NO. 114: SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER PRESENT TRUTH

No. 114

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

The above-mentioned paper by R. G. Jolly reached us on September 28 – too late for us to make response in our November paper, which had already been completed for mailing when his paper arrived. However, we shall now make systematic comment on those “Questions of General Interest” to be found in his Present Truth on pp. 76 to 80.

TRUSTING ONE’S CONSCIENCE

We realize this discussion of ‘conscience’ by us is one R. G. Jolly would much rather avoid, because of the fact that Brother Johnson charged him, along with others, of having a ‘bad’ conscience. And this charge by Brother Johnson was clearly justi­fied by R. G. Jolly’s conduct toward the “aged Youthful Worthy widow who was both sick and penniless.” In that shameful situation R. G. Jolly was Brother Johnson’s chief opponent before the Philadelphia church on the subject (See E-10, pp. 585-586). R. G. Jolly’s heartlessness in this matter, and his evils in other matters, moved Brother Johnson to record these charges against him; nor has R. G. Jolly at any time made denial in the Present Truth of that “spot” against him. It is elementary, we believe, to Truth people that a ‘bad’ conscience is not to be trusted; but we are assured that a ‘good’ conscience can be trusted – and, furthermore, that all God’s people who have “good and honest hearts” will seek to keep their consciences “good,” and regulated by His Word.

‘Tis true that sins can be committed when one’s conscience is not properly regu­lated – and not be a violation of that person’s conscience; but when they are apprised of such evils, they do all in their power to adjust the evils they have committed, and correct their consciences to the best of their ability – to make amends to the person, or persons, they have wronged; i.e., if they have “good and honest hearts.” We have an example of such a course in the Apostle Paul. It is also elementary that all Great Company members have had “bad” consciences – some moreso than others – otherwise they would not have lost their crowns. Their sins of omission and commission had to be at least partially willful (in violation of conscience) to the extent of knowingly violating their consecration vows (knowingly committing wrong in error of teaching or conduct). So, if Brother Russell was prompted in his comments by the “large crowd” who came with him during the Harvest; then his statement to them, “Don’t trust your con­science” would certainly apply. And this same situation would also apply now to R. G. Jolly’s rabid sectarian adherent.

Brother Russell and Brother Johnson both repeatedly warned us not to take their Scripturally unsupported thoughts as God’s Word – because they both well knew that they were fallible men, and ofttimes corrected, or modified, their previous statements by elaborating on the subject in subsequent articles. Brother Russell made the statement (Reprints 5247, col. 1) that, “There is no excuse for our getting into the Great Com­pany.” We believe this to be Scriptural, because God gives all new creatures the needed help to insure their faithfulness – otherwise, He wouldn’t be a God of Love and impartiality; He calls no one – ever – to an impossible task (He assures the faithful of VICTORY in their Class standing as they continue to “keep their hearts with all diligence,” and a “conscience void of offense toward God and men”). And we also state, we believe with full Scriptural support, if we accept the Epiphany Messenger’s teaching thereon, that NO CLEANSED GREAT COMPANY LEADER will attempt to present a new doctrine; for in so doing they will be offering “strange fire.” Any ‘cup’ they attempt to use will not be from the Lord, but from Azazel. See E-8:192, onward. Brother Russell also makes the statement that, “The ‘great company’ do not belong to the kingdom at all. They will be associated in some way not explained, but will be part of the kingdom real, nor yet of the earthly or representative kingdom.” This statement is certainly not in harmony with all other Scripture, because we believe Brother Johnson gave us a clearer picture and better understanding of their future reward, and gave us clear Scripture to substantiate his conclusions. They will be noblemen, a sort of police force during the Kingdom Reign, and will be a part of the Heavenly phase of the kingdom, as Brother Johnson has taught us. Brother Russell was probably influenced by the conduct of some of the “measurably faithful’’ who came with him. So we mention what Brother Russell ‘said’ in the instance, knowing full well that R. G. Jolly will not use this to “prove” the Great Company is not a part of the Kingdom, earthly or Heavenly. But when Brother Russell ‘said’ that the Great Company will have their portion with the hypocrites in the Time of Trouble, we do adhere to this teaching, because it is Scripturally supported (See Reprints 4654, col. 2; Matt. 25:11).

In R. G. Jolly’s attack upon us for our Scriptural teaching on conscience, he uses Brother Russell’s statement (what Brother Russell ‘said’) as a shield for his sins of teaching and practice. Yes, he reprints articles “word for word” from both Messengers. So did J. F. Rutherford! Both of them have done this to ‘prove’ they are in harmony with the Messengers’ teachings–and it deceives many that otherwise wouldn’t be deceived if they published their gross doctrinal errors and omitted such articles altogether. In this same paper in which R. G. Jolly castigates us he publishes an article by Brother Russell – “Blessed are The Pure in Heart” – but he also inserts his own gross errors (“strange fire”) at the bottom of p. 67, onward.

Had R. G. Jolly refuted us because what we gave in our July paper was UNSCRIPTURAL, then he would be in order and should be commended for his efforts to “contend fox the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints.” But his whole contention is that “Brother Russell said.” So we now also quote from what “Brother Russell said” on the subject of ‘conscience,’ which we believe is Scripturally supported and in complete accord with what we presented in our July paper: “Every Violation of Conscience Wrong.” In this article Brother Russell states – ‘the weaker thus might violate the conscience, which would make the act a sin to him. (not necessarily a sin in itself aloneJJH). Every violation of conscience, whether the thing itself be right or wrong, is a step in the direction of willful sin.” (Nov. 15, 1911 WT, Reprints 4920, top, col. 2) If one is not to trust, or listen to, his conscience, how could he commit willful sin by ignoring the voice of conscience? It is this same article in 1911 to which Bro. Johnson refers in his Manna observations for November 24, in which he himself states, “based upon such a good conscience, our sacrificial acts will be in order and will be acceptable (their ‘‘works’’ won’t be burned – See 1 Cor. 3:13-15), if in harmony with the Lord’s Spirit, Word and Providence.”

And when Brother Johnson charged R. G. Jolly with having a ‘bad’ conscience, it is because it is unbelievable that his conscience was so seared that it supported his course against the sister who by a “combination of starving and cancer died.” “if a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye gave them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?” (James 2:15,16) Unless R. G. Jolly has reached the point of “no return,” we charge him with a ‘bad’ conscience today–because, if he is yet in the Household, his conscience–if ‘good’-­wouldn’t allow him to call us “shyster lawyer,” “sifter,” etc., just because we are resisting his present evil course (the same resistance Brother Johnson waged against evil-doers). He knows only too well that at no time have we refused help to the downtrodden; that at no time have we pulled any political tricks to gain a position for ourselves; that at no time have we “coveted any man’s silver or gold”; and at no time have we used the Truth for our personal aggrandizement, or achievement. The Star Member (Brother Johnson) had no occasion to record any such sins against us, but R. G. Jolly, who is most guilty of many of these evils (and tacitly admits them as he continues to hold to the Truth that Brother Johnson was the Epiphany messenger), does now broadcast, as well as ‘whisper’ such infamous lies against JJH (please note that a “whispering campaign” was waged against this dying, helpless and cancerous widow, and that R. G. Jolly was Brother Johnson’s chief opponent in this disgraceful Levitical crueltySee E-10:585, bottom.

But we proceed a little further to the March 15, 1914 Tower (Reprints 5425): ‘We may be sure that if our course as new creatures in Christ is condemned by our own conscience it would also be condemned by God.” And we quote a little more from Brother Russell in the same March 15, 1914 Tower: “A scale which is rightly adjusted will stand level. It is reliable. And so with a good conscience – it is one which can determine the slightest deviation from God’s law” (and thus can, and should be trusted–JJH).

We accept the quotations aforegoing from Brother Russell because they are Scrip­turally correct–because they are in harmony with St. Paul’s statement respecting a “good conscience,” which caused him to conclude in Heb. 5:14 that we “by reason of use have our senses (conscience) exercised to discern between good and evil.” And when one has his senses so exercised, he will not offer a ‘refutation’ that attempts to displace the Scriptural teaching thereon, as presented in our July paper, now so brazenly attacked by R. G. Jolly. Thus, it is clear enough that his conscience is still not ‘good’ enough to discern between “good and evil” – thought and Scripture. Therefore, we quote him St. Paul’s words (Heb. 5:12): “When for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.”

When That Evil Servant began to analyze hypocrites, Brother Johnson observed that JFR should be well qualified to define such, as he himself was one of the worst hypocrites of the entire Gospel Age (and when R. G. Jolly still had a bad conscience as late as 1938, recorded against him, he kept one for a large part of his sojourn in the Household, even if he has since become “cleansed,” as he proclaims since his emancipation from Brother Johnson’s restraining hand). And it seems R. G. Jolly is also well qualified to understand “shyster lawyer methods and practices of deceit,” when he himself has been most guilty in his dealings toward the Star Members’ teach­ings, and toward us. Also, he should be well qualified to describe a ‘bad’ conscience; but is hardly qualified at this time to describe a ‘good’ conscience.

Let us keep clearly in mind that it is because of their bad consciences that God tells us through St. Paul (2 Thes. 2:11) that He would, specifically in the Epiphany ending of this Gospel Age, send the measurably faithful “an energy of delusion” – ­a punishment God does not inflict upon the fully faithful. And, as we witness them forsaking the Truth that once made them clean (John 15:3), and receiving instead “an energy of delusion,” we have the indisputable proof that such new creatures are crown losers in an uncleansed condition. And in all of this he would have his readers be­lieve he is being abased by us. This is an identical twin to the wail of That Evil Servant for Brother Johnson’s criticism of him.

Also, let us keep clearly in mind that the studied shyster is a lawyer who argues mere excerpts of laws, or laws that are “irrelevant, incompetent and immaterial” to the cause at issue – just as R. G. Jolly attempts to do with the teachings of Brother Russell and Brother Johnson. Such lawyers always quote the law “WORD FOR WORD”-­just as R. G, Jolly does with the writings of Brother Russell and Brother Johnson. R. G. Jolly is indeed a good one to shout “shyster lawyer” at others. His charge against us of “vilification, misrepresentation and false condemnation” applies pointedly to him (as Bro. Johnson recorded of him); and we once more observe in conclusion of this “conscience” bit that Brother Johnson specifically wrote in the record (E-10:585) that R. G. Jolly has a “bad conscience” and was guilty of many “misrepresentations” – a charge Brother Johnson never made against JJH. Nor would we revive R. G. Jolly’s past evils if he had overcome them - if he were the “cleansed” Levite leader he claims to be. The difference in his present evil course and that of the past is this: He no longer has the restraining hand of the World’s High Priest (now since all brotherly fellowship and favor are removed from him–See E-15:525) There was a marked difference in JFR’s course when under Star Member Brother Russell’s restraining hand, to what it was after Brother Russell’s demise, as most of us know.

ZECHARIAH AND THE ALTAR

He accuses us of a misrepresentation when we stated he had not previously answered our conclusions regarding Zechariah’s stoning “between the temple and the altar.” His criticism of us in this instance is measurably justified;. and we now make due apology. However, we now add that we did speedily make answer to R. G. Jolly’s 1957 contentions, and cited many Scriptures in our Nov. 15, 1957 paper that completely annihilate his position and contention re Zechariah. So far as we can recall he has never answered these presentations in the Present Truth. But it is never our wish to resort even to half truths in any degree at all in any of our statements of R. G. Jolly, or any one else. As most of our readers know, we have much more than enough Truth to use against his perversions of the fundamental doctrines of both Messengers, and his “strange fire” (false doctrine of Epiphany Campers Consecrated); so it is not necessary for us to resort to his methods of untruth, half truths, and “sleight-of-hand” to annihilate his precarious position, as he squirms at our Scriptural refutations of his gross errors of teaching and practice. (See Luke 21:15)

However, here again – as he has done on previous occasions - he attempts to “make quite a case” by shouting we repudiate “true” teaching we formerly held (Did he accept Bro. Russell’s statement re Great Company not being a part of the Kingdom real, or the earthly phase? And, if so, does he now repudiate that teaching?) Of course, when he inserts the word “true” in his statement, he is offering merely his own be­fuddled conclusion (based upon his desire to eliminate all the Fully Faithful when he became the Executive Trustee of LHMM, and the self-proclaimed “cleansed” Great Company leader). Our contention now is that the teaching we offered in 1952 was not in accord with all other Scripture on this vital subject; although there was much truth in that statement that we still accept, We now admit we were then unduly influenced by R. G. Jolly because of a misplaced confidence in his ability and integrity – not then realizing the full import of his record under Brother Johnson. We believe Bro. Johnson himself was unduly influenced by some of R. G. Jolly’s good qualities–hence the record is there only because of necessity. The Lord allowed us to fall temporarily into this mistake for His own good reasons – just as He did with Brothers Russell and Johnson in similar instances.

Brother Russell and Brother Johnson both made mistakes in teaching until full clarity was received – because they, too, were fallible men; and R. G. Jolly himself has been an outstanding performer in this respect. Just take those 27 “mis”-calculations he gave in the January 1947 Present Truth – mathematical “certainties” (?) for 1956, which directly contradict a great part of what he himself now advocates re Zechariah. And he based many of those calculations (which may be defined only as the machinations of Satan) upon the very same Pyramid which he used three short years later to “prove” October 22, 1950 was the correct date for the last saint to be glorified, instead of 1956 – and to ‘prove’ that his former ‘pyramid’ calculations re antitypical Zechariah were false, since Brother Johnson died on the former date. But everything else (in the ‘parallels’ up to 1956), according to his later contentions, was fulfilled accord­ing to expectation (with the exception, of course, that all the saints were eliminated in 1950 instead of 1956) in the person of R. G. Jolly, etc., in the enaction of his “Brother Russell’s Epiphany Parallels.” And R. G. Jolly is the same person who would now cry “sifting errorist” at JJH! But R. G. Jolly now explains that “Jesus’ primary reason (for the expression “between the temple and the altar”) obviously was to identify clearly which Zechariah he meant, for many in Israel had that name.” Yes, about 28 Zechariahs are actually mentioned in the Bible, including the one that was stoned, and the one bearing his name in the Bible book. But, was there any one of these – aside from the officiating priest – that was martyred by the Jews? If not, then what sense is there to such an argument? Nor is there anything in the record anywhere to show the Jews knew the priest had been slain “between the temple and the alter.” Therefore, our Lord’s limitation would be as meaningless to the Jews as it is to us – unless He had a deeper meaning in mind. Here again R. G. Jolly “darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge.” (Job. 38:2)

However, the real crux of this Zechariah contention, the real touchstone by which it should be gauged, is the Number One question that applies to every Biblical interpreta­tion: Is It in harmony with all other Scripture? R. G. Jolly himself once believed and taught this fundamental truth; but it would seem he has now rejected it (in his ‘frenzy’ – “strong delusion” – to eliminate the saints altogether and gather his Epiphany Campers Consecrated – thus saying by his acts, “My Lord Delayeth”). Let him reconcile his Zechariah interpretation with the large Gospel-Age Samson antitype. Let him recon­cile it with Gen. 3:15: “Thou (the seed of the Serpent) shalt bruise his heel.” Did this final “bruising” take place with Brother Johnson’s death? Let him also reconcile it with Zech. 8:10, and Brother Johnson’s clear statement on this text as recorded in E-6:630 –

“The ‘no hire’ for man or beast of Zech. 8:10.... is to occur after the foundation of the church beyond the veil was laid, but before the glorified temple would be completed. Hence, it evidently refers to the time of Anarchy after Armageddon.”

