NO. 102: A LOOK AT LEPROUS MIRIAM

by Epiphany Bible Students


No. 102

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

In Numbers 12 there is related the case of Miriam leprous, and the reason she was thus afflicted. As all Truth people know, leprosy is a type of sin. When a member of Israel became completely leprous, he then typed Adamic depravity – “from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment (oil, see Margin).” – Isa, 1:6 Thus, of the human family it is correctly written, “There is none righteous (free from antitypical leprosy); no, not one.” But, when an Israelite became leprous in spots – as was true of Miriam – that was a type of Great Company uncleanness; just another way of saying they have “spots” on their robes, which must needs be ‘‘washed and made white by Great Tribulation” – Rev. 7:14. Such “spots” have had wide variety, some being gross immor­ality, as evidenced by the one described in 1 Cor, 5:1-5; and some due to errors of teaching and practice. As Brother Johnson has said of these in E-15:525 – Some lost their crowns by the skin of their teeth; others escaped the Second Death by a similar margin (and it is quite possible for the very ones who lost their crowns by the skin of their teeth to also escape Second Death by a similar margin – or to even not escape it: It is the New Creature of this secondary class that is in danger of the ‘sorer’ punishment (Heb. 10:29). And in between these two extremes are to be found innum­erable variations,

The name Miriam means “rebellion of the people,” which gives us the clue to the antitype of her specialized leprosy. She was not leprous from head to foot, but just in glaring spots – typical of those “spots” on the robes of certain Great Company members during this Age; and especially so at its end – the same being “rebellion” – an indica­tion they have succumbed to the sixth Slaughter-Weapon Man (Ez. 9:2) of Revolutionism, a revolt, or casting aside of teachings and arrangements which they once accepted as Truth. In this “rebellion” Miriam is simply a companion type, from slightly differ­ent viewpoint, of King Saul, who also was guilty of “rebellion” – (l Sam. 15:23). King Saul types crown-lost leaders from about the second or third century A.D. up to Armageddon in direct defiance of antitypical Moses – which leaders would include all those in Little as well as in Big Babylon; whereas, Miriam types such leaders in their fault-finding and disputatious relations to antitypical Moses (as was true of R. G, Jolly, et al, in 1938). Let us keep in mind also that Jambres (2 Tim. 3:7) means “rebellious” ; thus, this evil quality is reflected in many types.

Another instance of leprosy in spots is recorded of King Uzziah in 2 Chron. 26:16-21, where it is written that he was afflicted with leprosy “in his forehead,” and that he was such “unto the day of his death” (v. 21). In this he was typical of That Evil Servant, who became incurably worse in his erroneous teachings (the, “strange fire” he offered at the Lord’s altar) – leprosy in his forehead. It was this type that first apprised Brother Johnson that JFR was beyond hope, after which his attacks upon him became much more pronounced and caustic, knowing that in due course he would join with Judas and his class and “go to his own place” – the “place” of no return (Acts. 1:25).

MIRIAM VS. AZAZEL’S GOAT

During Miriam’s humiliation and punishment for “speaking against my servant Moses” she was banished to the wilderness; and on this she is close companion to Azazel’s Goat (Lev. 16:8 – Margin), which also was sent away into the wilderness (Lev. 16:20-22). But the distinguishing difference in the two pictures is that Miriam types crown-losing leaders in their New Creatures; whereas, Azazel’s Goat types ALL crown-losers in their humanity. It should be noted that the Israelites – ­or any others – did not add to Miriam’s distresses; they merely stood aloof until her cleansing had been completed – a very decided contrast to the treatment of Azazel’s Goat (in which a more direct and personal contrast will be shown later in this article). The latter (Azazel’s Goat) was sent into the wilderness “ unto a land not inhabited” –­ placed completely at the mercy of predatory insects and animals, thus picturing the destruction of the fleshly) minds of crown-losers at the hands of persecuting persons under very adverse conditions (even to the loss of some of their humanity in service of Azazel) – “delivered unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh (fleshly mind) that the spirit (New Creature) may be saved.” (I Cor. 5:5) In Miriam’s case the leprosy was sufficient affliction in itself – nothing more being necessary for the purpose when that was the only condition (as was true with R. G. Jolly in 1938 when he was exposed in his evils and manifested as a crown-loser – and the people stood “aloof” – even those of his own kinsmen because of fear they, too, would be contaminated – manifested as crown-losers. See E-10:646, par. 1. At that time he was not fully abandoned to Azazel; he only had Priestly fellowship withdrawn from him: He still had the brotherly fellowship and favor of the World’s High Priest–and, fortunately, its restraint).

THE “PERSONAL” TOUCH – AND DETAILS

Having offered the generalities, we now consider some individuals of our Epi­phany Day, chief of whom is R. G. Jolly. He himself admits openly and readily that he is a crown-loser; and the record in E-10:645,646 clearly sets him out also as a member of antitypical Miriam. In the incident there related, he and two other crown losers not only openly “spoke against my servant Moses,” but they actually attempted to seize control of the Lord’s Mouthpiece – the Epiphany Messenger. R. G. Jolly in submitting to this attests his full agreement to the type at that time. Thus, we need no further proof in his case. His disputation in that situation was a revolu­tionism against Parousia-Epiphany Arrangements; but we now consider some of his revolutionisms against Parousia-Epiphany Truth since his complete Abandonment to Azazel, since which time he has lost the brotherly fellowship and help of the World’s High Priest (at the time of his untoward experiences in 1938 he lost only Priestly fellowship: He didn’t lose the help and favor, and restraint, of the Epiphany Messenger; he was not disfellowshiped). On p. 156, Vol. 9, we have this:

“Miriam’s joining the people of Israel in journeying types the Great Company, especially in its leaders, doing the clean work that will be theirs AFTER THEIR CLEANSING – building the Epiphany Camp, first, from among the nominal-church believers after the nominal church is destroyed (in Armageddon-­JJH) and, second, from among fleshly Israel after they look upon Him whom they pierced and mourn for it.”

Note especially that Brother Johnson says the Epiphany Camp will be built AFTER THE NOMINAL-CHURCH IS DESTROYED – after Armageddon (because it is Armageddon that will destroy the nominal church systems); whereas, R. G. Jolly now says it should be done BEFORE Armageddon – and that it should be filled up partially with Consecrated Epi­phany Campers (while Bro. Johnson says it will be filled with the believing and re­pentant, BUT UNCONSECRATED Jews and Gentiles) – and he is proceeding to attempt to do it! Thus, he displays a similarity to That Evil Servant, who said in his heart, “My Lord delayeth,” as he now displays open continuance of his determination to “speak against my servant Moses” (with the same evils he portrayed in 1938, together with additional evils of Azazel’s Goat when they remain very unfaithful – which will continue to be so until he submits to the Truths that will cleanse him, and thus seeks to extricate himself from Azazel’s clutches). In this he also manifests before all his continual “leprous” condition.

Note further Brother Johnson’s comment in E-9:156 (63): “That journey (from Hazeroth, see Num. 12:16 – JJH) was taken to Paran, which we already have seen represents the Kingdom (Num. 10:12, Vol. 8, Chapter 10). Hence in the antitype Miriam will be in the antitypical journey, among other things, engaging in her work of gathering Gentile and Jewish believers into the Epiphany Camp (the Epiphany in the finished picture – JJH), which is the final Gospel-Age growth in grace, knowledge and service – ­when the cleansed Levites will be decidedly less sectarian than they now are.”

