 14 to 6 p.m. April 14; and any hour that evening after six p.m. will be appropriate for keeping “this remembrance.” We shall observe the occasion this year at 1507 N. Donnelly in Mount Dora at 7:30 p.m. April 14; and a cordial invitation is extended to any and all of like mind to join with us who may be in this vicinity. And may the God of all Grace, after that ye have suffered awhile, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen and settle you.

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

PROPER RECKONING FOR THE MEMORIAL DATE

Most of our readers will recall that in 1962 (Supplement to No. 80) we revised our date for the Memorial from March 18 to April 17, our reason therefor being that the March date would bring Nisan 14 before the Vernal Equinox. This evoked consid­erable criticism from R. G. Jolly and “cousin” Krewson, the both of them accusing us of procedure contrary to Brother Russell and Brother Johnson.

Now it is brought to our notice that Brother Russell made a correction in 1913 absolutely identical to our own correction in 1962. In the February 1, 1913 Watch Tower he announced the Memorial date as March 20 after 6 p.m. He based this upon the moon coming new at Jerusalem 2.44 a.m. March 8, thus commencing Nisan 1 at 6 p.m. March 7 Jewish reckoning. The Vernal Equinox in 1913 arrived 7.21 a.m. March 21, or exactly 13 days, 4 hrs. and 37 mins. (absolute time) after the March moon came new.

Then, in the March 1, 1913 Tower Brother Russell corrected the date to 6 p.m. April 20, basing his change on the April moon coming new April 8, which would begin Nisan 1 at 6 p.m. April 7 – at least 15 days, 16 hrs. and 39 mins. after the Vernal Equinox date of March 21. Thus, assuming that moon came new at midnight April 7 (the very earliest it could possibly occur), he used the new moon that was at least 2 days, 18 hrs. and 2 mins. farther from the Equinox than was the one that came new March 8. Therefore, we have here one indisputable instance where Brother Russell did NOT use the moon nearest the Vernal Equinox.

Then there is the time when he gave the Memorial date after 6 p.m. April 22, 1910, thus having Nisan 1 begin at 6 p.m. April 9. We do not have all the details for that year; but, assuming the Vernal Equinox occurred at the very late date of March 23, it would then put Nisan 1 seventeen days from that event – certainly a longer time from the Equinox than the March new moon of that year. On both those occasions Brother Johnson was very closely associated with Brother Russell, and a very careful reader of the Watch Tower. Therefore, he knew the details connected with them in a manner which we do not have; and it was probably that knowledge which prompted him to write in the February 1933 Present Truth that the Memorial should never be observed before the Vernal Equinox.

R. G. Jolly would know about the 1910 and the 1913 incidents, too, because he was there just as was Brother Johnson; and it just may be that is the reason he has remained silent after our refutation of his contentions in 1962. We invite him now to make clear and full declaration on this.

As for J. W. Krewson, he keeps repeating, repeating, repeating we are in error – without offering any proof for his charge. We now also invite him to reconcile his own position with Brother Russell’s clear contradictions of him in 1910 and 1913.

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

To The Bible Students:

I received the lesson and I really enjoyed it. Thanks very much. I would like to have the following: Where Are The Dead, What Is The Soul? The Resurrection of the Dead, Two Distinct Salva­tions and The Three Babylons.

Truly yours ------- (MASSACHUSETTS)

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

My dear Brother Hoefle:

Greetings in our Blessed Redeemer’s name from Sister ------- and myself. All here are in fair health at present. It has been a long time since I wrote you, and I must thank you for the January paper, Among other things I notice you state that all of the sects in Little Babylon violate God’s commands. Yes, and the L.H.M.M. is no exception.

The friends are in good spirit.... Some time this year we intend to have an immersion service, D.v. There might be three. We are in anticipation of the tracts.

Our Christian love to all the dear ones with you, as we continue to pray for you, that the God of all Grace will continue to bless your efforts in contending for the faith once delivered to the Saints.

Your brother by His Grace ------- (TRINIDAD)

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

My dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace through our Saviour!

I am happy to tell you that I am in receipt of the encouraging letter to Sister ------- and me jointly. We thank you for sparing the time, as we are aware of how hard pressed with the work that you are. I read your letter to the Class and they want to thank you for the encouraging and ex­horting words of comfort – and to assure you of their remembrance and prayers.