Likewise, let him reconcile his present contention with Brother Johnson’s teaching in E-5:420 that the message of Rev. 19:5 would be given by the Great Company after they are cleansed. None of the 60 Groups as such were cleansed prior to October 22, 1950, if we are to believe Brother Johnson on the subject. Does R. G. Jolly contend that the removal of Brother Johnson’s beneficent influence, and restraining hand, cleansed the LHMM Group? And let him reconcile his interpreta­tion with Psa. 46. Brother Johnson stated that, in the face of the clear interpretation placed upon Ps. 46 by Brother Rus­sell, only one befuddled by Azazel would contend that the last saint would be gone be­fore Armageddon. And with that conclusion we are in full agreement. And we declare also that our own present interpretation of the Zechariah type is in full harmony with all other Scripture.

JESUS’ WORK AS GOD’S EXECUTIVE

R. G. Jolly also makes quite some uproar because we omitted the word “pertinent” from the quotation in E-11:473. This was an inadvertence on our part – which we now regret, chiefly because of the opportunity it affords him of “straining at gnats.” We realize, of course, that grasping at this “straw” is prompted by desperation on his part. He’s now telling us that Jesus’ Executorship extended into the Camp in 1954 (something Brother Johnson failed to see and record) – even as he also tells us that He ejected the unconsecrated tentatively justified from the Court into the Camp at that same time. According to this argument, Jesus merely relinquished His Executor­ship over them in the Court so He could take it up again in the Camp (According to R. G. Jolly’s contention, then the only time they would be without Jesus’ Executorship is the time they are passing through the Gate into the Camp!). A clear picture? Yes, clear as mud! The comment that Brother Johnson made re JFR on a similar perversion now applies pointedly to R. G. Jolly (E-6:191,195):

“To maintain his evident error, the tabernacle teachings must be twisted and distorted.... (p. 191) The Camp means the rebellious nominal people of God, who, while desiring some relationship with God, do not desire it sufficiently to be approved by Him, even for fellowship with Him.... in the finished picture (at the end of the Epi­phany periodJJH) those who are less than tentatively justified.” (P. 195) (Of course, if R. G. Jolly can make a “narrow way” in the Camp, why not extend Jesus’ Executorship there, too?)

As things stand now, R. G. Jolly has at least three classes in his Camp: (1) the rebellious nominal people of God (if he still adheres to Brother Johnson’s teaching thereon), (2) the Court rejects who had “received the Grace of God in vain” up to 1954, and (3) his Consecrated Campers. If Jesus’ Executorship now extends to the Camp, does it apply to all those in the Camp, or merely to R. G. Jolly’s select few Campers Consecrated? Or does R. G. Jolly contend that Jesus’ Executorship now extends to the whole world (before the inauguration of the New Covenant)?

Once more we refer R. G. Jolly to E-11:591 – “There is a threefold set of antitypes of the tabernacle type: (1) the Gospel-Age antitype, (2) the Epiphany antitype and (3) the Millennial-Age antitype. Only one of these three antitypes operates at a time.” So we ask again: Which antitype is operating now? And we observe further that when the Millennial Camp is definitely erected, it will operate under the New Covenant, at which time Campers can consecrate. Are his Conse­crated Campers now under the New Covenant, or has he moved some feature of the oathbound Covenant into the Camp to accommodate his Campers (his “Household of Faith”)? All such features have hitherto been in the Court (where the Household of Faith is always represented until the Gospel Age is fully ended – according to the teachings of the last two Star Members).

We offer further comment by Brother Johnson in E-14:350 – “God declares that the time is coming when He will punish all the measurably unfaithful consecrated – the crown losers – with the unconsecrated. The latter are worldlings (nominal) church-members, Jews, clericalists, autocrats... for all these classes are unconsecrated and all the captive (nominal) church-members are also unconse­crated in their hearts.” (They –­ the Great Company – will have their portion with the hypocrites, as we have quoted from Brother Russell–JJH) R. G. Jolly now attempts to place his newly-consecrated Campers right alongside himself, throwing them also right in with those described aforegoing. A most winsome picture he is offering them for walking the same “narrow” way the fully faithful Youthful Worthies walk! (Please see R. G. Jolly’s July, 1955 Present Truth where he treats this subject in detail.)

At the bottom of p. 79, col. 1, R. G. Jolly attempts some detailed analysis about “the parallel time 40 years after 1914, i.e., Oct. 1954.” Just what “parallel” does he have in mind? Is it the parallel Brother Johnson defined, in which he himself expected to play a very prominent role, and which never materialized? Or is it now “Brother Russell’s Epiphany Parallels,” in which R. G. Jolly allowed himself to be inducted by “Cousin” Krewson? If he is now discussing the parallel Brother Johnson gave, why does he ignore completely this statement by Brother Johnson (in E-10:114): “1954 is the date that the last member of the Great Company will get his first enlight­enment that will bring him into the Truth by Passover 1956.” And why does he also distort a further statement on that same page? – “After 1954 no more persons will enter the tentatively-justified state.” We have often quoted the above; but, R. G. Jolly’s only response is the lame “sleight-of-hand” that this means “for Gospel-Age purposes.” Brother Johnson states the Epiphany is the last special period of the Gospel Age. And even R. G. Jolly himself admits that we are still in the Epiphany – overlapping, of course, into the Basileia, but still in the Epiphany nonetheless. Since things equal to the same things are equal to each other, then “Gospel-Age purposes” are still with us if the Epiphany is still with us, because the Epiphany is a part of the Gospel Age.

And we add to these refutation of his position that up to now he hasn’t produced one scintilla of physical evidence that anything at all occurred in 1954 to substantiate his “Parallel.” And with such unanswerable refutation to his 1954 date, he still brazenly yells “shyster” at others. We realize, of course; that he is desperate! “Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.” (Rom. 11:22)

“The tongue of the wise useth knowledge aright: but the mouth of fools poureth out foolishness.” (Prov. 15:2 – “foolish virgins”) “But the salvation of the right­eous is of the Lord; he is their strength in the time of trouble” (Psa. 37:29).

Sincerely your brother

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

My dear beloved Brethren: Greetings in our dear Lord’s Name!

Your letter of Sept. 26 received, and I thank you for the help you sent me, copied from Present Truth. You see I had asked him for Bro. Johnson’s word about Campers Consecrated, and also the type – for so far we always have had a type for every Class. Do not copy the Reprints, as I have them.

I sent Oct. 1, No. 112 to the brother who left Jehovah’s Witnesses when he read the Three Babylons tract. I am sending you his address, but he is moving from there. I am glad that Sister ------- is better. Sincere love and best wishes to you all and all with you. Your sister in the faith ------- (Pennsylvania)

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

My dear Brother and Sister Hoefle: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you and the other dear ones with you!

Thanks for your good letter. I noted all you have said. We have not yet received the November article, but have received the October paper. We are grateful for you, Brother Hoefle, and all the dear ones that lend a helping hand in making us the spiritual food we look forward to with hungry hearts. I am glad you had such a good opportunity to fellowship and help the friends in Newark. I would have been glad to be there to hear your discourse.

I am reading Brother Russell’s discourse – a book given to my father by Brother Johnson. I am so glad that I am blessed with such books.

I am grateful for your love and prayers. I do need your prayers, for I am weak.... Remember me to Sisters Dunnagan and Wells, and all the dear ones your way.

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

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings of love and peace!

I returned to my son’s home Sept. 28, after a very pleasant interlude. Our hostess is the widow of a Baptist minister, and my impression is that the other ladies were of the same faith. They all seemed well developed in character (good morals), but with little interest in religious questions..... believe I won her confidence, for she sometimes told me of her difficulties, which she has accepted as for her own good. I saw no opening for helping her (in the Truth), so I left it to you through that fine sermon – the Two Salvations.

Whatever unhappy experience you may have had at Philadelphia, you can be sure they will be more than made up to you. “For thy shame thou shalt have double in thy Maker’s favor blessed.”

My grandson.... brought me several cartons of old letters – many by friends who went through the sifting at Brother Russell’s demise, and others through this present one. Among these letters I found one from Sister ------- who is now with the Lord.... So many of these dear old letters show how the Lord has led us through confusion into the “Land we hold today.” God bless Brother Hoefle, I pray. With prayers and love for richer blessings for you both

Sister ------- (MARYLAND)

NO. 113: A REPORT ON PHILADELPHIA

No. 113

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

In accordance with our established custom, we attended the LHMM Philadelphia Convention over Labor Day – an experience we consider a privilege, although it con­tained the usual sad observa­tions, even as we “suffer it to be so.” The usual Insults, rudeness and Levitical impudence were evident; but such character­is­tics are minor in comparison with the ever-increasing perversions of the Truth that are pyramiding in these last days of “perilous times.” (2 Tim. 3:1,9)

On Sunday morning R. G. Jolly spoke for about one and one-half hours on Psalms 23, the first half of which would gain praise for him from any one who has received “the love of the Truth.” His initial comments were of such quality that we began to entertain the fond hope that this might be at least one occasion since he was aban­doned to Azazel in October 1950 that he would “quit himself like a man.” But such an expectation proved quite premature on our part; we were expecting much too much from one who has perverted so much Truth (Azazel means Perverter) since Brother Johnson’s demise.

LEVITICUS 12 AGAIN

In unwarranted digression from his elevating subject, he embarked once more on his favorite perversion of “Campers Consecrated,” offering profuse comment on the 40 and 80 days of Leviticus 12; but his remarks on this type were no more pertinent to Leviticus 12 than was Leviticus 12 to Psalms 23. And, as is so often the custom with those who pervert the Truth, he also violated the principles of the Truth by direct falsehood in some of his statements, one glaring instance being his charge that none of the “sifters” had ever given an analysis of Leviticus 12 in their attempts to refute him. All who have given even cursory notice to our papers know full well that we have treated this Leviticus type a number of times, but we shall now offer clarification once more for emphasis. (This charge by R. G. Jolly may be true of “cousin” Krewson, whom he labels as a sifter; but neither the charge, nor the name “sifter” are true as respects JJH.) The cleansing of the mother for 40 days after the birth of a son types the cleansing from all error of the Little Flock developing Truths by the Parousia Messenger from 1874 to 1914; and the 80-day cleans­ing of a mother after the birth of a daughter types the purification of the Great Company developing Truths by 1954. Let us not forget that the purifying of the Truth for the Little Flock is for the developing of the Christ Class; while the purifi­ca­tion of the Great Company developing Truths also includes the cleansing Truth for the crown-­losers, as well as for developing them in their standing as “daughters” after their cleansing (2 Cor, 6:17,18). “Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye doubleminded.” (Jas. 4:8) The sons (Little Flock) keep pure hearts and their garments unspotted – that is, the spots do not accumulate and contaminate their characters; the Great Company lose their standing in the elect Christ Company because their hearts become impure, and they allow their garments to remain spotted and wrinkled until “great tribulation” forces their cleansing. So the purifying Truths for this secondary class are not only for their development in their class standing as “daughters,” but are also to cleanse them from the character defilements brought about by their revolutionisms and perver­sions. Thus, this explanation of Lev. 12 by Brother Johnson we accept without reservation; but we observe once more that there is not one word in this type that even hints of Campers Consecrated, or the termination of entry into the Youthful Worthy Class.

Again we quote from E-4:342 regarding Youthful Worthies: “If our dear readers will keep in mind that The Tower’s denial of Tentative Justification during this Age is the foundation of its rejecting the Scriptural doctrine that those faithful con­secrators from 1881 until Restitution sets in, for whom there are no crowns avail­able..... will be the Millennial Associates of the Ancient Worthies in reward and service, they will be able by Scriptural, reasonable and factual thinking completely to overthrow every argument that the article under review presents to defend its thesis.” (And we can say as much for the presentations of the “cousins” as to ‘‘Campers Consecrated” and “Quasi-Elect Consecrated”; if they use the Scriptural and reasonable, and factual, arguments presented herein, they will be able to com­pletely overthrow their theories – JJH) Leviticus 12 treats solely of New Creature developing Truths during the Harvest time. And, as stated, we have offered this explana­tion on numerous occasions in previous papers; therefore, when R. G. Jolly declared his blatant falsehood to the contrary, we would advise him – and all who follow in his steps – that they will do well to consider the warning in Rev. 22:14,15: “Without the city are they who love and make a lie.” Let him consider this part of Rev. 22 when he makes further comment on Rev. 22:10,11. Let him also fit his present contentions re no more Youthful Worthies since 1954 with Brother Johnson’s clear statement in E-4:342 that entry into the Youthful Worthy Class and Tentative Justifi­cation are inseparable. When no more Youthful Worthies can be won, then Tentative Justification will cease to operate forever toward newcomers, as Brother Johnson clearly states on p. 114 of Epiphany Volume 10.

We also quote from the Epiphany Messenger from E-12:319,320, where he is dis­cussing the Ransom: “It is next to God’s character of perfect wisdom, power, justice and love... It conditions, as just shown, every doctrine of the Bible (although it does not ‘condition’ any false doctrine – “Strange Fire” – not taught in the Bible –JJH), and gives it its proper setting in relation to God’s plan...... and disharmony sets in between it and all other Bible doctrines, and immediately contradiction and confusion sets in with an intricate puzzle, if its main feature is distorted, or any of its parts is misshapen (Such as “spreading the merit” into the Camp for Restitutionists while the elect are still in the CourtJJH). And because it is such, we present it as our sixth general proof that the Bible is a Divine reve­lation.... as the radiator, dominator and grounder of every Bible doctrine, as the condit­ioner of its very teaching, as the touchstone of every-truth, as the exposer and refuter of every error, as the meritorious cause and the efficient means of election and free grace.....” (p. 320) (Nor can any perversion be introduced – such as Jonadabs, quasi-elect consecrated or Epiphany Campers Conse­crated – without pro­ducing disharmony with the RansomJJH)

THE REAL PARALLEL

The false parallel by R. G. Jolly on this subject becomes readily transparent when we give attention to the real parallel. Although Brother Russell gave all the Little Flock developing Truths by September 1914, these were much clarified and elaborated by Brother Johnson to the wholesome edification of all those Priests who gave heed thereto. But in no instance did Brother Johnson produce any completely new developing Little Flock Truth during his ministry. And by the same analogy all the Great Company developing and cleansing Truths (for the spots on their robes) had appeared by 1954 – no new ones having been presented since that date (and no new ones needed), although we have correctly elaborated much on some of those Truths in the past ten years – just as did Brother Johnson with the Little Flock Truths. And this we did with brotherly interest in the spiritual welfare specifically of R. G. Jolly – ­which efforts on our part would have gained for him much spiritual respectability, had he heeded them. Had he done so, he would not now need to ‘‘make lies his refuge’’ in his ministry to God’s people.

And, while there is a clear and marked similarity in both parallels, there is also a decided contrast in the conduct of those persons involved therein. All the Little Flock in the Epiphany Movement gave ready accord and diligence to their Truths, thus perfecting that ‘‘Holiness without which none shall see God” (although they were not “made perfect” in character until they faithfully applied such Truths to them­selves for their necessary development over a varied period of time); but ­so far as we know – not one Great Company leader anywhere at any time since 1954 has declared his acceptance of and obedience to the Great Company cleansing and cor­rective Truths. In R. G. Jolly’s counter­feit “Brother Russell’s Epiphany Parallels” (that were administered to his ego by “cousin” Krewson), his No. 1 subject – had his “parallel” been genuine – would have been his declaration and elaboration of the Abandonment Process for Azazel’s Goat as set out in E-15 and in E-4 so clearly by the Epiphany Messenger – just as the confession of Christendom’s sins upon Azazel’s Goat was a primary factor in the Little Flock’s Attestatorial Service from 1914 to October 1916. But what do we see of him? We find just the reverse: A direct denial – ­in act, if not in actual word–of that primary Great Company developing and cleansing Truth – a Truth that he, and others of his kind, must recognize and faithfully apply to themselves if they are to attend the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. And R. G. Jolly may consider himself very clever as he hoodwinks “the unstable and the unlearned” of his henchmen; but he may be sure there must eventually come a “looking to of judgment and fiery indignation” (Heb. 10:27) to all who “run greedily after the error of Balaam for reward” (Jude 11) – the same being a type of those who teach error for profit. (See Berean Comment on 2 Pet. 2:15; Rev. 2:14)

There is another feature of the real parallel we do well to note. Our Lord gave the admonition, ‘‘Work while it is day; the night cometh when no man can work.” (John 9:4) This had special application to the reaping feature of the Harvest work, which was overtaken and stopped by “the plowman” in the closing months of Brother Russell’s ministry. Subsequently, there has been a great concentration of effort to win the fourth element of the elective classes; namely, the Youthful Worthies. And, the real parallel here – which will bring a clear end to that work – will be when it, too, is stopped by “the treader of grapes,” bringing also a “night” wherein no man can work, and no more can be won to Tentative Justification, as stated in Rev. 22:10,11 (See E-10:114).