FOR GOSPEL AGE PURPOSES

R. G. Jolly repeatedly stresses Brother Johnson’s statement in E-10:114, “for Gospel-Age purposes,” in support of what he is now doing; but here Brother Johnson tells us the final Gospel-Age purpose will be the construction of the Epiphany Camp AFTER ARMAGEDDON. Thus, here again he continues to “speak against my servant Moses” ; and here again he joins with those who say in their hearts, “My Lord Delayeth.” There is a pronounced difference in one respect of the Miriam type and the Azazel Goat type: Miriam will still continue as a type after she is cleansed; while, after the Great Company’s wilderness experience in the Azazel Goat picture, they will cease altogether to be known as the Azazel Goat Class – they will be cleansed (their fleshly minds be destroyed by their wilder­ness experience while in the clutches of Azazel).

When the Apostle Paul said, “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” in 1 Tim. 2:12, we might also add from the teaching of the Miriam type, in which she tries to usurp the office of Pastor and Teacher – and “speak against my servant Moses” : “I suffer not a Great Company leader to usurp the office of Pastor and Teacher – attempt ‘to teach’ the General Church by bringing forth new doctrine, or to interpret types differently than the Star Members have faithfully taught.”

SOME “ PRESENT TRUTH” LETTERS

On p. 79, col. 1 of the Sept-Oct. Present Truth are two letters from Jamaica – ­both of them dealing with the same subject. If either, or both of them, come from R. G. Jolly’s representatives there who, like himself, admit they are crown-losers, then we can well understand the statement that they “cannot see JJH at all as a teacher of the Truth.” This is the attitude of the large majority of crown-losing leaders in the LHMM, much the same as was true of other individuals of other groups regarding Brother Johnson; and the reason is clear enough: Every one of them who now accept R. G. Jolly’s errors is a self-evident member of antitypical Miriam; and every time they teach those errors they by that act “speak against my servant Moses.” These various leaders freely admit they have lost their crowns; but up to now we haven’t found a single one of them who is ready to confess the “besetting sin” that brought about that loss. None of them seem to recognize any willfulness on their part – or “double-mindedness,” with which all Great Company members have been addicted. Perhaps had they come to that point they would be in position to apply the “ cleansing” Truths for their ‘besetments’ (sins) – and seek to cleanse themselves – become the “Cleansed Levites,” which they now claim for themselves. But so long as they profess a lie, as did Saul – “I have performed the commandment of the Lord” (1 Sam. 15:13), and try to conceal their evils, as did King Saul, and continue in them, there can be no cleansing of such crown-losers. Some of these crown-losers in the LHMM received priestly as well as brotherly fellowship from Brother Johnson until his demise. But when R. G. Jolly persuaded them to accept his edict – Last Saint gone – they also acknowl­edged they were crown-losers. They were willing to do this by R. G. Jolly’s assur­ance that they were still the ‘highest’ class on earth; that the Lord would amelio­rate their position by giving them “great works” under his – R. G. Jolly’s – supervision. He taught that the full abandonment process wasn’t necessary for them (as ‘good’ Levites), but only applied to ‘bad’ Levites! By these ‘assurances’ R. G. Jolly completely repudiated the Epiphany Messenger’s teaching on the Abandonment Process for both ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Levites as set out in E-15:525 and other places.

Nor do we expect any of that Class, in their present condition, to appreciate the Star Member’s teaching thereon, that we have been upholding, defending and pre­senting; and we can well appre­ciate the statement – they “cannot see JJH at all as a teacher of the Truths” so long as he presents these faithful and true teachings. It is not every Truth that the Great Company “receives not in the love of it” , but rather the exacting Truths that require more of them than they are willing to give–the Truths that reprove their evil course and require faithfulness to their vows. So far as we know, none of these leaders (in the LHMM) admit they are a part of antitypical Miriam; none of them admit they are a part of anti­typical Saul; and none of them admit the Truth on the abandonment-to-Azazel process (as applic­able to themselves), as taught by the Epiphany Messenger in numerous places and repeatedly pointed out in our writings – particularly in E-15:525. The Scriptures clearly describe certain “ besetting sins” of crown­lost leaders, some of which are described in the Miriam and Saul types (yet they “admitted not the love of the truth in order that they might be saved” – 2 Thes. 2:10, Dia.): (1) A desire to be somebody great, with more powers than the Lord has appointed as their official powers (E-4:277); (2) Double-mindedness – “unstable in all his ways” (Jas. 1:8). All crown-lost leaders have these two “besetting sins,” although all crown losers don’t necessarily have to be power-graspers – but all have double minds.

Thus, all of them continue to “speak against my servant Noses.” And since we have been stressing these subjects, it is no surprise at all that these crown-losing leaders in the LHMM as a solid group “cannot see JJH at all as a teacher of the Truth.” The same class of people in Big Babylon could not see Brother Russell as a “teacher of the Truth” either – nor should this occasion any surprise, considering the exposures he made of them. The Scribes and Pharisees (a prototype of crown-lost leaders) could not see Jesus as a “teacher of the Truth” – and they crucified Him! And, when we consider 2 Thes. 2:10,11 this is readily understandable, and has prompted the follow­ing from Brother Johnson:

“The Bible is made up so as to give the faithful the kind of teaching calculated to help them trialfully, as it is also intended to stumble the unworthy.” (To stumble those who build on “Christ as the Sand” – Matt. 7:24-27–JJH)

When the Crofts Hill Class in Jamaica so decidedly forsook him in 1957, R. G. Jolly quickly sent in his “ heavy artillery” (the outstanding Jamaican leaders) to win them back. At that time dear Sister Condell (widow of Brother Condell, Brother Johnson’s faithful representative there for many years) and other proven brethren there quickly and decisively put all those leaders to flight; and she wrote especially of one of these self-admitted Jamaica-crown-lost leaders, ‘‘He is blind as a bat!”

SPECIFIC LEPROSY

The sins of Miriam were twofold: Fault-finding and power-grasping for equality with Moses: ‘‘Hath the Lord indeed spoken only by Moses? Hath he not spoken also by us?” (A most striking antitype of this is to be found in the disputations of the ‘good’ Levites with the Epiphany Messenger, when they commanded him to be silent and let them do the talking – See E-10:588, twelve lines from top; also see pp. 584-594 of this same Volume for more of the same.) That is why Brother Johnson could so em­phatically conclude that crown-losers were guilty of leprosy any time they attempted to produce a new doctrine – such as Campers Consecrated, Jonadabs, etc. “The working out of these excepted doctrines (those not worked out by That Faithful and Wise Servant, being the excepted ‘doctrines’ – JJH) is the privilege of the Epiphany Messenger” (E-9:135, top). And that is why he wrote in E-4:276 (32):

“If the leprous garment is woolen, it represents their grasping for power and lording it over the justified in justified respects (such as R. G. Jolly is do­ing with his Epiphany Campers Consecrated – JJH), either in using their office as teachers of error (“strange fire” – such as asking Restitutionists to consecrate before their time-setting given us through antitypical Moses – JJH), or as corrupters of arrangements for serving the justified” (such as misleading them on the time application of Lev. 12, Rev. 22:11 and Moses’ second 40-day stay in the MountJJH).

“STRONG DELUSIONS”

All during the Age antitypical Miriam has been subject to “strong delusions” (2 Thes. 2:11), but especially so during this Epiphany period; and such delusions have always persuaded them to attempt some great work other than the one the Lord wishes His real Elect to do. Brother Russell realized that the Harvest of the Elect was the primary purpose of his effort, based upon our Lord’s words, “In the time of the Harvest I will say to the reapers.... gather the wheat into my barn.” (Matt. 13:30) The bundling of the tares, and the witness to the world “ for sin, for righteousness, and judgment to come” were merely incidental to the gathering of the wheat. This was also Brother Johnson’s main purpose in the work he did.