We got the January paper and enjoyed the message. We know the signs of the time are plain. We are not yet in the climax of the “time of trouble,” yet it is like a woman in travail. These upheavals continually are not the ushering in of God’s Kingdom of peace: We can see only a Kingdom of Darkness, and not a wink of light so far as the world is concerned. No peace within nor without.....

We know how sick at heart you are when not able to awaken your brethren to the fact they have failed in discerning the signs of the time, and because of that going before the Lord’s time – ahead of the Lord.

Sister ........ joins in sending love to you both, and to Sister Dunnagan and Sister Wells – and ask that you remember us at the throne of Grace.

 Yours through Grace ------- (JAMAICA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and Peace in Jesus’ dear Name!

Thank you for your good letter. Enclosed is $ --- for the Lord’s work. Please send me some tracts – same kind I have been getting – when convenient. Thank you!

I am thinking I probably owe my subscription. I don’t know that I have ever asked how much it is. I hope you are both well and the others there near you.

With Christian love and good wishes to all from your sister by faith, ------- (CALIF.)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: May our Lord’s rich blessings be your everlasting portion!

I do appreciate so much your sending me the 1950 Dec. PT. I have no recollection of having seen it before, though I must have it stored away some place. I remember well what a shock it was when a sister in ------- Class called me and asked if I was going to his funeral....... You may have been there that evening when Brother Johnson got up from a sick bed and came to correct some error he feared would pass. It seems it was to impress us that Brother Jolly was bust­ness manager, and NOT Pastor and Teacher..... I believe this meeting was held in the Tabernacle which had just been bought.

A friend who knows of my interest in religion has just sent me a roll of papers put out by Billy Graham and his supporters. I never dreamed that he could still be teaching the old nominal church theories! This will open the way for me to put out another “Two Distinct Salvations.” May our Lord bless it, her and YOU!

Your sister in That Blessed Hope ------- (MARYLAND)

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

My dear Brother Hoefle:

We thank you for the card we received.... I fell the second time and broke my hip, and was in the hospital five weeks – and I am just getting around on my two feet with a walker. And I am thank­ful! We, my daughter and I, receive your good paper and we thank you.

Enclosed is $ ---. May it bring with it God’s blessing and His peace!

Lovingly, ------- (CONNECTICUT)

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

My dear Brother Hoefle: Loving greetings!

Thank you for the December paper. We note that R. G. Jolly attempts to refute your July article (we do not take Present Truth paper now). His attitude toward you is deplorable and shows a “bad conscience.” Your July article should have been helpful for cleansing purposes. If he had been a “cleansed Levite,” as he claims, then he would not resort to calling you a “Shyster lawyer,” a “sifter,” etc.

Continue, dear Brother, in your able defense in refuting wrong doctrine – and whatever errors that temporarily the Lord amy allow you to make, when clearly made known to you, in the acknowledgment, like Brothers Russell and Johnson, cleanses and blesses you and those to whom you minister. Your reference to Reprint 4920 ­also Manna Nov. 24 is excellent. In the same connection Reprint 2735..... are all wholesome food for Bible Students. Even the questions, and how appropriate, for Nov. 24!

We send you Poem 178 as quoted in Nov. 24 Manna. Earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints! The Lord’s spirit, Word and Providence will support you. Brother ......... joins us in sending you hearty Season’s greetings and a happy New Year in the Service of the Lord. Also for Sister Hoefle, Sisters Wells and Dunnagan.

Your brethren by His Grace, ------- (ENGLAND)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Greetings to you in our Saviour’s Name! It has been quite a long time since I have written you, but owing to circum­stances could not be done. I have received your letter and assure you it was appreciated. Thank our great God for all His loving kindness and tender mercies toward us the children of men!....

I have not received any of the papers for this year, but hope you have not forgotten me, and that I will receive them in the near future. I am now studying Epiphany Vol.12 – “The Attributes of Jehovah .....
The Class is growing very strong in the Lord.. Sister ------- and the other friends send their sincerest love to you and Sister Hoefle. My love to all.

I remain yours in the Master’s Service, Brother ------- (TRINIDAD)

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

Gentlemen:

During my most recent bereavement, I was loaned a copy of The Herald “The Resurrection Of The Dead.” I became most interested, and I must return this. I would more than appreciate you sending me one each of ­What Is The Soul? Where Are The Dead and The Three Babylons – and copies of other articles that may be available at this time.

Most sincerely ------- (MICHIGAN)