As R. G. Jolly’s program stands now, he is dividing the merit of Jesus between the Faith Age and the Works Age – a manifest and ridiculous impossibility. As Brother Johnson has so ably stated, When these people fall into the clutches of Azazel, they talk all sorts of nonsense. Just think of it: The merit imputed during the Gospel (faith) Age has not yet been freed, yet R. G. Jolly now has his Campers Consecrated coming under that merit for the Works Age Class as he spreads it into the Camp here in the end of the Gospel Age! This is an identical twin to the error of some in the Dark Ages who preached the Revelation text (Rev. 22:17), “The spirit and the Bride say, Come, whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” “The water of life” could not possibly be available until “His Bride hath made herself ready.” Thus, their message was gross error because it was several hundred years before there really was a “bride.” Note the case of Cornelius: A man who was earnestly seeking God in prayer and righteousness, yet even he – in the Faith Age – could not be tentatively justified until the “key” was turned in the lock by St. Peter. This is Brother Johnson’s clear and correct teaching on this matter.

EXTENT OF EMBARGO ON JESUS’ MERIT

In this connection, R. G. Jolly offered quite pronounced foolish jeering at the thought that the merit of Jesus will be embargoed until the last Youthful Worthy has finished his pilgrimage of this “present evil world,” so we now give what Brother Johnson has to say about it in E-12:315,316,318:

“Not only the Bible teaches the amputative use of the merit for the elect, but facts prove it; for if the ransom had been actually given justice for, and then had actually been given to the elect, they would have been made actually perfect in body... Most wise, just, loving and powerful, therefore, has been the elective use of the ransom; and the same will be true of its non-elective use when it is due to be made. After the three elect classes of the present (Little Flock, Great Company and Youth­ful Worthies – JJH) will have left this world, and thus will no longer need the impu­tation of Christ’s ransom-merit, then it will be free to be used for the actual pur­chase of Adam and his race of the unbelief class. Divine wisdom arranged for that use of the ransom, which, by way of distinction from its use in an imputative or reckoned purchase, we call its application or actual purchase. (pp. 315,316) It proves the Second Advent, the judgment day, the resuscitation of the dead and future probation to be objects of the Kingdom for the blessing of the non-elect, since the ransom has in this life been used for the benefit of the elect alone.” (P. 318) (We realize, of course, that the Tentatively Justified – in the Court – who did not go on to full consecration – received some benefit while faithful thereto; but in the end of this Age, when all who fail to consecrate for elective purposes, are ejected from the Court, their Tentative Justification lapses and they cease to be of the Household of Faith altogether – even though they are faithful in the character development received while in the Court; They no longer have opportunity for conse­cration during the Faith Age. See E-4:405, 406. This teaching is in harmony with the Ransom, and with the teachings of both Messengers, despite the false statement of R. G. Jolly at this Philadelphia Convention that Brother Johnson taught Epiphany Campers Consecrated – JJH)

And here is substantiation from That Servant on the same issue: “It is our thought that with the closing of the ‘door’ of this Gospel Age there will be no more begetting of the Holy Spirit to the spirit nature. Any afterward coming to God through consecration, before the inauguration of the restitution work, will be accepted by Him, not to the spirit plane of being, but to the earthly plane. Such would come in under the same conditions as the Ancient Worthies who were accepted of God. The Ancient Worthies came in, no call being opened to them – the High Calling not being yet open, and the restitution opportunities not open. But they freely gave themselves up to God without knowing what blessings their consecration would bring, except that they had the intimation that they would, in the future life, have a “better resurrec­tion” than would the remainder of the world.

“Our thought is that whoever under such condition as these will make a full conse­­cra­tion to the Lord, leave all to follow His ways, and will live up faithfully, loyally, to that consecration, may be privileged to be counted as a similar class to those who preceded this Gospel Age. We know of no reason why the Lord would refuse to receive those who make a consecration after the close of the Gospel Age High Call­ing and before the full opening of the Millennium.” (Sept. 1, 1915 WT, Reprints 5761, col. 2, pars. 1,2)

From the two citations aforegoing, it is clear enough R. G. Jolly doesn’t hesi­tate at all to ridicule both Messengers in his desperation to proclaim his “strange fire” (false doctrine) of Campers Consecrated. “Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall”! (1 Cor. 10:11)

THE HEAD VS. THE HEART

During the latter part of his discourse on Psa, 23 R. G. Jolly also presented confusion extreme, as he applied Little Flock comments to crown-losers – one such being that he is so thankful God does not consider his head, but only his heart. This is certainly true of the Fully Faithful; but it is decidedly false of those in Azazel’s clutches. We present one simple question: Does not God give specific attention to the “fleshly minds” of crown-losers? From R. G. Jolly’s contention, one might wonder if R. G. Jolly is so befuddled by Azazel that he believes their “fleshly minds” are in their feet rather than in their heads.

Here again we present the case of Uzziah in 2 Chron. 26:16-21, a king who attempted to meddle into priestly matters, and was stricken with leprosy in his forehead, the same being a type of those who become unclean (spiritually “leprous”) through perversion of the Truth. And, just as in the type, Uzziah could not himself see his terrible condition without looking into a mirror, yet was clearly visible to all who looked upon him, so in the antitype, many who have become leprous and teach error, do not see their real condition (nor do others see it who are afflicted with the same malady – and are spiritually blind); yet it is clearly visible to others – ­to those who because of their faithfulness have clear spiritual vision. All such “lepers” would be well advised to look into the mirror of Truth if they do not wish to remain a leper unto the day of their death, as was true of Uzziah.

The Apostle James (Jas. 1:15) states this matter quite clearly: “Lust, when it is conceived (in the mind) bringeth forth sin; and sin when it is finished (in the heart) bringeth forth death.” Thus, the matter may be clearly summarized, “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation” (by rejecting malice, envy, hatred, etc., from his mind). The Fully Faithful do this, or failing therein, immediately seek the help of their Beloved Advocate to maintain that standing before God that does assure them He still considers them among “the pure in heart.” The Measurably Faithful fail to do this in more or less brazen manner, which causes them to lose their saintly standing and transfers them to the class Scripturally designated “Sinners,” and are eventually abandoned to Azazel (See E-15:525). Thus, the call by St. James, “Cleanse your hands, ye Sinners, and purify your hearts, ye doubleminded.” (Jas. 4:8)

“THY ROD AND THY STAFF”

This analysis of R. G. Jolly’s discussion of Psa. 23 would be not properly inclusive if we did not note his remarks on the last clause of verse 4: “Thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.” Here again he proceeded as though there were no dis­tinction in new creatures regarding the “rod’s” application – and this he did despite our oft-repeated reference to Brother Johnson’s emphatic line of difference between the Little Flock and Great Company as outlined in Vol. 15. The “staff” refers to the precious promises upon which God’s people lean in their journey up “Zion’s Hill” -­just as a footman leans upon his staff in his journey over rough and hilly country; and the “rod” refers to chastenings from the Lord, of which there are two clear dis­tinctions – even in the Fully Faithful: First, punishments for evils committed, and, second, pressure upon good qualities to refine and make such qualities even better and more fruitful in good works. This latter is so clearly and beautifully stated in our Lord’s picture of the vine: “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.... every branch that beareth fruit, He purgeth it (by benign chastise­ment – just as the owner of a vineyard prunes ‘suckers’ any dead parts from his fruit­ful vines), that it may bring forth more fruit.”

But the “rod of love” (the pruning knife) as applied to God’s Fully Faithful is in clear contrast with the “rod of affliction” wielded against the Measurably Faithful. Note now some comments by Brother Johnson in E-15:523 – “Since the Great Company’s willfulness makes them unamenable to moral suasion (the rod of love –JJH), the Heavenly Father uses for their recovery, first the rod of affliction, and that in two forms: First, He withdraws restraints from persons who oppose the partly good and partly evil work they do (as has been so clearly evident in the conduct and works of R. G. Jolly since October 1950 – JJH).... The second form with which He applies the rod to them is unfavorable circumstances.” These two forms of the rod are nowhere in the Bible even hinted as being “the rod of comfort” for the Fully Faithful in Psa. 23. Note now Brother Johnson’s conclusion of the matter on p. 525: “As in none of the Great Company do these two forms of “the rod” (of affliction) prove sufficient.... He delivers them over to Satan, called in Lev. 16:8 Azazel (averter, perverter).... and they come into such a condition as the priests disfellowship them, and thus with­draw all brotherly help and favor from them.... temporarily abandons them, and lets Satan buffet them (with the “rod of affliction” as contrasted with the “rod of com­fort” – JJH).... with great disappointments, troubles, losses, frustrations and suffer­ings.... which eventually lead them to come to themselves and retrace their steps.”

Certainly, all who read this contrast of the two “rods” without prejudice will readily discern the clear distinction, and will quickly conclude that the comments by R. G. Jolly were sadly lacking in comprehensive teaching. Half truths are often more misleading than whole errors; and this case in question is directly to the point. Our readers will do well to read for themselves what Brother Johnson has given in Vol. 15 on this subject, now so vital to a proper understanding of the Epiphany, which is the special “judgment day” of the Great Company; and if properly understood, the Lord’s people will readily discern R. G. Jolly’s nonsense about his own abandonment in an ‘‘attenuated” sense. Brother Johnson never allowed for such ‘sense’ in the case of the best of the Great Company. See E-15:525.

“THE SHADOW OF DEATH”

R. G. Jolly revealed the same confusion and unclear mind when he treated “the shadow of death” in Psa. 23 as though it were identical to the “shadow of death” given in Psa. 107:10. Even though the Fully Faithful walk “through the valley of the shadow of (Adamic) death,” there is not the slightest hint that they are also in darkness. “If any man follow Me (in full faith and obedience), he shall not walk in darkness” (John 8:12); but it is succinctly stated of those accused of Revolutionism in Psa. 107, that they not only “sit” (not walk) in the “shadow of death” (the second death is meant here), but they also “sit in darkness” (in much error). And directly be­cause of this sullied condition by crown-losers God “brings down their hearts with labor” (the “rod of affliction”), thus to bring “them out of darkness (error) and the shadow of death” (Psa. 107:12-14 – the second death, which casts an ominous “shadow” in their direction during their “uncleanness.”

The foregoing observations are by no means all; but we allow our readers to judge for themselves what merit attaches to our recitation of them. In his remarks at the Question Meeting R. G. Jolly stressed that the “sifters” are present, and they make notes of “every little thing” for purposes of criticism. Clearly enough, he him­self considers his perversions of teaching and practice as “little things” – and In this he seems to have the present approval of the great bulk of his adherents; but we would remind him – and all: ‘‘Be sure your sin will find you out.” (Num. 32:23)

“Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, Make you per­fect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is well-pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (Heb. 13:13,20,21)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Johnson:

I feel that I should report conditions as I find them here in Cleveland, Ohio, where I had the privilege of serving the friends in two meetings today, numbering in attendance 15 and 26 respectively. The brethren had mailed announcements of our meetings to some of the Society friends, whose addresses they had, and were wishing they could get word to the rest, when the Society Elders came to the rescue, mimeographing and mailing the following letter to their adherents in general:

“Dear Brother or Sister:

The Apostle says, ‘In the last days grievous wolves shall enter in, not spar­ing the Flock,’ and it is to protect the Lord’s sheep against such that the following is brought to your attention: There has been a meeting advertised for next Friday afternoon and evening, at the Labor Temple, the speaker to be ‘Pilgrim Brother Jolly.’ He is working against the Watch Tower Bible & Tract society, and this meeting is not being held under the auspices of the Cleveland Ecclesia of the I.B.S.A. For your guidance in the future, all notices of meetings will be signed by the Secretary, C. T. Gilchrist, or announced from the platform at the B. of L.W. Furthermore, in regard to literature, please note that all our reading matter bears the name of the International Bible Students Association, or The Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society (Not so the Golden Age). With Christian love, your brethren,

‘‘Board of Elders, Cleveland Ecclesia.” (Dated April 22nd, 1924)

By means of this letter, in which the Adversary overstepped himself, at least three Society friends came to our meeting; one saying that she proposed to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ had set her free, another speaking of the Cath­olic-like actions of the elders in the Society Class, and another saying that when he got the elders’ letter telling him not to come, he thought-that was just the reason why he should come and see what it is that the Society friends are so afraid of. He rejoiced in the “pure truth” he heard, and from which others had been trying to turn him, and handed me $5 for the Lord’s work, also promising carefully to study any Truths we might send him. The others also expressed deep interest. But what astounded me the most, dear Brother, was the truly Papal spirit, which, like its pattern – the Catholic Channel – this Little Catholic Channel is more and more showing. They capped the climax by posting “spies” at our door to warn friends not to come into our meet­ings, and to spot those who did so. Different ones came in reporting how three Society deacons (one in the afternoon and two in the evening) had tried to persuade them not to attend our meeting. I sent a brother out to invite them to come in. (QUITE A DIFFERENCE IN R. G. JOLLY’S ATTITUDE WHEN HE HAD THE TRUTH ON HIS SIDE: HE SURELY DOESN’T SEND ANY ONE TO INVITE THE “HOEFLEITES” OR THEIR ASSOCIATES INSIDE TO LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAYS TODAY; HE KNOWS HE NOW STANDS IN THE POSITION TOWARD THEM AS DID THE SOCIETY LEADERS TOWARD HIM IN 1924 WHEN HE WAS UNDER THE BENEFICENT INFLUENCE AND RESTRAINT OF BROTHER JOHNSON. – JJH) The one in the afternoon railed against us, calling the brother a Judas and adding that he was there to warn friends against us, and that he did not think we would have much of a crowd. No doubt they succeeded in scaring some away. But some who recognized that “the spirit of fear” (We would here instance R. G. Jolly, Fred Blaine, et al when they flee from the face of JJH. They don’t have the “spirit of fear” – Oh, No! They, too, claim to be protecting their flock – JJH) is not the spirit that the Lord hath given us, but comes from Satan and is one of his best tools (used in the spirit by the society today, as by the Catholics in the Dark Ages) to keep others in subjection and bondage, broke through the Society guards and later testified that the Lord had blessed them with Truth as a result. It almost seems impossible, dear Brother, that Truth friends could fall so low as to resort to the spirit of fear and intimidation and to such methods of the Dark Ages, in an effort to hold their flock. (Note: This is R. G. J. talking before he was abandoned to Azazel in October 1950; and before he was aware he was a crown-loser – JJH) Surely the darkness hates the light. Not being able to refute the Truth, they fear it. They have good reason to fear it, and to fear a loss of their members who might investigate it, and see how it puts to flight their many errors; but how can they so fall from grace as to use the same methods and tactics that Satan has always used, and which methods the Lord never used nor instructed His people to use? Alas! How are the mighty fallen! Now I long for the time when all our Little Flock brethren who are now languishing in such surroundings, shall be delivered! No doubt all of them, not knowing amidst the maze of so many Truth sects and divisions, where to turn to find the Lord’s green pastures, just stay where they are, crying to the Lord for deliverance. Thank God, He will hear the cry of every one of them in His own time and way! Your brother in His love and service,

(SIGNED)   R. G. Jolly

The foregoing is a reproduction of R. G. Jolly’s letter in the June 1924 Present Truth, to Brother Johnson, which we copied and sent to him at the Chicago Convention last year, with the following note from us:

To R. G. Jolly: A good letter by you – a very good letter, indeed! But it is truly sad in the extreme to note that after a full forty years of char­acter trial you now have retrograded to the identical technique toward me and mine that you so clearly exposed during the “good fight” under the supervision of the Epiphany Messenger. I remind you of this in keeping with Heb. 3:13, “Exhort one another daily, while it is called today (the Gospel Age “day” of salvation for the Elect); lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.” And with this cones my prayer for you personally that you “be not hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.”