Even if we should assume that the “ wheat” (the Little Flock) is now all in the Heavenly garner (which we ourselves do not believe), then there yet remains the “ barley” Harvest (the Great Company) and the Youthful Worthies. But do we find any of the sects in Little Babylon – those led by antitypical Miriam – concentrating on this feature of the Harvest work? No, we do not! Like their kinsmen of the past, they have something more important to do; and one of the main features of their efforts has been their obsession to convert the Jews to Christianity – despite the fact that the Scriptures as explained by the Star Members clearly reveal that this work will not prosper until antitypical Miriam is cleansed in Armageddon.

That Evil Servant was foremost in this “strong delusion” ; and his book, “Comfort for the Jews” contains less of error than anything he ever published. But the actual results of that effort were so abortive that book is seldom, if ever, mentioned any more. He made haste (“my Lord delayeth” ) to create a new effort, thus to divert the minds of his trusting adherents from his failure to convert the Jews.

The Dawns made similar effort; and the result of their effort was also far short of expectations. Some of the more honest and sober of their leaders have admitted as much. Leprous Miriam learns slowly – very slowly.

Nor is R. G. Jolly to be outdone by his kinsmen in this respect. He, too, has concentrated much effort toward conversion of the Jews, despite Brother Johnson’s clear and definite teachings that this work will be fruitful only after antitypical Miriam has been cleansed in Armageddon. His tract with the smiling Jewish countenance on its face received long and profuse praise by him at the Philadelphia Convention a few years back; but up to now we have heard not one word of exultation from him about any Jews being converted by that tract. So he comes up with other ideas –­ he is prolific with ideas, so long as he is able to finance them with other people’s money, somewhat in keeping with St. Paul’s words, “They shall make merchandise of you.” His latest brainchild now is to translate some of his writings into Hebrew for another special effort toward the Jews – before the “due time” – and provided his trusting partisans will supply the necessary funds. Our prediction now is that this effort also will prove abortive, premature, just as we have predicted of his past failures. This member of leprous Miriam (R. G. Jolly) also learns very slowly. And to our readers we offer the counsel that they leave others to be bandied about by R. G. Jolly’s Levitical hokus-pokus, as we ourselves concern ourselves with the Lord’s wish toward the Elect; namely, gathering ourselves and others of like mind into the Heavenly Garner – ever considering that our witness to the unbelief class (Jews or Gentiles) is the least important feature: of our present work in this Harvest time. “The Harvest is the end of the Age” ; the Age has not yet ended-­nor has the Harvest in the broad sense yet ended.

KETURAH’S SIX SONS

The above-defined “ leprosy” (teaching error to the justified) is further accent­u­­ated on p. 77 of the Sept-Oct. PT, where part of Brother Johnson’s teach­ings are used, and part perverted (Azazel means Perverter) in explaining the typical six sons of Keturah, the third wife of Abraham. The true interpretation of this type, in complete harmony with Brother Johnson’s teachings on the subject, we expect to expound in a future article. But, for now, we simply inform our readers that R, G, Jolly’s faulty unscriptural attempt here is just one more proof of his present “ leprous” condition.

RESPECTING YOUTHFUL WORTHY LEADERS

Let us consider now the position of those lesser leaders in the LHMM. Undoubtedly, a number of them seem to be good characters; they were “examples of the believers” under the benign leadership of the Epiphany Messenger; and it is our opinion that not a few of them are being stampeded into “following a multi­tude to do evil” (Ex. 23:2). However, to such we now offer the warning to them from E-1:136, bottom:

“It is these measurably unfaithful Great Company new creatures that Satan found more or less fit instruments for developing the errors of doctrine, practice and organization in Greek and Roman Catholicism and in Protestant Sectarianism. These were by their waywardness, stubbornness and revolutionism (antitypical Miriam “speaking against my servant Moses” – JJH) ... using doubtless ignorantly, their great­est endeavors to advance what actually were the plans of God’s chief enemy – Satan... The same remarks with slight modifications apply to His dealing with those of the Youthful Worthies who are in character much like, as they are also cooperators with, the Great Company (birds of a feather often flock together – JJH).”

“A word to the wise” should be sufficient! And we might add: “He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous; him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him: But to them that rebuke him shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them.” (Prov. 24:24-25) Brother Johnson offers this observation of all murmurers and rebellious persons – leaders and ledlings: “Such are being defeated by sins, worldliness and errors. These sting the one who fondles them, even as a host of pursuing bees sting their victim, hurting and poisoning him. Everywhere we look in state, church, capital, aristocracy, labor, private life and Levitism, we witness these terrible defeats on the fallen at the hands of sin, worldliness and error.... And the end is not yet: for during the remainder of the Epiphany such defeats will be their lot. And no matter how greatly they grieve when they learn of their fallen condition, they will not be able to induce the Lord to change his mind into restoring them to their former standing before Him.”

With this comes the prayer that the Holiday Season will bring to our readers “the joys of the Lord.” May the “peace of God, which passeth all understanding... keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus,” which is the assured blessing to faithful Spiritual Israelites who “ continue in His word.”

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – What will be the condition in the world when Rev. 22:11 is in process of fulfillment?

ANSWER: – If the general and oft-repeated interpretations of Brother Johnson are to be accepted – and we do accept them – then Rev. 22:11 will not see fulfillment until “the night cometh wherein no man can work.” This “ night” had its first fulfillment as World War One broke out, when a complete cessation of the Parousia reaping work occurred in each country as it became involved in that war. And this gives us a clue to the correct application of Rev. 22:11. In our article in this paper we have quoted from Brother Johnson re the fruitful ministry antitypi­cal Miriam will have after Armageddon (the second violent feature of the Epiphany period, as taught by both Messengers). If Rev. 22:11 is to apply at 1954, then Brother Johnson’s Miriam prediction is just so much nonsense. We are in full agree­ment with the interpretation of Rev. 22:11 to be found in E-10:114; even the gener­ality of the Epiphany occurrences also fits with what we now say. There Brother Johnson thought we would experience the beginning of Anarchy by 1956; and that beginning of Anarchy will indeed produce the “night wherein no man can work.” It will then be useless to “exhort the tentatively justified to consecrate and sinners to repent.” Brother Johnson also said all Great Company members would be in the Truth by Passover 1956; and this likewise has certainly not occurred –nor will occur until the time features of the Epiphany produce the condition.

Only one befuddled by Azazel would attempt to distort the interpretation to fit 1954, as R. G. Jolly is now doing. Certainly we are still in the Gospel Age; and Brother Johnson tells us on p. 156 (63) of Vol. 9 that the “ final Gospel-Age growth” of cleansed antitypical Miriam will be the construction of the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture – a general Great Company appeal to the “believing and repentant, but UNCONSECRATED Jews and Gentiles,” in formation of the Epiphany Camp. And it is our thought that Rev. 22:11 cannot possibly apply until that work is completed. At that time “the treader of grapes will overtake him that soweth seed.” (Amos 9:13) This presents a reasonable and harmonious setting, as against the present disjointed attempt of R. G. Jolly. Even he must admit that the great majority of the Great Company are not even now in 1963 in Present Truth; yet he proceeds right on in his determined error as though this had been an accomplished fact at 1956. Here is just one more vivid proof of Brother Johnson’s observation that “Bungling is the usual and natural activity of the Great Company”; and we resign to their fate those who wish to become involved in such “bungling.”

It has been a general characteristic of all Great Company leaders to run ahead of the Lord – to do a ‘work’ not authorized by the Lord while in their uncleansed condition. That is why their works have been largely failure (insofar as faithfulness to His Word and Providences): They did not retain their standing in the High Calling. Their ‘works’ will be burned (I Cor. 3:15 – See Berean Comment), but they will be saved (their New Creature). They built upon Christ as the Sand. But this will be changed when Miriam is cleansed. She will then do a work acceptable to the Lord; her fleshly mind will have been destroyed and she will no longer be “double-minded,” but single-minded – will have the “one mind” that is incumbent upon all who win out in their class standing. (See 1 Pet. 3:8) At that time, Brother Johnson tells us, they will be much less sectarian. They are not counted as a Class as overcomers of sectarianism as the Youthful Worthies are, because they have been largely responsible for ‘sects’ and sectarianism. (Please see E-5:228,229.) Miriam’s cleansing is a thing devoutly to be hoped for!