(SIGNED) John J. Hoefle

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

We refrained from publishing this sooner in the vain hope that R. G. Jolly might recover himself somewhat from his present evil course; but such hopes have been sadly unrealized. Thus, we now make it public in the hope it may benefit some of our readers,

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Greetings of love in the Master’s Name from Sister ------- and myself. Yours of the 24th was gladly received. Thanks for the address; also Brother, for the answer to Mr. -------

Sister ------- and myself are pretty well at present. Sister ------- is much better, but not quite alright yet. It is Sister ------- at St. James that is now in bed, suffering with high blood pressure...... She asks that you make mention of her in your prayers.

We are glad to learn that you both are preparing to attend the Philadelphia Convention. I understand that Bro. ------- from Trinidad will be there. You met him at Bro. Roach’s funeral. I notice you will be having a meeting at New Jersey at the home of some dear faithful brethren. We pray the Lord’s blessings upon it. ............ I would say they are bringing in the Restitution before the time, in that they claim Rev. 22:11 has met its fulfillment in the year 1954. So there is no more opportunity to enter the Tentatively Justified state for Gospel-Age purposes, as no one can go higher than his then position after 1954; and those in the Court condition, prospective Youthful Worthies who did not consecrate, were placed back into the Camp condition with the truly repentant and believing Jews and Gentiles – ­where they are now being consecrated. If they are not consecrating for Gospel Age purposes, the only conclusion one can come to is that they are consecrating for Restitution purposes. “My Lord delayeth”!

Our loving regards to the dear ones with you, with our prayers

Yours by His Grace........... (TRINIDAD)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Greetings in the name of our Lord!

For a long time you have been due a letter from this house. First, the Memorial report: We had with us three friends. So we were 5.... One time during the last 16 years we had only the two of us...... We used your nice letter written just before Memorial as a part of our service, and it was very well received. Thank you for remembering us at that time. It added to our blessings.

How fast the old ones are leaving us! And they most surely will be missed. Even though we know that they must go, the news that they are gone comes to us as a shock. Then, too, it very forcefully reminds us that we, too, are nearing the. time of departure. What a consolation we have in the Truth at such times!...... We knew of Brother Roach only what appeared in your papers. We know, from experience, what it meant to break with some of the dearest Levite friends. Now he can rest.... Surely when that day comes we will all rejoice greatly together.

And we are still looking for you to come by here to see us. We could talk & talk. Give our love to all those whom you may contact in your travels. To you and yours, our love and best wishes,

Brother and Sister ------- (LOUISIANA)

NO. 112: AN ENERGY OF DELUSION

No. 112

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

In 2 Thes. 2:10-11 there is the prophecy, “Because they received not the love of the Truth... for this cause God shall send them strong delusion’’ – ‘an energy (frenzy) of delusion,” according to the Diaglott. That this prediction by St. Paul is pertinently applicable to the time in which we are living is clear enough from verse 8: “Then will be revealed the Lawless One (the Mystery of Iniquity, the Man of Sin), whom the Lord Jesus will consume with the breath of His mouth (by a clear revelation of the Truth), and annihilate by the appearing (the Epiphany) of His (second) presence (Parousia).” And the context Is clear enough, too, that this “energy of delusion” will come upon those who once professed to accept the Harvest Truth, but who failed to receive “the love (agape) of it” – the love which places the Truth first in their lives, as being the representative of God Himself, and who failed to ingraft that agape love into their hearts and minds.

Clearly enough, there are two classes who have failed to “receive the agape love of the Truth.” They are the Great Company and the second-deathers. Both of these groups have two main divisions – those in the nominal church, and those in Present Truth. The second-deathers in the nominal church are described by St. Paul as “those that know not God” (never having understood His “glory,” His glorious char­acter of Wisdom, Justice, Power and Love in perfect proportion), and those that “obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (those who outwardly embraced the Harvest Truth, but refused to “receive the love of that Truth”) – 2 Thes. 1:8; 1 Pet. 4:17. The Great Company also have similar division: Those in the nominal church who “loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (John 12:43) – those who continued to “sit in the gate of Sodom”; and those who joined the Harvest Move­ment. The latter groups have now gone mainly back into Babylon (Little Babylon, which they built), thus demonstrating clearly that they also !received not the love of the Truth.” Note the Berean Comments especially on 2 Thes. 2:10,11: “Great delu­sions are just before us, and some of these may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth.”

Viewed in the overall comprehensive sense, such as are now in Babylon are typed by Lot; and Gen. 19:1 states that “two angels came to Lot at even” – the evening of this Gospel Age. And the “two angels” (Messengers) who have spoken to antitypi­cal Lot at the end of this Age have been the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers. Some members of antitypical Lot did hearken to their voice, and fled from “that city which is called, spiritually, Sodom” (Rev. 11:8) when the figurative fire and brim­stone began to fall in 1914, and joined the Truth movement. But others of Lot’s kinsmen (“sons-in-law,” Gen. 19:14) yet remain in Big and Little Babylon unto this day. “The end (the ultimate object) of the commandment (the good Word of God) is (agape) love” (1 Tim. 1:5); and all those in God’s Household here in the end of the Age who failed to achieve that “end” are the ones described by St. Paul as those who “received not the love of the Truth.” Let us keep this truth clearly in mind: ALL who lost their crowns during the reaping time did so because they failed to receive “the love of the Truth”; and such are bardly in a position to discuss and clearly define something they do not have. Let us consider now some of these:

THAT EVIL SERVANT’S “ENERGY OF DELUSION”

We shall pass by the five Harvest siftings, and their respective slaughter­weapon men (Eze. 9:2), considering mainly the sixth slaughter weapon of Revolution­ism, because it has been by this last that the “energy of delusion” fully appeared. This Revolutionism slaughter-weapon has also made “manifest the counsels of hearts” – ­the means of revealing crown-losers to those who “continue in my word.” The first “energy of delusion” by J. F. Rutherford was his counterfeit “smiting of Jordan” in 1917-18, which resulted in a tenure in Atlanta penitentiary for him and seven of his confreres through their publication of The Finished Mystery – a work which they declared to be Jordan’s first smiting, but which was in reality the second smiting.

After their release in 1919 came then the real deluge of delusion, beginning at Cedar Point Convention after Labor Day in 1919. It was there that the ‘‘Golden Age’’ drive was initiated. We were there at the time, and many of the details are quite vivid with us to this day. JFR had it all minutely figured out how his trusting col­porteurs would secure four million subscriptions in one year at $1 per. We said at the time that his figures would not bear analysis – based upon his own statements, his anticipations were impossible. And time proved our conclusions correct. By the time his year was expired the sales of the Golden Age were so negligible that the newsstands would no longer allow them space, although the magazine was placed there on consignment, with no cost except space to the vendors.

Then followed his “Millions Now Living Will Never Die,” with the date fixed at 1925. And at about the inception of this second “delusion” came also the boast from JFR: “If I had a million dollars, I’d break the Devil’s back in one year!” Of course, such “profusion of words” could come only from one who had “received not the love of the Truth”; and by the time 1925 had clearly manifested his “strong delusion,” there had also come with it a flood of error – vitiation and perversion of one fundamental doctrine after another, until C. A. Wise, then Vice-President of the Society under JFR, was saying, along with others, ‘‘Brethren, I don’t know myself any more!” All this became worse and much worse until That Evil Servant’s death in 1943. Howbeit, JFR’s first fatal doctrinal Revolutionism was his perversion of Tentative Justifi­cation, followed eventually by his “Jonadab” spiritual hybrids – the same being the bosom comrade of R. G. Jolly’s perversion of Tentative Justifica­tion and his ‘‘Conse­crated Epiphany Campers” hybrids, the only difference between the Jonadabs and Campers being the name by which they are designated.

We quote the following from Brother Johnson on this fundamental faith age teaching:

“Knowing from Scripture that he would repudiate one truth after another until his understanding of his pet theories of God’s Word would be utterly darkened, we knew that we would not wait in vain for him to give his ‘darkness’ on the Tabernacle for light; and true enough, the June 1, 1920, Tower contains his con­fusion on the Tabernacle. He actually offers that which flatly contradicts our Pastor’s view on the subject as a progressive development (this ‘progressive’ development has a familiar sound as we review R. G. Jolly’s “Advancing Tabernacle Truth” in his July-August 1959 PT – See our Sept. 1, 1959, No. 52 for refutation – JJH) of that Servant’s thought! From such progress may the dear Lord deliver us!...... Indeed, the only reason for his article appearing seems to be to undermine confidence in our Pastor’s teaching on Tentative Justification. And to maintain his evident error, the tabernacle teachings must be twisted and distorted. It is unnecessary for us to treat further of Tentative Justification..... We refer to the matter here in order to emphasize the fact that JFR’s error on Tentative Justification is causing him to be confused on many Scriptural subjects, among others, on some of the symbo­lisms of the court and its gate. If we remember the foundation error of the article under review, we will have no difficulty in seeing that his superstructure must be false.” (See E-6:190-191)

All of this fits R. G. Jolly as though Brother Johnson were ‘refuting’ him and his present contentions on Tentative Justification, and on Tabernacle types, and his “justification” outside the linen curtain – outside the righteousness of Christ. (Please see May-June 1959 PT for RGJ’s delusion – “Progressive Tabernacle Picture”; and see our July 1, 1959, No. 50 Answer.)

JESSE HEMERY’S “ENERGY OF DELUSION”

Jesse Hemery also attended that Cedar Point Convention in 1919; and wholeheartedly endorsed the Golden Age, The Finished Mystery, and kindred delusions. This he contin­ued to do until 1926, when even he could no longer endure the “energy of delusion” that was coming from JFR. So he made open break – to promulgate his own “energy of delusion”­ claiming, as he did, that the Society was “That Servant” up to the time he left it in 1926. He then later contended that the whole Harvest movement, with its supporting chronology and prophecies, was a thing yet future. How he ever reconciled such views we have never learned; and we must limit our own statements herein to measurable hearsay. If we are correctly informed, he died in 1963 at age 96. An identical twin. to the Rutherford-Hemery debacle was born in the Jolly-Krewson controversy after 1952. J. W. Krewson also contended R. G, Jolly was “cleansed” until he began to withdraw from him in 1952; after which J. W. Krewson began leading his “cleansed nucleus,” declaring Jolly uncleansed.

SOME “ENERGY OF DELUSION” CLOSER HOME”

Since Brother Johnson’s death the LHMM has been in charge of R G Jolly, an admitted crown-loser – which admission also carries with it the indisputable fact that he likewise is among those who “received not the love of the Truth.” This statement needs no elaboration, because those who received that agape love could not possibly lose their crowns. “Put on love, which is the bond of perfectness,” says St. Paul in Col. 3:14. And this should alert us to expect an “energyofdelusion”  fromhim (R.  G. Jolly), in keeping with what has come from others of his kind. In fact, we should be very much surprised if such were not the case; just as we should be greatly surprised if other crown-losers also did not manifest the same “leprosy.” And, as we might expect, those crown-losers engulfed in “energy of delusion” have a definite dislike for each other. “The poor (spiritually) is hated even of his own neighbor.” (Prov. 14:20–See E-11:638, par. 1) Thus, it is no surprise at all that R. G. jolly has met with such abject failure in his “Attestatorial Service” toward his kinsmen in other Truth groups. They !now him from way back – just as Jesse Hemery and others knew J. F. Rutherford well.

And much the same may be said for J. W. Krewson, and his “energy of delusion,” In his paper No. 57, pages 97-105 he engages in considerable diatribe against JJH. Once more on p. 98, par. 1, he impeaches our Pilgrim status, despite Brother Johnson’s clear statement in E-10:249, bottom, that he had authority to appoint Epiphany Pilgrims. And it was by that authority that he gave us our pilgrim appointment – just as he also gave J. W. Krewson an evangelist appointment by that same authority. It will be re­called that J. W. Krewson made quite some ado about his Evangelist appointment “with the seal of the LHMM” – until we produced our pilgrim appointment carrying the same seal. Up to that time he had been flaunting his “written” credentials – all the while he was writing letters privately intimating we were a fraud, never having really re­ceived a full pilgrim appointment at all from Brother Johnson, because he thought we couldn’t produce a written proof of our appointment. This he also accentuated In some earlier papers. He has never since been quite brazen enough to cite his own (Evangelist) “appointment”; he merely contents himself with berating our pilgrim appointment. And this should be clear proof to all what manner of person he is. For any one with not quite so much “air” in his tires, our refutation of his drivel would have caused him to hide his face in shame. For our part we answer him: What you are speaks so loudly I can’t hear what you say. And in the face of all this, with his own limited appointment by the Epiphany Messenger, and the loud claims he now makes for himself, he has the unmitigated gall to quote us E-11:370, top, from Brother Johnson re “grasping for powers not given by God,”

And much the same may be said for his contentions re 1 Cor. 6:1-6, as givenon p.103, par. 2, of his No. 57. Of course, in this particular instance we realize only too well that J. W. Krewson is forced to more than his usual “profusion of words” here in his effort to appease his gullible supporters who financed his legal fiasco with R. G. Jolly. They’ll probably need ‘‘profusion of words,” and then more of the same, before they’ll be induced to finance further his “dreams. In all of this he offers irrefutable proof that he is R. G. Jolly’s close “cousin.”

“Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” (Luke 12:1) Brother Russell’s observation on 1 Sam. 15:13 is that Saul manifested consider­able hypocrisy (See Berean Comment) – a character quality to be found in those who “received not the love of the Truth.” The Truth is designed to produce just the opposite in the Fully Faithful: “The end of the commandment is love, from a pure heart (good intentions), a good conscience (without offense toward God and toward man), and an unfeigned faith” – ­an open countenance “without hypocrisy” (Jas. 3:17). But to all in whom “the command­ment” fails, God “will send them an energy of delusion,” after they lose their crowns (New Creatures) – or lose their Class standing before God in the case of unfaithful Youthful Worthies.

On p. 102 J. W. Krewson once more makes futile attempt to answer us on the correct date for the Memorial; and in this he uses the same technique as his “cousin” Jolly: He cites a “Proof” from Brother Johnson which offers a direct contradiction to his own contentions. In that 1933 Present Truth to which he refers Brother Johnson states with­out equivocation that the correct date for the Memorial is a Great Company developing truth, J. W. Krewson says in his answer to us in his Nos. 44 and 45 papers that it is a Little Flock developing Truth. In that paper Brother Johnson clearly admits that all previous Harvest dates for the Memorial were almost always one day wrong in the calcu­lation – and he humbly admits his own previous failure in that respect. J. W. Krewson ignores this item completely in his answers – a thing he is forced to do by his own contention that the purification of the date is a Little Flock developing truth. If his statement were true, this matter of the one-day difference would have been presented and “purified” by Brother Russell.

In that same 1933 Present Truth Brother Johnson also says the Memorial should be held “NEVER BEFORE THE VERNAL EQUINOX.” J. W. Krewson ignores this entirely in his present answer to us – and for good reason: He and “cousin” Jolly held their Memorial before the Vernal Equinox two years ago. But Brother Johnson had adequate reason for his conclusion: In the time of Christ the Passover was always kept when the sun was in Aries; and at that time the sun reached Aries at the Vernal Equinox. That is why the Jewish Encyclopedia states that the Passover is a Spring festival; that is why Brother Johnson says it is a Spring festival. That is why Brother Johnson said “Never before the Vernal Equinox.”

And be it noted that the “cousins” (Jolly-Krewson) are the only two persons of record in the entire Gospel Age who ever contended the slaying of the Passover Lamb could have a winter observance – as they had it two years ago. Therefore, by offering his ‘‘Proof’’ from Brother Johnson, J. W. Krewson is either deliberately falsifying, or he even yet does not understand what Brother Johnson wrote. In either case, he is a fine specimen of a “Pastor and Teacher”; and his false statements, and ignoring of certain truths, is sufficient for all to view with suspicion anything he may present on any subject. As we have previously written, “cousin” Jolly doesn’t hesitate at all to tell a falsehood any time it suits his convenience; and it would seem “cousin” Krewson is similarly afflicted. Here is one instance where our readers can prove for themselves who is the true, and who is the false: Just go back and read Brother Johnson’s article in 1933.

Yet, in the face of the foregoing, J. W. Krewson has the brazen effrontery to say we have “not been able to even remotely overthrow” his contention. We realize, of course, that this remark is for “home” consumption – to hoodwink those of his readers who do not read our papers. Thus, it is little wonder he strongly urges his readers not to read what JJH writes: They just might learn who is telling the Truth! But we are happy to report – in spite of such insistence by him – that some of his “cleansed nucleus” have actually solicited us to send our papers to them, assuring us that they do read them. We wouldn’t be one bit surprised if his feeble efforts in his last paper may have been prompted as a cover-up for some pointed questions that have come to him on this and other subjects.

In this paper J W. Krewson again resorts often to his favorite bit of spiritual “sleight-of-hand”: What one does through another he does himself. And we submit that almost any kind of spiritual distortion can be accomplished with that sort of inter­pretational contortion. But there is at least one Scripture he has not been able to pervert with his favorite slogan; namely, v. 8 of our text: “Whom the Lord Jesus will annihilate with the Epiphaneia of His Parousia.” Inasmuch as the Man of Sin still remains intact, there is one impregnable proof that we are yet in our Lord’s Epiphany. Many times have we presented this text to the “cousins” – and J. W. Krewson in particular; but up to now he hasn’t attempted any of his “sleight-of-hand” to answer us. Why not? Inasmuch as J. W. Krewson now contends that the Epiphany is already completed, he is hard pressed to assert that the “Lord Jesus” will also accomplish this “through him” (after his – JWK’s – Epiphany period is over); this ‘‘annihilation’’ just wasn’t accomplished in J. W. Krewson’s Epiphany period.

Now appears before us two “would-be” leaders, who were once under the benevolent influence of the last Messenger (and incidentally under his restraining hand until the Lord removed him from our midst in 1950) who are now revolution­izing against this clear Scripture describing what the Epiphany period would accomplish. They have openly and persistently revolutionized against this Harvest Truth, given to us by That Servant, and further elaborated upon by the Epiphany Messenger. Is it any wonder that such would be consumed with further and more pronounced “strong delusion” – ­“Seeing thou hatest instruction and castest my words (the faithful teachings of the last two Star Members) behind thee?” (Psa. 50:17)

“Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord way have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you: But the Lord is faithful, who shall stab­lish you, and keep you from evil.” (2 Thes. 3:1-3) “Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of His goodness, and the work of faith with power.” (2 Thes. 1:11)

Sincerely your brother,

 John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERALINTEREST

My dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace!

I am better and have used up all my amunition. I would like some of “Where are the Dead” and ‘‘Resurrection” tracts.... I have only one copy of the Resurrection left, and should have sent for more sooner.

Your last paper is helpful, and I am grateful. I do not know whether Bro. Jolly knows he is wrong or not, but he is, I think.

By His Grace ------- (CONN.)

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

Dear Brethren:

After reading your literature I’d like for you to send me copies of The Resurrection of the Dead, The Three Babylons, and others.

Sincerely, -------  (NORTH   CAROLINA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and peace through our Beloved Master!

Would you kindly forward tracts: 500 Where are the Dead 500 What is the Soul, 500 Resurrection of the Dead and 200 The Three Babylons? Enclosed is check for for the Truth fund.

Sister..... and I will no doubt serve some at the churches at the Shore during the summer months, D.v....... We are looking forward to going and hope the weather is good. With the 400 you sent we served some of the largest churches in ------- and the people received them very nicely, and Sister ------- and I enjoyed being able to do this all important work; and we thank God for the privilege. We want to remind you of our deep appreciation for your articles which we receive monthly, and for your lovely letters. They do help to strengthen us in the Way and give us renewed courage to press on. Be assured of our prayers on your behalf as we approach the Throne of Heavenly Grace that God will grant you strength to carry on this great work to His Honor and Glory, and for our good and profit......

Sister ------- joins in sending you, dear Bro. & Sr. Hoefle, and all the dear ones there with you in the Service our Warmest Christian Greetings.

Your Brother and Sister by His Grace, ------- (NEW JERSEY)

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

Dear Sir:

Your pamphlet of The Three Babylons was most welcome – also your answer re – The immaculate Conception, Jesus, could he ever die on the Cross as Son of God, etc. Your answers tell me of your deep study in Bible explanations, probably many years of personal devotion to that deep Book. To me the Bible is ever new, daily, hourly – as there is no past – no Future – in only this moment in which we live. So the Bible must be understood and lived by each hour of our existence. Correct?

Please tell me of your understanding of the years of Jesus from age 12 to 30.  Did he wander East – preaching, meditating – converting the people living in the far East? Thank you, Sir. Please also forward me the Divine Plan of the Ages. That would be most refreshing, spiritually.

Your thankful.friend -------  (CALIFORNLA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

May Grace and Peace be your continued portion, through Him whom we love and serve! Your monthly papers are a delight and the special edition of “The.Herald of the Epiphany” – Two Distinct Salvations” is excellent for volunteer work. Sister and I would like a few for distribution also some of The Three Babylons tracts. We still have a few left of the others. Some have acknowledged them – some saying they would read – whilst others have returned them with no comment.

We are amazed to find brethren holding the erroneous view of R. G. Jolly on Psalms 46 against the clear views of Brothers Russell and Johnson on Psalm 46. These brethren must be like the Jehovah’s Witnesses – no time to read the Star members’ writing; much too busy ‘on the work.’ We know the answer to some will be Matt. 7:22-­24 – Diaglott.

Yesterday –– pounds posted to Bro -------. Our continued love in the Lord to you, Sisters Wells and Dunnagan and all in the Faith, with our prayers; and asking for a continued remembrance in your prayers. Thank you.

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

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Christian greetings in the Name of our Blessed Lord!

Again it is my great pleasure to write you – also must acknowledge the receipt of --- pounds from Bro. -------. The July and August received and read with much satisfaction. They are compiled with such food for strength and life – and satisfies as nothing else could do. It pains our heart to see such brethren.who once were enlightened with Parousia and Epiphany Truth to talk such nonsenses.... Many who are in the LHMM do not believe the strange fire of Campers Consecrated... Christian love for yourself, Sr.  Hoefle and all.

Bro. ------- (JAMAICA)

NO. 111: "I WILL SEND THE HORNET BEFORE THEE"

No. 111

 (Reprint of No. 54 - with pertinent additions)

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

The exodus of Israel from Egypt was indeed a stupendous undertaking in material, physical strength and courageous determination. The burden upon Moses in that effort is probably beyond a sound evaluation by any human being living today. God knew this full well; and He gave Moses and the Jews abundant encouragement for the immediate present, and in His promises of future special helps. One of these promises is con­tained in Ex. 23:28: “I will send hornets before thee, which will drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee.” The word “hornets” in this text is a collective noun and should read “the hornet” – just as we might speak of the fly, the hawk, the wolf, etc.

Here was just one of the encouragements given to Moses – and repeated to the general assembly of Jews – to build up their courage for the task at hand. In v. 20 they had been told that God would “send an angel before thee to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.” This one promise should have been more than enough for ordinary men; but Jehovah was fully alert to the inferiority complex that had developed in the Jews during the hundreds of years of their slavery in Egypt – a con­dition which would certainly diminish the combative qualities of even the strongest, and develop a subservience not to be countenanced by God's people, “Jesus needed not that any should testify of man, for He knew what was in man”; therefore, among His last words was the counsel, “Let not your heart be troubled.” And this consolation was to free men, most of whom had never been in servitude as were the Jews.

The Jews had been long under the oppressive yoke, an experience that could not fail to deplete their combative qualities. Thus, humanly speaking, it is no great surprise that they quickly wilted under trialsome experiences, and often plagued the beloved Moses and Aaron for the “leeks, the melons, the onions, the garlic” which had been theirs in Egypt – (Numbers 11:5). Also, they readily forgot the precious promise of “the hornet before thee” when the ten spies brought back their evil report of Numbers 13. “There we saw the giants,” the spies had told them, “and we were .... as grass-hoppers ... in their sight,” This word “giant” is from the Hebrew “Nephilim,” the same word as found in Gen. 6:4, “There were giants (Nephilim – fallen ones) in the earth in those days.” With the horrifying tales of the great deluge that were handed down by “the fathers,” there had come the legend of the “giants” that existed before that flood – those virile creatures, half god and half man, that permeate all Greek and Latin mythology, described as demigods in the numerous accounts. Self-­evidently, the Jewish tradition was also impregnated with accounts of these “fiends from Hell” – creatures which they had never seen, but believed to be in existence in some hidden retreat. Thus, they were ready listeners when the ten spies reported to them that the Nephilim, the fallen ones, that race of super men, were the foes they must meet if they crossed Jordan into Canaan. ''And the people wept that night.... and murmured against Moses and against Aaron .... Would God that we had died in the land of Egypt.... let us return into Egypt”—Num., 14:1-4.

How easily is the fallen human heart and mind deceived and melted! Undoubtedly there were real giants in Canaan; Goliath of David's day 450 years later is proof sufficient of that. It is stated that Goliath was “six cubits and a span” (I Sam. 17:4), which would make him over nine feet tall, even using the shortest of the cubits (18”) in the calculation – a very formidable antagonist indeed in any hand-to-­hand combat. But Goliath, nor any of his kind, were of the Nephilim; God had attended to their annihilation in Noah's day. And David proved speedily enough that Goliaths in the camps of their enemies were creatures of frailty, vulnerable to the weapons, emotions, and senses, even as were the Jews themselves. Nor could any Goliath before nor since remain quietly in ambush behind rock or bush under the rousing sting of a hornet. It is said that the sting of six hornets has been suffi­cient to kill a horse, so we need no vivid imagination to evaluate the advantage that would be with the Jews as God would “send the hornet before them” – a promise which the Jews en masse so speedily disbelieved.

But, in addition to Moses and Aaron, who “fell on their faces,” Caleb and Joshua held faith in God's promise: “The land...is an exceeding good land...the Lord will give it to us.” But the people would not hear, preferring instead the forty years' wandering in the wilderness, at the end of which all males who had departed Egypt at twenty years and over were corpses in that wilderness – all except the two, Caleb and Joshua. Therefore, when God repeated his promise in Deut. 7:20 to “send the hornet” among the Jews' adversaries, Moses was talking to a new gener­ation – although it is clear enough from Joshua's farewell address that he had believed and had seen with his own eyes that “He is faithful that promised”; the Lord had indeed “sent the hornet before them.” (Josh. 24:12)

THE ANTITYPE

In considering this type, it should first of all be stressed that only the Hittites, the Canaanites and the Hivites are named in Ex. 23:28; whereas, at least a dozen nations are mentioned at various times – Amorites, Perrizites, Gir­gashites, Jebusites, Amalekites, Ammonites, Philistines, Maonites, Moabites – this list not including the Zidonians, whom the Jews never attempted to conquer, but usually held in friendly relationship. It will be noted, however, in E-12:516 that Brother Johnson lists only seven nations of Canaan whom Joshua conquered – the Canaanites (worldliness), Hittites (cowardice), Amorites (sinfulness), Perrizites (siftingism), Hivites (sectarianism), Girgashites (selfishness), and Jebusites (erroneousness). Brother Johnson also teaches that “the hornet” represented God's opposing and hurting power.

Why, we ask, are only three of the foregoing evils listed in Ex. 23:28? We be­lieve it is because those three sins have been most influential in retarding and de­stroying Christian character and progress all during the Gospel Age. These three – ­the antitypical Hittites (cowardice), Canaanites (Merchants – worldliness) and Hivites (sectarianism) – are the three evils St. Paul specifically opposes in 2 Tim. 1:7 – “God did not give to us a cowardly spirit (of the antitypical Hitites) but one of power, and of love, and of a sound mind”(Dia.).

The opposite of cowardice is courage, and the essence of courage is power (will power) and a strong heart. The quality of courage, when balanced by love and a sound mind, adorns a character as do diamonds and rubies the physical person. And God gives to all His faithful people the “spirit of power” – will power. “I can do all things through Christ, Who strengtheneth me,” says St. Paul; and his great will power is eloquent testimony to the truth of this statement. There was none of the antitypical Hitite (the cowardly spirit) in St. Paul. Courageous men of the world have some qualities and slogans that Christians may well emulate. One instructor, when training contestants for gruelling physical combat, always impressed upon them: “The other fellow is as tired as you are!” Thus, when the pace becomes so unbearably severe, and the body is crying for a respite, just remember your opponents feel exactly as weary as you do. Fear not them that are able to kill the body,” said Jesus; and St. Paul had ingrained these words into the very fibre of his heart and mind: “I shall not fear what man may do unto me,” for “the fear of man bringeth a snare.”

And the courageous will power of true Christians all during this Age is eloquent testimony that “God hath not given us the spirit of fear.” Even their worst enemies have often admired the courage of men physically frail, who “endured the cross, despising the shame,” even as Jesus Himself had done, St. Paul is an outstanding example – a small man of frail stature and with faulty eyesight, knowing that his head would soon be chopped off by the Roman ax, could write calmly to his beloved Timothy, “l am now ready to be offered.” And he makes only passing mention that “no man stood with me, but all men forsook me,” as he assured Timothy that the “Lord stood with me, and strengthened me,” Military leaders have been known to express openly the wish that they might have under their command just one company of men of such courage.

Secondly, the antitypical Canaanite (worldliness) is the very antithesis of (agape) love; and God has given His people this “hornet,” the spirit of love, to enable them to overcome worldliness. The two are exact opposites. “Love not the world (cosmos), nor the things in the world (cosmos). If any one love the world (cosmos), the love of the Father is not in him,” (I Jno. 2:15) The Canaanites were the lowlanders, the merchants who pursue vigorously the things of the world. “Where a man's treasure is, there will his heart be also”; consequently, one cannot be motivated by the spirit of (agape) love, and yet put his heart into “the things of this world” – this cosmos.

During this Age God's people have been called out of this world (antitypical Egypt) just as certainly as the Jews were taken from literal Egypt; and the lure to return to old habits is perhaps even more prevalent now than it was then. And a “Great Multitude” (Rev. 7:9) has returned at least partially to old haunts, old habits, old social conditions; while some have returned fully, and the earth (the present social order) has swallowed them up – just as it did with Korah (Num. 16). Thus, uncounted numbers have sold their birthright for “one morsel of meat” (Heb. 12:16), while the Fully Faithful have “overcome the world” – just as did their Captain.