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in Jesus Name!

Just a line to thank you for the papers – and I do read them!

Sincerely ------- (CALIFORNIA)

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

Epiphany Bible Students Ass’n

Dear Brethren: We have heard of your Bible Studies and would like to have more information concerning the studies. Would you please send us the needed information before we send for the Studies. Thank you very much!

Sincerely ------- (CALIFORNIA)

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

MORE ON THE TRINIDAD SITUATION

Dear Brother Robertson:

I received an extraordinary lengthy letter dated June 22, 1963, which like all others from you, I would have thrown in the dustbin after reading a couple of lines to get the gist of it, but as I had written you one in connection with your defaulters list of subscribers to Present Truth and Bible Standard, and did not up to then receive your reply, I thought this one was the reply.

However, my first duty is to defend the last two-Star Members’ character –­ by your saying that you taught me certain doctrines and other things, I was just beginning to see from you.... I am a possessor of the V.D.M. certificate, without which nobody could be an elder or pilgrim in the closing Parousia days. Brother Johnson saw mine and trusted me. Secondly, after Bro. Jolly and you made such unwarranted and vicious attacks on me in Nov-Dec. 1962 PT our dearly beloved Bro. Hoefle was kind enough to publish on page eight of May 1, 1963 of his paper a letter from Bro. Johnson lauding me very highly. Mark you, this letter is dated Sept, 13, 1950! Again to prove me a clericalist you say that you did not defend Jehovah’s character at my request the time I had...... disciplined for immorality. Bro. K ------- did it for me, and....... did benefit from it.

You also say that I am claiming to be a Priest when no more are on earth. Look up Epiphany Volume Six, page 412, where Bro. Russell condemned sifters for teaching that the Pyramid gives data to prove the Church’s leaving the earth; look up January 1951 PT, pp. 9-12 where Krewson disobeyed and gave Jolly October 1950, who elsewhere said. God must have some reason for giving Krewson that information, which you now accept because it is from your leader, an Unclean Levite.

You also have the audacity to stress Campers Consecrated to me, a product of Jolly-Krewson brains. They cannot be fitted in the family picture, because the Marriage Supper has not yet taken place – so there can be no children! they do not fit in among the Resurrection of the Just. (Epiphany Vol. 17, page 164, par. 2) See Z 1910, page 4716, par. 8, Jolly’s miserable failure in making types, and you will see that he is daring to be doing the same thing now. What, Is he the 50th Star Member? He is a Usurper!

The notes in your minute book are most unreliable. You show that I made a gift of..... The gift I made was twice the amount you show. You also say that the Class never asked me to inform Bro. Jolly not to send a pilgrim to Trinidad in 1960. I say it did! ‘‘How can ye believe, who receive honour one of another, and seek not the that ‘cometh from God’ only?” You also speak of the office you now hold. I now ask you, what am I do with that? This now recalls to My mind a statement in which Brother Johnson said, “One has to be careful with the definition of an unclean Levite.” So I would be very glad to know what is Bro. Jolly’s defini­tion of the ‘Household of Faith’!

You say that it was officiousness in me to ask Bro. Jolly for a brief history of the minister he is sending to us. I think in this case you are defending your­self, for had the brethren in Surinam not seen your insufficiency they would not have made you take a back seat at their Memorial Supper in 1958. Of course, I have defended the last two Star Members on this point. Surinam matter is your own report.

In your attempt to teach me you have placed yourself in a very ugly position. See Epiphany Volume 10, page 588, eleven lines from top. Campers Consecrated false doctrine is leading you right back from whence I took you in 1941. Cast out of you unclean spirits! Mark well. So as not to belittle you, I told this even to no one, until about 15 years after some one told me about it. I asked how he got to know it, and the person said – “ What, it is no secret! Brother Robertson talks it openly.”

True to history, the one I have done the most for is today crying out “ away with him; crucify him!” I cannot bother to reply to other portions of your letter. It is in the hands of the brethren to read.

You say that you never employed a female in a campaign against me. I say you did! – and when I saw the danger if I had kept silent, I wrote a fairly strong letter, supported by whom I was protecting, secondarily to the Truth, and foiled your effort. You never saw anything like this – your insinuating charge of theft to kill my influence among the brethren, you unwittingly gave your signature proving your falsehood.

In conclusion I tell you that if you care to reply to this letter, and would like me to read it, you must do so through your official organ – your Present Truth. If by any other means I will throw it into the dustbin as I have done with all your other ‘teaching’ letters. Why do you not be consistent and obey your leader’s instructions on page 59, col. 2, par. 1 of July-August 1960 PT? You were a thought – ­let in 1941 and you have dropped right back there now. See Epiphany Vol. 5 -­Miscellany, page 520 (49).

Best wishes, L. F. Roach–July 3, 1963 (TRINIDAD)

NOTE: – We are in hearty accord with what Fred Blaine told the Philadelphia Con­ventioners about Brother Roach – namely, He is most clear in Parousia and Epiphany Truth. Brother Johnson also agrees with us, as is evidenced in his letter to Brother Roach of Sept. 13, 1950 – published in our May 1963 paper, p. 8. We also find Brother Roach humble and meek – “gentle toward all” who are amenable to Right­eousness and Truth. And this accounts for the hearty support he receives from the faithful brethren there in Trinidad who know ‘what manner of man’ he is. However, he is also most vigorous and pronounced against errorists and evil-doers, as is evidenced by his strict requirement of morality in the Church, etc.; and in this he is following in the footsteps of our Blessed Master, and all His faithful foot­step followers – from the Apostles down to the least of His faithful brethren. We well realize such public exposure of evil-doers in the Lord’s House will bring the fury of such misleaders upon him and us, as well as cause us the loss of the friend­ship of many of the “ unstable and the unlearned” – and bring some of the same upon those who fearlessly uphold and support the righteous course of those who stand at the Battlefront. This we can expect if we would be faithful – Matt, 10:25. But “ blessed are we” if we suffer some of the afflictions for the same cause as did Our Lord and His followers who have walked “In His Steps.” (JJH)

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

Beloved Brethren: – Loving Greetings in our Lord’s Name!

I have enjoyed your letters of Aug. 9 and Sept. 11. They have very good thoughts, which I appreciate the Truth stated in them very much. As you say, we do indeed have the “full assurance of faith” and can “count it all joy,” and the 100% promised the faithful. When I was reading this, it came to my mind what Bro, Russell said in the Watch Tower in 1900 (Reprints 2643), par. 10 –­ “If our hearts are still in harmony with Him” – and down to the end. It seems to me that par. 10 shows us that we still have the “full assurance of faith,” and all par. 12 is all wonderful. But the 10th paragraph came to my mind.

I received the papers Nos. 100 and 101. They are full of wonderful blessings, and soul encouraging satisfying Truth. I can see that the dear Lord is surely guiding you for the way you are defending the Truth.

I could use some more tracts before the winter is fully here. I have some that I intend to put out this week, D.v....... I think the Booklet would be nice.....

I send you all and all with you my Christian love and pray for the Lord to keep you all faithful. We have to look to you now for the Truth – and I thank the Lord for directing me to you.

Your sister in the Truth ------- (PENNSYLVANIA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Will you please send me some more tracts – Where are the Dead, The Resurrection, as I am all out just now. Will write later.

Sincere Christian love to you and all the friends...

 ------- (CONNECTICUT)


NO. 101: THE PHILADELPHIA CONVENTION (1963)

by Epiphany Bible Students


No. 101

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

Over Labor Day we attended the Philadelphia gathering, receiving the usual calumny, diatribe and slander – none of which did we return in kind. On Saturday evening, Aug­ust 31, R. G. Jolly made considerable comment about the Krewson lawsuit, injecting his customary name-calling, etc. While we have contended from the outset that J. W. Krewson's case was “weak as water,” it is very evident, too, that the weakness of his case was further accentuated by his own incapacity to answer R. G. Jolly. The crux of the con­tention was the Laymen's Home Mission­ary Movement name and label of its publications –­ especially, The Present Truth and Herald of Christ's Epiphany. Inasmuch as R. G. Jolly now contends we have been in the Basileia for nine_years, what moral right does he him­self have to use that name?

When Brother Russell recognized our Lord's presence, he immediately designated his paper, “The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence.” When Brother Johnson recog­nized we had progressed into the Epiphany, he imme­diately designated his paper, “The Present Truth and Herald of Christ's Epiph­any.” If R. G. Jolly is now following their example, as he claims, and if he really believes we have progressed into the Basileia (before the three main features of the Epiphany are here – Armageddon, Anarchy and Jacob's Trouble), as he is now preaching it, why hasn't he changed the name of his paper to, “The Present Truth and Herald of Christ's Basileia”? All his activity at present toward new Truth converts he stresses as a Basileia (Restitution) work, Why, then, is he still “Heralding the Epiphany”? Had J. W. Krewson rigidly cross-examined him on this and a few other points, we believe his defense would have been so much strengthened that he just might have emerged victorious from a tragically weak position. We do not here champion his cause, for we believe R. G. Jolly was at least partially justified in the action he took, with which position the Court also agrees.

In his resume he also threw a few barbs at us for appropriating the name, “Herald of the Epiphany”; and we now cordially invite him to institute legal proceedings against us if he believes the charges he made before the Conven­tion, And, if he does, we now assure him we shall not charge him with violating 1 Cor. 6:1-4. And we would also then settle a few other matters in the same Court action, where we believe the weight of Jus­tice would appear with us. (of course, here we are not in the least concerned that he will resort to such action, for we are fully persuaded he hasn't courage to meet us any place where we would be treated on equal terms with him. Rather, he'll content himself with hurling loud invective from the Convention platform – or with his “secret weapon,” his “whispering” campaign” – where he's sure he'll be safe – brave little man that he is!) Be it noted for the present, however, that he could hardly wait until the Epiphany Mes­senger was in the tomb before he hurried to rid himself of the name, “Herald of the Epiphany,” and replace it with the name, “Bible Standard” – a name which he himself, has borrowed from early in the Epiphany (See E-10:72,73,74,75). We adopted our name because we are still Heralding the Epiphany,” and the name clearly declares our posi­tion; whereas, R. G. Jolly is now “Heralding the Basileia;” without any of his publi­cations declaring such in their nomenclature. Consistency, thou art a Jewel!

 BIG BABYLON TECHNIQUE

During the Question Meeting the question was asked: “How much did the Krewson lawsuit cost?” On this R. G. Jolly went into about ten minutes of detail to relate what a “bargain” his lawyers had given him; but never once did he reveal the figures, which would allow the questioner to determine the matter for himself. Certainly, any contributor would have a right to know how his money is being spent; but he knew no more at the end of R. G. Jolly's ten minutes than he did before asking. This is in exact parallel to cases described by Brother Russell on pp. 289-296 of the Question Book. On p. 294, par. 1, is the following:

“'Brother Russell,' he said, 'instead of trying to catch him and hold him for an hour, I thought I would have to try to get loose myself, and prevent him from holding me.' I said, 'No, brother, you have not the idea; you will have to try to hold them down to the question, because they cannot answer it, and they know they cannot, and they will try to get you mixed up. And they will not admit they cannot answer it.'“

Then in another similar case, Brother Russell gives us this: '“I said, 'Brother, I guess the reason why he did not was because he did not know how to answer it, and thought that was the best way to get out of it.'“

We have given these excerpts from That Faithful and Wise Servant's answer to the question, ''When will the Great Company suffer the Great Tribulation, and will they be at the marriage supper of the Lamb?” found on pp. 289-296 of the Question Book. It would require too much space to quote all of it, but we urge our readers to see all of this answer, if they have the Question Books and note carefully how Brother Russell describes the similar technique of Big Babylon's “sleight-of-hand' artists (R. G. Jolly's kinsmen in Big Babylon – the Great Company leaders there!).

In connection with the question on the cost of the Krewson lawsuit, we quote. a paragraph from the May 1956 Present Truth, p. 52, col. 1, par. 1, in which R. G, Jolly gives the brethren just as clear (?) a report of the finances of the Bible House as he did with the question at this Labor Day Convention on the Krewson lawsuit:

''We believe that our carefulness in handling the funds donated by the brethren for the Truth work will have the Lord's approval, as well as the approval of the brethren in general. We believe that the brethren will also appreciate knowing that we have had an audit of the L.H.M.M. finances made, beginning from the time Bro. Johnson had the last audit made, and that we have the auditor's notarized statement that the books are in good order.”

SEATS FREE AND NO COLLECTIONS

The foregoing was the pronounced and oft-repeated slogan of the Parousia Messenger; and so intent was he in observing the practice that he would not even put on a ''poor mouth,” as he himself stated it. This was in keeping with the course of our Lord and the Apostles – as it also is with us. With seats free, and no collections, we can easily afford to tell the Truth! However, at every day's session of this Convention attention was directed to the box on the table to receive donations; and each noon the box in the dining room was stressed, where contributions could be made to defray the cost of the food served. It is our own opinion that when a board is spread, and guests invited to eat – and then invited to pay for what they eat – such conduct is just about the absolute zero of “cheap” decorum. Early in the Epiphany, while we were yet with the Dayton Ohio Class of the Society, that Class was having a small Convention, rather costly, and the suggestion was made that neighboring Classes be invited to contribute to the spiritual feast to which they were being invited. At which we ourselves stated that such a course just reminded us of a man in the street who was wearing a silk shirt, but his underwear had not been washed for a month. After that there was no more said about appealing for contributions!

Also, at the Saturday evening Business Meeting R. G. Jolly gave consider­able time and loud talk to his great appreciation for contributions of even One Dollar, because such help him to send Bibles, etc., to the poor heathen in Africa. Here again he for­sakes the elevating high standard set before us by the “Laodicean Star,” and reverts to the technique and purpose that prevailed throughout Christendom a hundred years ago, at which time great stress was also given to “help the poor heathen” gain “salvation.” Just some more Big Babylon technique!

“PROOF” OF CAMPERS CONSECRATED AT 1954

A question was propounded, asking proof on this subject. It was the first ques­tion R. G. Jolly considered in the Monday morning Question Meeting. As the questions were handed to Chairman August Gohlke by the various ushers, we noticed he kept putting them underneath – to be sure that this Campers question would have first attention. It had all the appearances of a “plant,” because R. G. Jolly took a full forty minutes to answer – just about an ordinary discourse for the average speaker; and this gave him ample excuse for not having “time” to answer quite a few other questions that had come to the platform.

As “proof” he offered three Scriptures: (1) Leviticus 12, (2) Rev. 22:11, (3) Moses' two stays in the Mount of 40 days each. R. G. Jolly said he had “many more Scriptures”; but forty minutes wasn't sufficient time even to mention them. As we have previously pointed out, Leviticus 12 has to do only with the purifying of the Little Flock and Great Company developing Truths, which were freed of error by 1914 and 1954 respectively – and the cleansed Servants who minister those Truths. There is not the slightest hint that it involves the call of Youthful Worthies or Campers Consecrated; that is just something R. G. Jolly is reading into it to suit his purposes; thus, his analysis is not exegesis, it is eisegesis!