Thirdly, the antitypical Hivite (sectarianism) is the extreme opposite of “the spirit of a sound mind.” Note Brother Johnson's description in E-4:291 (47): –

“Sectarianism is a great sin; for it does not act from devotion to the Truth, the Truth arrangements and the Spirit of the Truth (which virtues are the Gospel-Age “inheritance of the land”—JJH), but from devotion to partisanship. The Truth, its arrangements and its spirit are by it neglected or antagonized whenever this is in the interest of the sect. Their actual, though not verbal motto is: My party, I stand for it, right or wrong.”

And, further in E-4:299 – “The works of sectarianism are wrath, strife, envy, prejudice, partiality, enmity, persecution and mis­repre­sentation of the faithful, approval of certain evils and disapproval of certain good things of the Truth and its arrangements.” Certainly, we can find none of “the spirit of a sound mind” in these reprehensible evils.

Sectarians in large measure use the weapons of Goliath, and they have received from the faithful the identical answer given to him by David: “Thou comest to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of hosts.” (1 Sam. 17:45) Note the close similarity in these words to those used by Jesus in answering Satan's temptation for Him to “love the world”: “It is written”—Matt. 4:10. But the Measurably Faithful fail in this respect, choosing rather the methods of this world to accomplish their aims – “Azazel deceives them into believing they will accomplish great works, win great numbers, gain great favor. The upshot of it all, however, is great disappointments, troubles, losses, frustrations and failures, as is shown of them in Psa. 107:12” (E-15:525) – just as R. G. Jolly even now, disregarding these warnings of the Priests, makes great uproar about helping the poor heathen in Africa, all the while he actually lost 7.4% of his subscribers to the Present Truth in 1963. We wonder if he is telling the people in Africa about his “great works” in America – in like manner as he is telling his trusting adherents in America about his “great works” in Africa! This “sleight-of-hand” is common usage with the “worldly” of our time.

The sectarian spirit is one of the evidences of Great Company uncleanness – ­a clear proof that they have not extirpated the antitypical Hivite from their characters. The fully faithful gain complete victory over the Hittite (cowardice), over the Canaanite (worldliness), and over the Hivite (sectarianism); the fully un­faithful make full compromise with these evils, and thus, shipwreck of their future; the Great Company make partial “covenant with them, and with their gods” (Ex. 23:32) –­ which is the direct cause of them losing their crowns. The fully faithful, who wage successful warfare against these evils, gain the Truth and the Spirit of the Truth as their unchangeable possession – a goodly prize indeed for fighting “the good fight” – ­“more than conquerors.” “Therefore, brethren, more earnestly endeavor to do these things, for thus richly will be furnished to you the entrance into the aionian Kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”

We may also offer a secondary application to “the hornet,” as the sharp stinging truths in the Bible. Who of us has not had the experience of quoting a pertinent annihilative text to some gainsayer; then see him jump from his chair as though stung by a hornet! A good instance of this is to be found in Acts 21:28: 'Men of Israel, help!” Those Jews had been “stung” by St. Paul's teachings to the point of willing to murder him. But Paul here again gave testimony that he had eliminated the anti­typical Hittite (cowardice) from his character, as he calmly asked the Roman commander: “I entreat thee, permit me to speak to the people.” How many would have been only too glad to “call it a day” after being rescued from a shrieking murder-bent mob; but St. Paul, “good soldier” that he was, gave again eloquent witness that “God did not give to us a cowardly spirit.” And may his example be a strong stimulus to all who strive to “inherit the land” – the Truth, and the Spirit of the Truth.

EPHRAIM TO THE BATTLE

This treatise would be hardly complete were we to omit some comment on Judges 7:24-25, where we are informed “the men of Ephraim.... took the two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb .... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon on the other side of Jordan.” (See E-5:226-229) Oreb (raven) represents Sectarianism – ­just as does “the Hivite” in Ex. 23:28 – and Zeeb types Clericalism; and those two prince errors are the same as typed by the two golden calves which Jeroboam constructed, one in Bethel and the other in Dan – (see 1 Kings 12:26-30). And the victory over these princes is designated specifically as going to “the men of Ephraim” (typical of the Youthful Worthies in this Epiphany period), with no mention whatever made of the Great Company. This, Brother Johnson explains, is because

“The Lord counts as overcomers.... only those who first in their own characters overcome the disposition underlying such doctrines and practices.... just as only the 144,000 are counted victors over the Beast and his Image, tho, as we know, the Truth section of the Great Company opposed the Beast and his Image, but... are not more than overcomers .... however much they verbally preach and zealously work against them .... On the other hand, from the type we infer that the Youthful Worthies overcome in their own characters the spirit of Sectarianism and Clericalism... This consideration should arouse the Great Company to cleanse themselves” – (E-5:229)

It is well to stress here that sectarianism is of Satanic origin – a product of Azazel. And, as Brother Johnson has so clearly taught, the Great Company serve Azazel with the bad part of their minds (the 'fleshly mind' that must be destroyed if they are to be saved in the Day of the Lord Jesus), as they also serve God with the good part of their minds. That is why James refers to them as “doubleminded.” Thus, pro­moting and developing sectarianism with the bad part of their minds, they have built up the various sects in Big and Little Babylon, instead of fighting this evil as the Saints and fully faithful Youthful Worthies have done unto complete victory in their own characters. And, while individual Great Company members may suppress this evil in themselves, the vast majority will cling tenaciously to their various sects until the Lord Himself separates them from those sects by extreme scourging in Armageddon through the destruction of their sects. But, for the present, we are safe in conclud­ing that any Great Company or Youthful Worthies who manifest the sectarian spirit are actually serving Azazel, regardless of the denials they may put forth to the contrary. That is why the Great Company are not mentioned as victors in the battle against Oreb and Zeeb; theirs is not a “more than conquerors” victory, because their cleansing from this great sin is forced upon them when “their hearts are brought down with labor.” (Psa. 107:12)

We should ever keep in mind that it was the Little Flock's faithfulness in antitypical Gideon's First Battle that emphatically attested they were of the “very elect.” And we conclude from this that it will be the faithfulness of the Youthful Worthies in the battle against antitypical Oreb and Zeeb that will eventu­ally determine them “worthy” to occupy places of rulership in the Kingdom with the ''worthies': of the ages preceding this Gospel Age. Inasmuch as the Great Company do not make full conquest of these sins within themselves, they cannot serve as examples to those Youthfuls who accept their leadership. It is rather the example of the Fully Faithful that has been their help and instructor thus far – and will continue to be so to the consummation of the Epiphany. It is quite probable that those who fail in this conquest will find themselves either back in the world or among the quasi-elect in the Kingdom, and not among the fully faithful Worthies – although some of them have been the loudest professors, just as was true of the Great Company vs. the Little Flock. This should certainly cause each one to “examine himself” to determine whether he is performing “in sincerity and in Truth” his part in this “good fight” against antitypical Oreb and Zeeb, or whether he be ''wallowing'' in the mire of the great sin of depraved Sectarianism.

We believe, tho, that a warning is here appropriate, lest any come to speedy judgment toward those now enmeshed in these evils. We are told in Ex. 23:29, “I will not drive them out (the Hittite, Canaanite and Hivite) from before thee in one year: lest the land become desolate and the beast of the field multiply against thee.” This is just another way of saying what Brother Russell said about grand characters –­ they do not spring up mushroom-like overnight, but are fine-grained and strong like the olive tree – the result of years of determination in fighting “the good fight.” Thus, the Lord allows each one time sufficient for his needs to “inherit the land” (the sphere of the Truth and its spirit); and it is only the “Lord who looketh on the heart” that can give equitable evaluation to each one. It should be sufficient for each one that he determine for himself that he is conquering the Hittite (cowar­dice), the Canaanite (worldliness), and Hivite (sectarianism) from his own character and giving that assistance to others of his brethren who are “of the Truth.”

And to all who fully conquer the antitypical Hittite, Canaanite and Hivite, eliminating them from their characters, to such the promise is sure: “He who follows me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” (John 8:12 – ­Dia.) And further, in John 12:35, “He who walks in darkness knows not where he is going”; and this is the specific penalty meted out to the Measurably Faithful in Matt. 25:30: “Thrust the unprofitable servant (The Great Company – See Berean Comment) into outer darkness” – into error – error of doctrine, such as Campers Consecrated, and error of practice, such as publishing a million Do-You-Knows prematurely, etc. The Manna Comment for March 26 pointedly defines the “darkness” of 1 Thes. 5:5 as ERROR – but “We (all who purify their characters from the three evils herein discussed) are not of darkness”; even as we are also clearly taught in Psa. 107:10 that the Great Company who fail in this respect are “such as sit in darkness.”

“He that hath an ear, let him hear what the spirit saith unto the Churches” (Rev. 3:29) – by the “voice behind thee” (Isa. 30:21), the “voice” for our time being the faithful and true teachings (based upon the Old and New Testaments) of That Wise Servant and other faithful pilgrims of this Harvest time. Thus, we urge all to con­tinue in this “good fight,” – “abounding in the work of the Lord at all times, know­ing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord,” (1 Cor. 15:58—Dia.)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – Is JWK “in harmony with the Harvest Truth” when he teaches the Worthies share with the GC in the sin-atonement for the world's willful sins?

ANSWER: – J. W. Krewson is not only wrong in this matter, but he is in complete “dis” harmony with the Harvest Truth.

Here is what he says on p. 51 of his May-June No. 56: “Second, with the gradual unfolding and elaboration of the Harvest Truth, there has come the comforting understanding that the suffering of the elect classes relative to their humanity, bear a relationship to sin-atonement. With the Little Flock this was as part of the sin-­offering and concerning the three Levitical Classes, pertains to atoning for the World's willful sins.”

Then, on p. 68, par. 1 he states: “It (his present teachings—JJH) is the current Harvest Truth....in harmony with Parousia-Epiphany teachings.” In making such a claim, he – with his “cousin” R. G. Jolly – walks the identical path of That Evil Servant, who loudly and repeatedly made similar claim, all the while he was murdering one real Harvest Truth after another in setting aside the “meat in due season” given by That Faithful Servant.

Note now Bro. Johnson's clear presentation on this question: “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 the Great Company sufferings differ from those of these three classes.” (JWK contradicts this teaching by the Epiphany Messenger, as he sets aside the real Harvest Truth and substitutes his 'current' Harvest Error—JJH) See E-12:275

The Great Company's sufferings differ also from those of the other three elect classes because their suffering is for their own partially willful sins – the sins that caused them to lose their crowns. Such stripes become very acute during their abandon­ment – when they are fully abandoned to Azazel – which reforms the reformable among them. (See E-15:526) Neither the Little Flock nor the Worthies share in the Great Company’s wilderness experience, because these fully-faithful classes never receive fit-man buf­feting experienced by the Great Company.

When the “cousins” proclaim that their various perversions are in reality just “unfolding and elaboration of the Harvest Truth,” they are simply resorting to the same kind of brazen falsehood as did That Evil Servant. Their “unfolding and elabor­ation” is really vitiation and conglomeration – a rejection of one basic Harvest Truth after another; they both claim “HARMONY” with the Laodicean Stars, all the while they are actually giving them the “Judas kiss” – at the same time yelling “sifter,” “false teacher,” etc., at us for “contending for the Faith once delivered unto the Saints (Star Members)” on:

(1) The Abandonment Process of the Great Company. Both “cousins” pervert this teaching as set out in E-15:525; E-4:210 and many other places.

(2) The Epiphany period and Time of Trouble being one and the same. Both “cousins” pervert this teaching.

(3) The condition of the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture (of the Epiphany period), on which both “cousins” have new and different views from the two Star Members, displacing what they taught with their own vagaries.

(4) Both “cousins” have produced a “new” (false) doctrine in their Epiphany Campers Consecrated and quasi-elect consecrated – just as JFR produced his brand of “dedicated” Restitutionists – such “strange fire” perverting in varying degree the doctrine of election and free grace,

(5) Both “cousins” have produced forced parallels to fit their varying needs.

(6) Both “cousins” have declared that the last Saint was glorified in 1950 – long before Armageddon – in defiance of what both Messengers taught thereon.

(7) Now JWK comes up with another doctrinal perversion on the sin-atonement; and we wonder if “Cousin” Jolly will join hands with “Cousin” Krewson in this latest brainchild – this new “unfolding and elaboration” of the sin-atonement – thus, following his Teacher once more as he did on Campers Consecrated, Bro. Russell's Epiphany Paral­lels, John's Beheading, etc., to be later left with the humiliating task of defending and “contending” for the faith (ERROR)” delivered unto him by his once beloved “cousin” J. W. Krewson.

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

THE JULY-AUGUST PRESENT TRUTH

Since writing the foregoing answer, R. G. Jolly's “current Present Truth” has come to hand, in which he uses the identical technique of “Cousin” Krewson – stating one thing, then offering a direct contradiction to his error from the Star Members' writings. Note specifically p. 55 (12), where he states that Jesus as God's Execu­tive has been building the Epiphany Camp since 1954. Then he has the brazen effrontery to offer as his “proof” E-11:473! We suggest our readers give close note to this, be­cause Brother Johnson offers a direct contradiction here to R. G. Jolly (RGJ self-evidently relying upon his adherents to take his word for the citation, without bother­ing to read it), the same as Brother Johnson offers for the errors of J. W. Krewson:

“Jesus' work as Executive.... will cease with the faith-justified (those remanded to the Camp in the “finished picture” – which includes some of R. G. Jolly's Con­secrated Campers—JJH) when their faith-justification lapses (when they are ejected from the Court into the Camp as Restitutionists, for Millennial purposes, when the Kingdom proper is set up at the beginning of the Mediatorial reign—JJH) which seemingly will occur in every case by Oct, 1954, according to Rev. 22:11.” – E-11-473 (In this same paragraph Brother Johnson tells us that He will continue as Executive with the Little Flock, Great Company and Youthful Worthies – in contrast to those ejected from the Court wherein such Executiveship ceases—JJH)

Also, when Brother Johnson said in E-10:114 “no more consecrations for Gospel-Age purposes after 1954,” he also said NO MORE TENTATIVE JUSTIFICATION when Rev. 22:10,11 would operate. And in another instance Brother Johnson has said, “Tentative Justifica­tion ceases to operate when the Gospel Age ceases.” Therefore, if “Gospel-Age pur­poses” have been accomplished, why is R. G. Jolly still teaching Tentative Justifica­tion? Our answer: Because he is forced to do so in support of his “strange fire” of Epiphany Campers Consecrated. Even “Cousin” Krewson was a little too crafty to stumble into this blunder with his quasi-elect consecrated, as he allowed “cousin” Jolly to set out his various errors and noted our refutations (although his brand of “strange fire” is different in name only from R. G. Jolly's “strange fire” of Epiphany Campers Consecrated. Both brands present only a new twist of the same quality as J. F. Rutherford's Jonadabs).

Once more we stress the fact that Tentative Justification is a faith justifica­tion for a faith Age only (the Gospel Age and its last special period – the Epiphany). Rom. 5:1 is directly to the point: “Being justified by faith.” It is this justifi­cation by faith that gives “peace with God” – introduces “into this favor in which we stand” (v. 2, Dia.) – places such persons in position to “present” themselves in har­mony with Rom. 12:1, doing which then gives them the “peace of God which passeth understanding” so long as they abide in His Word and Spirit. When Brother Johnson offered his interpretation of Rev. 22:10,11 in E-10:114, he had all this clearly in mind; and it was this clear logic that caused him to conclude that there could not possibly be any more tentative (faith) justification once Gospel (faith) Age purposes had been accomplished. As he himself stated: “It would be useless” when the time arrives for Rev. 22:10,11 to apply. Thus, we are forced to accept one of the two choices: Either Rev. 22:10,11 did not reach fulfillment in 1954, or Tentative Justi­fication is no longer operative for new believers.

It will be noted R. G. Jolly offers Questions for his readers to “study” his errors; and we suggest to any of our readers who may converse with Present Truth readers, that they call their attention to Brother Johnson's Questions on p. 545 of E-11, last Question at bottom of page, and two at top of p. 546. Then ask them if they can reconcile R. G. Jolly's teachings with Brother Johnson's teachings. And all the while R. G. Jolly is loudly proclaiming his “harmony with Parousia-Epiphany teach­ings” – just as does “Cousin” Krewson; but offering direct contradiction in the same article (a technique that That Evil Servant found most effective with his 'sleepy' adherents, a technique these “cousins” don't have any qualms about using to further their particular brand of leadership). It seems unbelievable that their readers can be so sleepy and obtuse that they merely “close their eyes, open their mouths, and swallow” the contradictions and gross errors that are thus fed to them. ''How readest thou?”

On various occasions we have directed attention to Brother Johnson's intention in 1950 to make Vol. 16 contain his analysis of Genesis-Leviticus-Deuteronomy; and that R. G. Jolly had been publishing Brother Johnson's Genesis interpretations, but injecting his own errors into the Star Member's teachings. It seems he is now con­tinuing his evil practice with Leviticus; and we once more offer 2 Chr. 26:16-21, wherein is given us the type of King Uzziah, who became leprous for meddling in priestly matters – for which he became “a leper unto the day of his death.... cut off from the House of the Lord.” This clear type is a warning to all to refrain from approaching things in the “temple of the Lord” which are forbidden to them.

R. G. Jolly's impudent boldness in ignoring this warning is proof positive that he is still uncleansed – is still stricken with Great Company “leprosy” (See E-4:257, 258). And, if he continues therein, he, too, will remain “a leper unto the day of his death” – that death from which there is no return. And all who clearly discern his present condition should “haste to go out from him” – as did the Priests in the case of the typical leprous King Uzziah. Be it noted that with Uzziah “the leprosy rose up in his forehead” – a clear declaration of unclean teachings (in the intellect) of his antitypes; and is a solemn warning to avoid all teachers who offer “strange fire” (false doctrine, such as Campers Consecrated, with its attendant perversion of Tenta­tive Justification). ''He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear.”

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in the Master's Name!

On behalf of our Ecclesia, I wish to express our gratitude and appreciation of your recent visit to us, and for so ably conducting the funeral ser­vice of our dear Brother Roach. It was a great comfort to us to have you and Sister Hoefle in our midst at the time of our bereavement. Your admonition and encourage­ment helped us much.

We are endeavoring to be steadfast and unmovable and will always apply to you for help when we need it, as you promised. We need your prayers. God bless you and our dear Sister Hoefle, Please give our love to the friends there.

  Sincerely your sister ------- (Secretary) – (TRINIDAD)

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

Dear Sir:

Exceedingly sorry in waiting so long in answering your kind letter.... Your literature I found in a bus in Beverly Hills – perhaps left there with a Purpose. Glad I found it, Sir. A wonderful stream of knowledge, blended with true statements reveal to me that you have a keen insight of Biblical explana­tion – a flair of interest in writing and clear adaptation of Life's richest Book. The Bible is ever new – but must be understood literally and esoteric – all in there pertain to each and all of us regardless of age. The ontology and cosmology taught through its content is Heavenly Blessed! We all are walking the Road to Damascus like Paul; some day we shall see that Light according to our unfoldment and spiri­tual Revelation. Your literature is deeply interesting – forceful, revealing and awakening. In forgetting one's self, your thoughts, creative and sincere, will meet the Reader. I must read your Lessons again to obtain further benefit thereof, please –

Would you please explain your interpretation of the following Phrases of the Bible: The Immaculate Conception; Jesus the Son of God – His death. Could the Son of God really die? Remember, He came through in the sepulcher, since he said to the woman, Please do not touch Me, I am not yet .... (He was still in the ethereal Body?).

Trust I have not taken too much of your valuable time in bringing you these questions. Thank you so very much! Sincerely yours ------- (CALIFORNIA)

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

Our Special Effort in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle will begin Sunday, Oct. 18 and end Sunday, Nov. 15, which will include four weeks and five Sundays. Any who wish to continue in this “good fight” with us are invited to order the pertinent literature early. Our Nos. 1, 2 and 3 may be used in serving at Church doors, and individually; and our No. 5 may be used as follow-up toward individuals who manifest further interest. All free – and postage prepaid, of course.

The Epiphany Messenger began this public effort in 1920 (See E-5:237, top), and continued these Special Efforts until his passing in October 1950. He told us that the fully faithful would pursue these two King Errors – Zebah (Eternal Torment) and Zalmunna (Consciousness of the Dead) – unto the completion of the Battle; and it was with this in mind that we produced the pertinent literature. Since Brother Johnson's demise there has been no Special Effort designated by the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement (the Movement the Epiphany Messenger founded), which further prompted us to renew the Epiphany Arrangements. The Epiphany Messenger designated a special period in the Fall to honor the Memory of That Faithful and Wise Servant; and since Brother Johnson also finished his course in October, we now honor him by continuing in the Truth and its Arrangements for the Epiphany period. We also honor the Epiphany Messenger by continuing to attack the errors of Little Babylon; and we have produced the Three Babylons tract for that “good fight,” The battle is not yet over, and we exhort our faithful brethren to continue therein in loving zeal “unto its completion.” It is our privilege to honor those whom God has honored; and we invite all who are of like mind to join with us in the prayer, “God bless their memory.” (1 Tim. 5:17)

NO. 110: THE FULLY FAITHFUL VS. THE MEASURABLY FAITHFUL

No. 110

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

Both Brother Russell and Brother Johnson offered voluminous comment on the two classes presented in our heading, in much of which they included also the other two elective classes – the Ancient and Youthful Worthies; but we shall confine ourselves in this treatise on the Fully Faithful and the Measurably Faithful of the New Creation, with the reservation that our comments would also apply in principle to the fully faith­ful and measurably faithful Worthies. With the New Creation there is set forth in the Scriptures a very clearly defined dividing line between the Saints and the crown-losers, which is not treated at all in considering the Worthies; thus, we cannot with certain­ty declare that there is a measurably faithful class among them that will gain an elec­tive salvation. But there is no such doubt respecting the measurably faithful of the New Creation, as they are shown in numerous types and designated by such names as “sinners” (Jas. 5:20), as “subject to bondage” (Heb. 2:15), as “prisoners in the dun­geon” (Ex. 12:29), “such as sit in darkness and in the shadow of death” (Psa. 107:10), etc.; but those of them who eventually gain spiritual life are properly now included in “the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven.” (Heb. 12:23)

The fully faithful of this New Creation are also described in the Scriptures as “obedient children” ( 1 Pet. 1:14), with the measurably unfaithful characterized as children who walk in forbidden paths – while in the typology of Lev. 16:8 they are designated respectively as “one goat for the Lord, and the other for Azazel.” (See margin) This secondary class is thus styled because they have expended much energy as the principal human performers for Azazel (the Devil) in building up the great systems of error that have arisen during the Gospel Age; but it is well that we keep in mind that they have also accomplished much good, the same being eloquently typed in the offerings of the princes of Israel as outlined In Numbers 7. Those princes type the leaders of this secondary class in their good works; whereas, King Saul of Israel types those same leaders from about 200 AD. up to Armageddon in many of their Azazelian deeds. In this latter type Saul portrays the measurably faithful leaders in contrast to the Prophet Samuel, who typed the fully faithful of this Gos­pel Age, especially their leaders. Those two classes are also pictured in a more limited way by the herdmen of Abraham (type of the fully faithful) and the herdmen of Lot (type of the measurably faithful. (Gen. 13:5-13)

THE WISDOM OF GOD – THE WISDOM OF THIS WORLD

In the type last mentioned above, “Lot beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere.... like the land of Egypt.... Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan; and Lot journeyed east.... and pitched his tent toward Sodom. But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly.... And Lot sat in the gate of Sodom.” (Gen. 13:10-13; 19:1) In this choice Lot gives clear por­trayal of those measurably faithful leaders who have built up Great Babylon during this Gospel Age. The “well-watered” plains of Jordan offered ease and plenty, and these inducements caused him to ignore completely the kind of people who would be his companions. “And Lot journeyed east.” In this he pictured the builders of Babylon accepting the wisdom of this world in preference to the wisdom of the Lord-­“ Come and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly of heart.” In 1 Kgs. 4:30 it is stated that “Solomon’s wisdom exceeded the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt” – thus, telling us that the Epiphany Solomon would be wiser than the children of this world. And those of us who knew him well give ready witness that Brother Johnson had a clearer understanding of present world affairs than any other human being.

‘‘And Lot sat in the gate of Sodom.” The gate entrance into the city would be the place of chief prominence; and who will not agree that those who built Great Babylon have “loved the praise of men more than the praise of God”? Lot’s choice of Sodom eventually caused him to lose all he had and all he acquired in that locality – just as those here in the end of this Age will also lose all “the fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and gold and precious stones, and pearls” (Rev. 13:16) they have accumulated by the use of worldly wisdom. Thus, all during this Gospel Age (after the Apostles died) antitypical Lot (the crown-losers, and especially their leaders, such as Augustine, John Calvin, etc.) has occupied the place of chief promi­nence – in the eyes of the world, that is – and sat in the gate “of the great city, which is called, spiritually, Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.” (Rev. 11:3)

SAMUEL AND SAUL

In 1 Sam. 10:1 we are told that “Samuel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon Saul’s head.... because the Lord hath appointed thee to be captain over His inheritances” Here was strange procedure indeed – Samuel, the greater, anointing Saul, the lesser, to be leader over God’s faithful Israel, even while Samuel, the Judge and Prophet dwelt among them. This can only be explained by understanding that God there made a type of the Gospel Age, which would reveal the course of events after the Apostles passed away, ‘Saul was a choice young man, and goodly.... not among the children of Israel a goodlier person than he: from his shoulders and upward he was higher than all the people.” (1 Sam. 9:2) In this he portrayed the gifted men of this Age, many of whom were much more accomplished than the Star Members who had “laid hands upon them.” The writings that some of these crown-losers have left are still more highly esteemed than are the writings of the Star Members themselves. As example, Elder White of the Adventists, who is much more prominently mentioned among them than is their founder William Miller. And in our own time J. F. Rutherford is regarded much more highly by the Jehovah’s Witnesses than Brother Russell, the latter’s books not even being read any more in that sect; although JFR’s errors are still prevalent there, clearly manifesting to the enlightened fully faithful that their adherents are more willing to “walk in the counsel of the ungodly” in blind sectarian devotion rather than look into their background and “search the Scriptures.” Antitypical Lot has indeed “sat in the gate of Sodom.”

In all of this there is strong confirmation of the Truth that “Man looketh on the outward appearance.” Even of our Lord Himself it is written, “When we beheld Him, there was no beauty that we should desire Him”; thus, the High Priest, the Scribes and the Pharisees were embraced by the large majority of Israel. And in thus doing, “Israel hath lost that which he seeketh.” Nor will there be any cessa­tion of this procedure until this Age has fully ended; the measurably faithful will continue to barter future reward for present advantage (until Armageddon has freed them from their bonds). And, with such forceful types to guide us, we should “think it not strange,” as we see this enactment continuing before us. Let us remember that at the outset King Saul was a very meek and humble man; but his is an outstanding proof that few people can stand great prosperity. It was not long until he was ignor­ing Samuel, whom all Israel knew to be the prophet and Lord’s mouthpiece in Israel at the time, which subsequently led to his complete undoing. He is one of the outstanding examples in all history of a man who came from nothing (“he hath hid himself among the stuff” – l Sam. 10:22) – rose to the place of chief prominence among his people, then retrograded to nothing; his end being much more humiliating than his humble beginning.

“THOU HAST DONE FOOLISHLY”

From the very outset almost all Israel gave Saul full embrace – “All the people shouted, and said God save the king.” (1 Sam. 10:24) In this our pity and sympathetic understanding surely go out to King Saul. He had been just a humble herdman from the smallest Tribe in Israel, and one of the least prominent families in that Tribe of Benjamin, and a young man of no experience at all in such a matter. Such great exaltation could hardly be expected to do other than magnify his own importance in his own mind (if he didn’t have a complete pure and honest heart and kept it). Thus, the admonition is given in 1 Tim. 5:22, “Lay hands hastily on no one” – don’t be in a hurry to place novices in the eldership, or give prominence to those unable to bear such promotion.

Therefore, it was not long before Saul decided to run ahead of the Lord, the record of which is given in 1 Sam. 13:8-16. When Samuel was not immediately avail­able, Saul decided he himself would “offer the burnt offering,” which he knew full well was not his office to perform; and, true to such characters, he immediately made lame excuse when confronted by Samuel. To this he received the swift rebuke from Samuel, “Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God.” There is in this statement a very familiar ring: The parable in Matt. 25:1-13 discusses the virgins, some of whom were “foolish,” the same being the crown-losers, the leaders of whom Saul typed as he also did “foolishly.” The record reveals how Saul went from folly to worse folly, until Samuel informed him he should expect no more help or consolation from him. But, even then, in desperation Saul pleaded with Samuel that he should “honor me now before the elders of my people, and before Israel” (I Sam. 15:30) – that he might still have “the praise of men” – that he might to the very last continue to “sit in the gate of Sodom.”

Few indeed during this Gospel Age have fully learned that “To obey is better than sacrifice”; thus, “straight is the gate, and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life; and few there be that find it” – the “crown of life” coming only to those few who realized that obedience with sacrifice is the ideal during the faith Age. But the Measurably Faithful all during the Age have learned this lesson only after they had their experience at the hands of Azazel – by fit-man experiences, the same being unfavorable circumstances and persecuting persons. They have been not only “foolish” in their headiness, but also “foolish” in their various endeavors. Therefore, Brother Johnson could truthfully say of them, “Bungling is the usual and natural activity of the Great Company.” Perhaps all in the LHMM accepted this conclusion wholeheartedly during Brother Johnson’s life – so long as they were able to apply it to other groups – ­much the same as the average person is ready enough to quote Scripture at the man across the street, all the while the same applies pointedly to him.

But for those in the LHMM now to apply the same rule to the Great Company in their own midst becomes quite taboo – such critics are chronic fault-finders, “sifters,” and the like. When Brother Johnson made sharp criticism of J. F. Rutherford the first half of 1917, the latter once said to him, ‘‘About all you’ve been able to do since you returned from England is to say, I object.” And R. G. Jolly made much the same criticism of us about 1954 – ‘Of late you seem to find fault with about everything I do.” However, we repeat once more that our faulting him gives us not one whit of pleasure; it is rather “of necessity that it is laid upon me” that we write much of that we do write. All well-disposed people find much more pleasure in honest compli­ment for others than they do in complaint against them. During Brother Russell’s life Brother Johnson was known throughout the Harvest movement as that “loving Pilgrim” (Medad means ‘loving’); and we believe he was fully honest when he stated it gave him only sadness and heaviness of heart to offer such sharp criticism of brethren with whom he formerly “took sweet counsel together.... walked into the house of God in Company” (Psa. 55:14). This is presently our own position; we were immeasurably more light­hearted before Brother Johnson’s death than we have been since that time.