Next, we examine Moses' second stay of 40 days in the Mount, which R. G. Jolly contends is antityped from 1914 to 1954. Even assuming his contention to be correct, there is here also nothing in the picture that by any stretch of the imagination could involve the call of “Youthful Worthies or Campers Consecrated. But, aside from this, Ex. 34:33 states, “Till Moses had done speaking with them, he put a veil on his face.” Note now the Berean Comments: “A veil on his face – typifying the Ancient Worthies.” Why does R. G. Jolly ignore this in his interpre­tation? Can he possibly fit it into 1954? And, if he is forced to ignore such a vital component of the picture to reach his strained interpretation, are we not forced to question both his sincerity, and his ability to be Pastor and Teacher?

Take now Rev. 22:11: Brother Johnson expounds this on p 114 of Vol. 10; and R. G. Jolly gave profuse comment on p. 114 – ignoring, of course, many of its essential parts – just as he did with the Moses episode. Page 114 says, “these exhortations will be given by the Epiphany Messenger (when writing Vol, 10 in 1938-40, Brother Johnson was firmly convinced he would be here to do this in 1954JJH); for in the order given they will not come until from 1954 onward.” Here again R. G. Jolly must violate all exegetical logic in a strained attempt to meet 1954. He himself is now admitting that the application could not apply before 1954; yet another set of his teachings has the ''Holy'' Class (the Saints) com­pletely out of his picture in 1950 – four years before he now wants his interpretation to apply, Of course, it doesn't bother him at all to have one vital segment of his circle falling by the wayside before the time-setting he now attempts to “prove.”

If R. G. Jolly really believes Brother Johnson was the Epiphany Messenger (and he shouts his approval whenever it seems to suit his purpose), let him consider now 2 Chron. 7:11, “Solomon finished the house of the Lord,” Brother Johnson's own inter­pretation of “finishing the house of the Lord” is that Brother Johnson himself classi­fied God's people in their Epiphany relations and purposes. If Brother Johnson “finished the house,” why, then, is it now necessary for a Levite to put an addition to it in the form of Campers Consecrated? Bear in mind that R. G. Jolly contends his Campers are in the Household of Faith in his newly defined “Camp”; they are so closely related to the Youthful Worthies that it's almost impossible to tell them apart! A dear sister reminded us of a similar contention by That Evil Servant in connection with his 'brand' of converts: “When Jehu and Jonadab (who rode in the chariot to­getherJJH) are out in the service, you can't tell which is which”! Indeed, some one his well designated R. G. Jolly's new converts as “Consecrated CAMPERS”!

In a separate question on this subject – “Are Consecrated Campers on the same narrow way with the Youthful Worthies?” – R. G. Jolly answered, No! Let us go back now, and examine what he said in July 1955 PT, p. 57, and 58:

“Thus the Youthful Worthies (and the Consecrated Epiphany Campers), like the Great Company, are surely traveling a narrow way.”

It is true the word “same” is not in the above quotation; but, when he says all three classes are “like,” it certainly can mean only one and the same thing. Of course, he is so befuddled by Azazel that we doubt he is certain in his own mind just what he does believe. Also, like That Evil Servant, he basks in the assurance that “you can fool some of the people all of the time”; and such belief feeds the ego of all Perverters (Azazel means Perverter). Sad to relate, That Evil Servant never once realized that the one person being fooled most of all was himself; and R. G. Jolly will receive a similar rating if he continues in his present course. As we observed him during this meeting, several times we gave silent appraisal of him: You poor little man; YOU POOR LITTLE MAN! It seems to bother him not at all to present to trusting brethren false interpretations, or even open falsehoods whenever it suits his purpose, So again we repeat, You poor little man! And we say this designedly and with true pity for his condition – because his rating could have been quite high had he been faithful to his consecration vows; it would have been so high that he would have realized his High Calling hope. King Saul offers a very clear type of R. G. Jolly and other crown-lost leaders, who were at one time “from his shoulders and upward higher than any of the people.” (I Sam. 9:2) King Saul types crown-lost leaders up to Armageddon.

But what about those who succumb to his symbolic “witchcraft” (especially deceptive false teachings)? It will be very similar to many who closed their eyes, opened their mouths, and swallowed the perversions of That Evil Servant. Once they awoke, many of them just went into seclusion – much the same as a beaten puppy slinking away with his tail between his legs. This will be the same fate with many now being deceived by this uncleansed Levite; and, in the finished picture, “They will cease altogether to be of the Household of Faith.” (See E-4:406)

THE THOUSAND-YEAR REIGN AGAIN REVIVED

When R. G. Jolly has been specially humiliated by our refutations, as he has been by our September article sent out before this Labor Day Convention, he usually resorts to the Thousand-Year-Reign of The Christ, and the “sifter”.(?) who is teaching error thereon. When Brother Johnson refuted such errorists as J. F. Rutherford for beginning the Reign by gathering his Great Multitude as his Restitution converts, we are certain that he would have just as vigorously attacked R. G. Jolly for 'gathering' (or separat­ing) the good Sheep (Restitutionists), and doing a separating work ahead of the Kingdom proper; because that is what he is doing, no matter under what label he 'labors' (Psa. 107:12). Self-evidently, he thinks he is now selecting the very chief Restitu­tionists (not permitting The Christ to decide that!). At least that is all he is promising his new converts up to the present time: They will be higher than all the other quasi-elect!

We have repeatedly quoted Brother Russell where he tells us that the King­dom Reign began in no sense of the word before 1912; also, where he tells us that the Kingdom was set up at September 21, 1914. Also, we have referred to Brother Johnson's statement that the Saints after that time are referred to as the Bride of Christ for the first time – ­and that while some of them are still in the flesh. We will cite the references for our readers' benefit, and will be happy to send copies of any of these articles to any who request them. See our May 1, 1956, No. 9 – where Bro. Russell says The Reign of Christ did not in any sense of the word begin in the past (written in 1912); Brother Johnson's statement that the Little Flock is referred to as the Bride of Christ after 1914 (with some in the flesh) – see our paper No. 19, Feb. 1, 1957; see our No. 44, July 1, 1958 for quotations from Bro. Russell re the setting up of the Kingdom on Sept. 21, 1914. At no time did Bro. Russell ever state, from 1912 onward, that the Kingdom reign began in 1874, as R. G. Jolly now contends. Yet he accuses us of being “out of harmony” with the Parousia Messenger on this subject!

R. G. Jolly has his Campers Consecrated walking “a narrow way” with (or 'like') the Great Company and Youthful Worthies, without having the sustaining promises that assist these two elect classes to walk this 'difficult' way (and as a reward these Campers Consecrated will be transferred – demoted – from the Household of Faith to a “Works Justi­fication” during the Mediatorial Reign!). We wouldn't be surprised if R. G. Jolly tells them privately that no one can discern the difference (during the Mediatorial Kingdom) between the physically perfect Youth­ful Worthy Princes (“in all the earth”) and the physically imperfect “princeship” he describes for his Campers Consecrated – to help sustain them along “a narrow way.” Considering R. G. Jolly's predicament with his Campers Consecrated jumble, it does not surprise us to hear him shout about the “Sifter” who is “out of harmony” with Bro. Russell on the Thousand-Year Reign of Christ, and who is teaching error on the Last Saint and the Zechariah type. Apparently R. G. Jolly needs further elaboration on these three subjects, which we expect to present in detail in a future article, D.v. As for ourselves, we have no desire to join in with the 'labor' (Psa. 107:12) of such Perverters (Azazel means Perverter) as JW's and R. G. Jolly to now “save” the non-elect. We repeat: We have no desire to join in with those who say in their hearts, ''My Lord Delayeth.”