However, we shall continue to protest at every violation of those ‘landmarks’ set for us by the last two Principal Men, because the Scriptures pointedly state of both of them that they were “wise”; and we are admonished to “count them worthy of double honor.... who labor in word and doctrine” (I Tim. 5:17) – we should be much alert not to be overcome by those who “rebel against the words of God and contemn the counsel of the Most High” (Psa; 107:11). In 1950 Brother Johnson made this observa­tion: “The worldly are so soundly asleep that it will require the terrific crashing of present institutions and the earthquake shakings of social revolution of the Epiphany period thoroughly to awaken them to a realization of the presence of the great Judge, Immanuel.” And on pages 129-130 of Volume 4 he also tells us, “During the Gospel Age very many Biblical things – the things of the spirit – were concealed from all but new creatures.” And we believe most of our readers will heartily agree that all intricate Biblical subjects even yet – fourteen years after his death – are concealed from all but the truly awakened and informed. Therefore, we feel fully justified in saying of R. G. Jolly, “THOU hast done foolishly” when he immediately determined to print and distribute a million “Do-You-Know” tracts. The very large majority of people here in the United States know nothing whatever about the contrast between the Song of Moses and the Song of the Lamb (nor of our Lord’s Second Presence); therefore, how could they possibly comprehend that the last Saint had left the earth, even if it were true – when they do not even know the difference between the High Calling and Restitution? And much the same may be said for some of his other efforts, so that the query is pointedly applicable to him, “Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words with­out knowledge ?” (Job. 38:2)

THE GREAT COMPANY’S JUDGMENT DAY

It is clearly stated in 2 Tim. 4:1 that “the Lord is about to judge the quick by his appearing” – His Epiphaneia (the Epiphany period) – just as the Man of Sin is also to be annihilated by the Epiphaneia of His Parousia (2 Thes. 2:48); and that during this period the Lord ‘‘will send them an energy of delusion to their believing the false­hood.” (v. 11) – Therefore, it could also truthfully be said about us, “Thou hast done foolishly,” if we should not very much concern ourselves with the teachings and efforts of the “foolish” Class in this their special JUDGMENT DAY, lest we also fall into “their path of error.” (Jas. 5:20, Dia.) These Great Company members are the “quick” of 2 Tim. 4:1, that Class now that “sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death, being bound in affliction and iron” (Psa. 107:10); and every teacher of Truth should realize a twofold heavy duty upon himself: First, to warn others “not to come into their secret; unto their assembly, mine honor, be not thou united” (Gen. 49:6); Second, to warn those now “in the shadow of death” of their precarious position, lest we be found remiss in our obligations toward them.

THAT SERVANT’S CORROBORATION

Brother Russell offers “wise” comment about this same class: – “The diffi­culty was Saul’s failure to respect the Divine arrangement (R. G. Jolly’s first revolution­ism was against the Divine arrangement in 1938 – JJH), his presumption in undertaking to do what had not been committed to his care, but was under the charge of another. (In 1938 RGJ also busied himself in matters under the charge of another – JJH). The Lord’s cause was not hindered (in 1938 Bro. Johnson had a very firm grip on the situ­ation – JJH); but King Saul’s own prosperity was interfered with by his neglect of the Divine Arrangement. (RGJ’s spiritual prosperity was temporarily devastated in 1938 by loss of his eldership in the Philadelphia Church, by his suspension from the Pilgrim service, by his humiliation before the General Church – many of whom held him up to ridicule – although this was not the charitable thing to do – JJH).

“If for the moment we think of Saul as representing those who have been favored of God, and called to joint-heirship with Jesus, we may see in his early victories a picture of our good beginning, when we trusted God implicitly, waited patiently and trustfully for Him to guide in all of our affairs. As Saul should have made progress and become stronger in his faith and patience and obedience, so should our earliest experiences bring to us implicit obedience. But as this was not the case with Saul, so it is not the case with many of those who have been anointed for joint-heirship with the Lord in His kingdom. Instead of their growing more dependent upon the Lord, they become less particular to know and to do His will. They still reverence the Lord; but they are not sufficiently careful to note just what He would have them to do. Sometimes they undertake to do the work of others (such as RGJ has done in bringing forth his new doctrine of Campers Consecrated, new doctrines being the exclusive privilege of the Star Members – JJH), thus becoming ‘busybodies in other merits matters: as King Saul busybodied and sinned in attempting to do the work that belonged to the prophet. Here then is our lesson, ‘obedience is better than sacri­fice’ in God’s sight. He will neither approve or reward carelessness on our part in this matter. On the contrary, inattention to His direct will (such as offering “strange fire” – JJH) would mark us as proportionately unfit for His direct service. So the Apostle exhorts, ‘Let us walk circumspectly,” carefully, scrutinizingly – ­Eph. 5:15.

“Saul’s difficulties were (1) A selfish spirit... the fleshly viewpoint (as displayed in the ‘fleshly minds’ of the Great Company – JJH); (2) A man-fearing spirit... Saul feared the people... the fear that bringeth a snare; (3) Too slack an appreciation of the Lord’s word; and this is the difficulty which specially besets nearly every one of the Lord’s followers who stray away into error of doctrine (such as Campers Consecrated, Faith justification in a faith Age for Restitutionists... who will reach perfection under a works dispensation, etc.JJH).... The Scriptures clearly indicate a great trial and testing for the Church. It will determine with very many what Saul’s testing determined for him. To the faithful the Lord says, “Fear not, Little Flock; it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. ‘The others will be answered, as was Saul, “Obedience is better than sacrifice; .thou art rejected.’”

Then Brother Russell continues in Reprints 5427, col. 2: “Undoubtedly, the principle remains always true that there are but two great captains in the warfare between sin and righteousness; namely, Christ and Satan. It remains true also that whoever is fighting for the one is fighting against the other. It is for us to make sure, first of all, that we are on the Lord’s side. (During the great con­flict of 1861-65, one General remarked to President Lincoln: Let’s hope the Lord is on our side. Answered the President: Let’s hope rather we are on the Lord’s side – JJH). There is still a further step – to make sure that we are fighting as our Captain would wish us to fight... ‘This is the will of God (concerning you), even your sanctification.’ Thus our personal salvation comes first, in God’s order. What is the next step? The answer comes, ‘Feed my sheep; feed my lambs.’ (This is the answer we gave RGJ in 1951 when he was deciding to reverse the Lord’s arrangement established by the Epiphany Messenger, to have six Present Truths each year and twelve Bible Standards, instead of twelve Present Truths and six Heralds, as Brother Johnson had done – JJH) At first we might be disposed to demur, to say, Lord, should we not rather go after the straying, after the lost sheep? The answer is given by the Lord, Do good unto all men as we have opportunity, especially unto the Household of Faith. If, therefore, the Household of Faith demands all of our time when we have the oppor­tunity, we may be doing nothing for the lost sheep, but only helping to perfect those whom the Lord has already found. (This is almost verbatim as we counseled RGJ in 1951 – JJH) The circumstances of the Lord’s providence alone can direct our course. When we can see His purpose, His object, in this (His) arrangement, all is clear. He is taking out of the world a peculiar people.... and they all need education along spiritual lines.”

During Brother Russell’s day even the weakest were able to give to every man a reason for the hope they cherished. Today, it is much the reverse with R. G. Jolly and his adherents. In Trinidad – if we are correctly informed – quite a few in his Class there do not even believe his “strange fire” of Campers Consecrated –much less offer a defense for it. If this teaching be sound, R. G. Jolly should have his adherents well enough schooled that they would be glad to “refute the gainsayers,” instead of being told to “avoid them” – instead of being told they should bend every effort to securing more like themselves, who also will know not whereof they speak. Thus, instead of having an army of “good soldiers” willing to face every foe for the cause, he is developing an army of runners – an exact duplicate of the army of Jehovah’s Witnesses, who also spread the word quickly to “avoid” the address of those they know still retain the Truth as given us through That Servant and the Epiphany Messenger.

Brother Russell and Brother Johnson both had much, much more to say about King Saul; and it is our purpose to treat further of this type that points so clearly to the crown-lost leaders who have led God’s people astray in doctrine and arrangements; but for now we submit this present writing with the suggestion that each one consider for himself which class he shall follow – the Fully Faithful (the Samuel Class), or the Measurably Faithful (the Saul Class). “Choose you this day whom ye will serve; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” (Josh. 24:15) And, “Through God we shall do valiantly; for it is He that shall tread down our enemies.” (Psa. 108:13)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

“IN THE VALLEY OF THE SHADOW”

During the period of June 13-17 there came to us the news of four deaths, and it is with much heaviness of heart that we now make report to our readers:

WILLIAM S. WILSON, husband of Sister Wilson, Suches, Ga., came to tragic death in a truck accident; thus a double shock to all of us.

GERTRUDE S. OLDHAM, of Springville, Cal., came to the end of her course at the home of her daughter, Mrs. Evelyn Wolfe, Fresno, Cal., after a lingering illness through most of the winter. Although she had been quite frail for a number of years, she con­tinued as the “good soldier” that she was until a broken hip forced her into the se­clusion of her daughter’s home.

EDWARD W. ALGER, of Royal Oak, suburb of Detroit, Mich. He would have been 93 years old this November; had heard a discourse in England by one of Brother Russell’s speakers at the age of 11 years – before even Volume One had been published. Thus, he was probably familiar with Harvest Truth for more years than any other human being up to the time of his departure on June 15. He had been a Pilgrim under Brother Johnson, but speedily withdrew from the LHMM when Levitical errors began to appear – just as he had also done with the Society for the same reason. He had visited with us for three weeks in Mount Dora during March of this year, observing his last Memorial with us there, at which time he was still quite active and lucid, taking an active part in the service. His demise was quite sudden, as he had been driving his own car and calling upon his patients (he was a drugless physician of some note in Michigan) just a few weeks before he was stricken with a coronary. He had been our good friend and years-long associate in the “good fight.”

LEWIS FREDERICK ROACH, of Trinidad, was born in Barbados March 27, 1873; came to Trinidad in 1890, where he became associated with the Government Police Force, having attained the rank of Superintending Sergeant at time of retirement some forty years ago. He was a legendary figure about Port of Spain, strong in his convictions, loved and respected. He associated himself with Harvest Truth in 1912; but quickly severed his relations with the Society in 1919, when the Levitical errors became repulsive to him. Thus, he was more or less alone until 1931, when he first met Brother Johnson on a trip to Trinidad. He was quick to embrace Epiphany Truth, immediately persuaded other isolated brethren to do likewise, and formed a thriving Class there as Brother Johnson’s representative, a position which he held to the time of Brother Johnson’s death in 1950.

When the errors of R. G. Jolly and associates forced the division in Jamaica in 1957, R. G. Jolly quickly sent his ablest speakers to the Crofts Hill area; and each one of those speakers was quickly defeated by the staunch brethren there, influenced in large measure by Sister Condell, widow of Brother J. L. Condell, the same brother who had been Brother Johnson’s representative for Jamaica for many years. Stinging under the defeat received by the Jamaica speakers, R. G. Jolly determined an astute move would be to “import” some one for the purpose, and he called in Brother Roach. Being fundamentally honest, Brother Roach did not attempt to resist what he could not meet with “sound doctrine.” In fact, at R. G. Jolly’s first visit to Trini­dad after Brother Johnson’s death Brother Roach informed us he had told R. G. Jolly he would be fully In sympathy with him so long as he would direct them to the Star Members’ teachings – much as we ourselves had assured him in Philadelphia when we conducted Brother Johnson’s funeral there in October 1950. After the Jamaica episode Sister Condell gave us the address of Brother Roach, and we placed him on our mailing list. Having had his senses exercised to discern between Truth and error, the beloved Brother quickly saw the perversions coming out of Philadelphia; but his aging shoulders (then approaching 90 years of age) seemed to him incapable of another battle such as he had waged after separation from the Society, and he tried to follow a generous and sympathetic course. But at Passover 1962 R. G. Jolly himself precipitated a separa­tion in Trinidad by the letter he wrote to them before his arrival for the Memorial. Up to that time Brother Roach had mentioned our name to no one in that area, as it was not his wish to divide the Class. Subsequent events have been detailed in our various papers; but Brother Roach was wholeheartedly with the Epiphany Bible Students at the time of his passing on June 16.

He and others had exacted the promise from us more than a year ago to conduct the funeral, which seemed imminent with each passing month; and we, accompanied by Sister Hoefle, responded to the cablegram at once, arriving on Thursday, and perform­ing the service on Friday June 19. And we believe the service is one long to be remembered by all present. The Government had provided a special group of uniformed pall bearers, all of the rank held by Brother Roach at time of retirement; and, after they had placed the casket into the hearse, a slow march began to the cemetery a few blocks away by most of those who had attended the service. The cortege – three, four, five abreast – was about a city block long, and contained some hundreds of people. They then gathered about the open grave, sang hymns and witnessed our closing service, as four cemetery attendants filled the grave, then covered the mound with floral wreaths. The whole service consumed better than two hours – concluding about six p.m. – ­the final part reminding us strongly of the poet’s words respecting the death of Moses:

But, when the warrior dieth,

His comrades in the war,

With arms reversed and muffled drums,

Follow his funeral car,

Amid the noblest of the land

We lay the sage to rest,

And give the bard an honored place,

With costly marble dressed,

In the great ministering transept

Where lights like glories fall,

The seated choir sings, and the organ rings

Along the emblazoned wall.

God hath His mysteries to grace,

Ways that we cannot tell,

He hides them deep, like the hidden sleep

Of him He loved so well.

With the passing of such “good soldiers” we may reconcile ourselves with the assurance that our loss is their gain. “The righteous shall be in everlasting remembrance” (Psa. 112:6) – both here and hereafter; and we cherish the hope for all of them that the promise is fully theirs, “Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.”

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brethren: Greetings in Jesus Name!

We would request that you do not send anymore of your pamphlets to us.... We are not particularly interested in your quarrels with R. G. Jolly, etc. Your papers seem so full of contention.

We have been fully consecrated since 1912 – have met Bro. Russell several times. However, I was interested in your analysis on pp. 4 and 5 of your June 1 issue. I do also agree that “the vision is yet for an appointed time,” with no dates available at this time. Sincerely Your brethren in His Service, Mr. & Mrs. -------

PS – We left the IBSA in Spring 1918 on the occasion of the great compromise.

(BRITISH  COLUMBIA)

Our Answer to the above:  

Dear Brother and Sister – Grace and peace through our Beloved Lord!

We are complying with your request of June 5 to remove your name from our mail­ing list, although I feel I should explain to you that my controversy with R. G. Jolly is not a matter of personalities; the real and only controversy is over the Truth that is being corrupted by him. You say you have been with Brother Russell, so you must know that he also constantly engaged in sharp controversy with Great Babylon and others in his day. Our Lord also was in much controversy, as revealed in Matt. 23; and we are now living in the time when the “recompenses for the controversy of Zion” are due to be executed. Thus, it is sad to see so many, claiming to be God’s people, saying they will have no part of the controversy He is waging at present.

According to Mal. 3:3, one of the Lord’s specific purposes for this time is to “sit as a refiner and purifier of silver.” A better translation says He is a refiner and polisher of silver – the Truth. And, certainly, nothing can be polished without considerable friction; and those who avoid such polishing are in fact closing their minds to Him who stands at the door and knocks. (Rev. 3:20) Also, we are specifically commanded to “earnestly contend for the faith” (the Truth) – Jude 3; and I would be interested to know what you yourselves are doing to “contend for the Truth.”

It seems to me that whatever we believe – if we have been reaped by the Harvest sickle of Truth – we should believe it clearly and earnestly enough to be willing and happy to contend for it; and we should be persuaded that the Lord is with us in this “good fight.” Even the Jehovah’s Witnesses, with all the corruption they have injected into that Truth so clearly given us by the Lord through Brother Russell, are quite zealous in contending for their errors; that is, until they come in contact with some who really have the Truth that Brother Russell taught – in which event they run away in a hurry.

With this comes our Christian good will and cordial good wishes that you may become fully awake to your duties and privileges as respects the due Truth in this Harvest time; and I assure you we here are at your service any time you should have a change of heart and mind.

Sincerely your brother,

PS - “All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution,” says St. Paul in 2 Tim. 3:12, which can be said in another way, “All the godly will surely ‘contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints’” (Jude 3). I assume you believe you are “living godly,” so I am much puzzled to know how you “suffer persecution” if you do not believe in ‘contending’ for the Truth. Where there is no “contending for the Faith (the Truth)” there could not possibly be persecution for the Truth’s sake.