“BEGINNING AT JERUSALEM”

Occasionally the question comes to us – 'Why do you come here if you don't agree with us? We could answer by asking them whether they ever go among groups with whom they don't agree? And, Why did Jesus go into the synagogue when He knew those hypocriti­cal power-grasping leaders hated Him? (Of course, the record is clear: “They hated Me without a cause.”) Also, why did St. Paul go into the synagogue, where also were “the Jews who took counsel to kill him”? (Acts 9:23) Elaborate answer is not necessary for such insipid inquiries; but we believe it well now to make our own position clear: We are simply obeying the command of our Lord (Luke 34:47): “Repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” As those instructed in Epiphany Truth know, Canaan for Gospel-Age purposes types the sphere of the Truth and its Spirits And, Jerusalem being the Capitol of that land, would indicate that organization dominant in the sphere of the Truth. During our dear Brother Johnson's life, the LHMM, with him at its head, was foremost in the sphere of the Truth. Thus, in our attempts to administer the Truth first of all to those in the LHMM, we are “beginning at Jerusalem.” This does not mean we neglect all others, because some effort is made toward Saints and “Sinners” in Little Babylon – toward nominal Christians in Big Babylon – or even toward unbelievers. We are still motivated by the Apostle Paul's state­ment, “I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.” The Apostle did not mean we are to use all means “fair and foul” to gain some, as some Great Company leaders apparently conclude; what he meant is that we use “all means” provided by the Lord through His Arrangements for His faithful people.

Nor are we without some cordial reception at the LHMM gatherings; and one such com­pensates richly for a dozen we may meet who apparently are totally unschooled in the mean­ing of “the spirit of the Truth.” As Brother Russell was reported to have said, “I'd rather have five earnest consecrated brethren any time than a whole room full of others.” So say we also!

To all our readers we extend the fond wish that the Lord may “feed them according to the integrity of His heart; and guide them by the skillfulness of His hands.” (Psa. 78:72) And we also offer the timely warning to those now encourag­ing R. G. Jolly and his partisan supporters in their evil deeds: “Thou shall not follow a multitude to do evil; neither to wrest judgment.... Keep thou far from a false matter and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked.” (Ex. 23:2-7)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Our dear Brother Hoefle: – May Faith, Hope and Love be multiplied unto you through our Lord and Master!

Your good letter dated Aug. 10 informing us of the new tract is received.

We went over the copy with care and we heartily agree it is very appropriate as a follow-up of the Gideon tracts, as you suggest. The Two Salvations tract will surely be more help to the earnest inquirer. Please let us have 200. We assure you and all with you of our love and prayers. Your brethren by His Grace,

The Crofts Hill Ecclesia (JAMAICA)

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

Dear Brother and Sister Hoefle: Christian Greetings!

It is again my pleasant duty to extend to you the Class' sincere thanks for your recent visit to us. We were greatly refreshed by your discourses, and specially appreciated the way you frequently pointed us to the Star Members' writ­ings. May the Lord continue to use you to remind us, lest we forget.

I am enclosing copy of letter from Brother ------- (the blind brother whom you visited at Manzanilla) to Brother Roach. He undoubtedly enjoyed the visit. We all join in sending sincere Christian love to both of you, and all the friends there.

Yours by His Grace – Secretary-Treasurer (TRINIDAD)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Loving greetings of Grace and Peace!

This is to let you know that I have run out of tracts for the obituary work, and would like more when you can spare the time. Also, I think the Two Salvations will be a splendid article for those whose interest is being aroused. You may send me some, and I will try to place each one wisely...... The question has just come to my mind, Would it be advisable to send them to those in the different Truth groups, who may have forgotten – and for others who may not know of the importance of the TWO Salvations – the precious gift to us from Brother Russell!

I am expecting that your visit to Trinidad was a blessing and fruitful. Also, that your attendance at Philadelphia Convention will accomplish that which our Lord will be pleased and prosper in it.

I heard from Sr.------- today, and she wrote of her pleasure and faith in your work.

May you both be strong and of good courage and bring deep blessings upon your service.

By His Grace, -------  (MASSACHUSETTS)

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

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

We are quite sure that recent experiences at Trinidad and the Philadelphia Convention have been spiritually profitable to you both, and has resulted in blessing upon quite a few dear brethren whom you met and had fellowship. We are quite sure that the Lord will notice many things which would have His blessing upon all those in particular whom He found taking heed to what you have had to say to them; and it will give us much pleasure to read about the meetings held. I am writing to dear Bro. Roach.

Our JW friend came last Sunday. We are sure you will fully understand when I say that he received a great blessing in our home, hearing things as never before from us..... When we told him we had in our home the full set of Seven Volumes, six of which are entirely our dear Pastor's writings, he did show much interest and some excitement – letting us understand how delighted he would be to get possession of these (and even offered to make an exchange for some of the Jehovah's Witness Volumes, including “The New World Bible” – which we promptly refused). You will understand that we did this for a few very good reasons. I had been making this a matter of prayer for a long time (for a set of these years ago), when, just picture me standing at our front door in answer to a knock, and there was a dear Brother to ask me if I would care to have a full set of the bound Watch Towers! If ever an answer to prayer was swift, that surely was... One thing the JW Brother told us, that among them quite a large number he could not feel justified in calling brethren.........

I must close with our united love and best wishes in the Lord ... Bro ------- (ENGLAND)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Christian greetings in His dear Name!

I realize you dear ones have a lot of worthy work and labor at this time, so I will be brief.... Your welcome letter of August 2 enjoyed by each of us. But I am disappointed in Uncle Sam's service. The Sept. issue #99 –­ ''Responding to the Trumpet's Call – has not been received. This is the first issue I have missed, I read Sister's..... #99, which she received about the 12th. I can't afford to miss it, so am asking you to send me another. Whoever received my copy... I do hope will read it and get curious enough to send for more Truth literature.... I do pray for you dear ones in your service for the Lord in the work you are doing. The results may seem slow at times, but we know in “due time” your efforts and labor in God's Word (Bible Truths) will be proven to be for the “love and need of other” – and they will be blessed.... I'm sorry to ask you for extra work in sending me another copy, but I can't miss any, as I save them and re-read.

Christian love and blessing in this month's effort in services. Your Sr. ------- (CALIFORNIA)

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

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

It is with great pleasure that we pen these few lines to you –­ hoping that you both are quite well and “rejoicing in the Lord” – because you are devoted to this great work, sincerely and honestly. Brother and I receive your letters each month–- which is in defense of the Parousia and Epiphany Truth; and we trust our dear Heavenly Father will strengthen you to continue in this great work which you have so unselfishly undertaken. Brother and I study your writings and receive rich blessing –­ and thank our dear Heavenly Father from the bottom of our hearts for being so richly blessed. We can understand your writings, they seem so clear....

Now, dear Brother, no doubt you will be going to the Philadelphia Conven­tion, so we would love to have you call on us, if possible, and give us a talk (spiritual food). We could have the temporal food, as I would love to have you come for dinner if you can make it, and any of the dear friends in your party.... And I am sure it will be a great pleasure to see you all again in person. It was at Bro....... two years ago when you spoke on Psalms 1. We enjoyed is so much.....

With much Christian love to you and Sister and all.... dear friends..

Brother and Sister ------- (NEW JERSEY)

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

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

We are happy to tell you we are still on the Mountain Top; indeed we are refreshed and strengthened through your visit to our Ecclesia in Trinidad – ­for which we are very thankful to our dear Heavenly Father and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

What I wanted to tell you on our way to Manzanilla was that I want to withdraw certain statements made as to R. G. Jolly in my letter to you published October 1, 1962. The part I want to withdraw is from page 7, eleven lines from top, which reads as follows: “for it was R. G. Jolly (a guest) and elder Brother Robertson, who arranged for the Chairman, and that he (R. G. Jolly) would be guest speaker – and that I would do the Bible reading for the Memorial service. Bro. Khan was to serve the wine and Bro. Robertson the bread.” This is all I wish to withdraw. As you may have noticed, in the Present Truth for Nov-Dec. 1962 R. G. Jolly states that he was apprised by letter one month before that he was to be guest speaker for the Memorial for 1962, so I am with­drawing that part from the letter. I should have said the following words – “Now this is exactly what R. G. Jolly did: The night of the Memorial Brother Jolly handed a program to the Chairman (after the service had started with a hymn and prayer), dictating in detail how the service should be conducted. In the same Present Truth, page 90, par. 2, R. G. Jolly states the Chairman must be given certain latitude as to various details; but any one can note under such circumstances the Chairman would have no latitude at all – after a program was given to him to follow. That is why I said the charge 'clericalism' made against Bro. Roach fits him (R. G. Jolly) – for I was answer­ing this charge of 'clericalism' made against Bro. Roach.

Warm Christian love to you and all with you. By his Grace, Bro. ------ (TRINIDAD)


NO. 100: THE TABERNACLE LINEN CURTAIN

by Epiphany Bible Students


No. 100

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

In the May-June 1963 PT, p. 47, col. 2, the comments there presented have prompted a number of questions to us, one of which being fairly representative, we quote:

“In the May-June PT Bro. Jolly says the linen curtain will become a ‘wall of faith’ to those in the Camp. Will you please explain this?”

In those comments R. G. Jolly also accuses JJH of “spiritual blindness” in connec­tion with this matter; but the accusation applies pointedly to him, which we shall proceed to prove herein.

CHRIST OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS

On p. 18 of Tabernacle Shadows there is this: “The curtain of white linen, representing to those within, a wall of faith, but to those without, a wall of unbelief which hindered their view of and access to the holy things within.”

The above is simply telling us in clear language that all within that linen curtain have accepted – and received – Christ as their righteousness, which has made them “acceptable to God”Rom. 12:1. From the time of the Apostles to the Gospel-Age Harvest the High Calling only was understood to be synonymous with the acceptance of Christ’s Righteousness, the same being motivated by our Lord’s words in Matt, 28:19: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Actuated by this faulty trans­lation, and the misunderstanding that came with it, tremendous efforts in time and money were expended on foreign missions in an earnest effort to bring the poor heathen to accept Christ as their righteousness if they would avoid an eternity of torment in flaming fire. Note now the Diaglott rendering of this text: “Go, disciple all nations, immersing them into (not “in,” but “into”) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” This correct rendering of the text tells all who preach Christ in “sincerity and in Truth” that they are to win disciples “into the name” – that is, they are to enroll them in consecration that they may learn the heart and mind – the dispo­sition – of the Father and the Son, thus developing in them a Christlike character.

Not understanding the two salvations, the foregoing was all that the interim preachers knew of the Righteousness of Christ, as they attempted by strenuous effort to remove the ‘‘wall of unbelief” – that “darkness that covereth earth,” even “darkness that may be felt” (Ex. 10:21). Nor was this activity materially changed during the Parousia Harvest time, although it was decidedly modified by the understanding that the non-elect were also to have a full opportunity for salvation – even though That Servant and the reapers engaged with him still were acutely aware that they had done – or could do – very little to reform the world, to remove that gigantic ‘‘wall of unbelief’’ which engulfed all but a few of the human race.

CHRIST AS SAVIOR AND KING

Nor did Brother Johnson expect that “wall of unbelief” to be removed by the efforts of those with him; that “wall” remained in the Epiphany Tabernacle, although the Epiphany Messenger realized that the blast of the Seventh Trumpet would become increasingly effective until the full end of the Little Season. However, the promul­gation of the Harvest Truth, stressing restitution, did awaken a considerable minority that did not wish to consecrate themselves to do God’s will under the strenuous and sacrificial exactions of “the narrow way” – although some of those good people were grate­ful enough for Restitution Truth that they contributed some time and money toward its prosperity. As they stated it, “Restitution is good enough for me.” Thus, to such, even during the Parousia, Christ became to them “Savior and King.” And we may expect an ever-increasing number to adopt that position, especially after Armageddon cleanses the Great Company, at which time Brother Johnson predicted they will have a “fruitful ministry.” (See E-4:49, etc.) But to none of such will Christ become their Righteousness unless they enter inside the linen curtain in the Court Condition; in fact, even those of them who do so enter, but refuse consecration, their final position receives this summation in E-4:406 – “They (the Youthful Worthies) are somewhat different from the tentatively justified who do not now consecrate. The latter during the Epiphany cease altogether to be of the Household of Faith, having used the Grace of God in vain.”

From the foregoing the conclusion is clear enough: Those inside the linen curtain who consecrate, and remain faithful therein, embrace the elective salvation; but those who refuse are eventually forced into the Camp, losing their tentative justi­fication in the process, and their standing in the Household of Faith. But, so long as they remain repentant and accept Christ as “Savior and King,” they constitute the true quasi-elect. Nevertheless, let us not lose sight of the fact that, while such are not actually unbelievers, they are still counted in with the unbelief class, and will receive their resurrection by judgment, the free-grace restitution along with all others in the Mediatorial reign – having, of course, a better starting point in character.

This is quite succinctly stated by St. Paul in Rom. 12:1-3 – “Brethren... present your bodies.... acceptable to God.... be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God.” Thus St. Paul is telling his readers in concise fashion that they can be “Acceptable to God” ONLY so long as God’s will is acceptable to them. This point we stressed in our Bap­tism discourse at Trinidad in August; and it is the only term on which any of the fallen race can ever regain favor with God during the ascendancy of sin. Therefore, those who in the end of this Age fail to follow St. Paul’s counsel, must be counted in with the restitution class, even though they are specifically classified as the quasi-­elect. That is why the tentatively justified who do not consecrate must self-evidently be forced from the Court into the Camp: They are not of the Household of Faith in the final analysis, although they have had a tentative standing in the Household before their ejection from the Court.

“WALL OF FAITH” – “WALL OF UNBELIEF”

In the Parousia and Epiphany Tabernacle pictures revealed to us through both Messengers, never once did either of them even as much as hint that the ‘‘wall of unbelief” would pass away at any time, so long as this Gospel-Age remains with us –­ and so long as the “reign of sin and evil” continues. However, are we to conclude from this that this ‘‘wall of unbelief” has been intentionally forced upon unbelievers by those within who hold up the linen curtain of righteousness – that such people actu­ally intend to teach ‘‘unbelief” to those without? CERTAINLY NOT! It is sad to note, nevertheless, that many who have preached Christ have done exactly that. It is a true observation that some of the Bible’s most outspoken friends have been its most conspic­uous enemies through the God-dishonoring doctrines they presented. The more arduous be­came their efforts to bring all within the “wall of faith,” the higher and deeper the “wall of unbelief” became to men such as Robert Ingersoll and others, who could not bring themselves to believe that a God of love could deliberately design an eternity of torment for creatures who are here through no planning or choosing of their own. Let us ever keep in mind that, during the Harvest, or earlier, those who preached Christ – ­by word of mouth or the printed page – were in fact “holding forth the Word of Life” in loving appeal to those without to enter and join with them. An insignificant few have accepted; a larger portion saw and understood rather dimly, some even rather clearly, but refused the invitation; while a third section paid little or no atten­tion at all – “some seeds fell by the road; and the birds came and picked them up” (Matt. 13:4, Dia.). But from this we are not to conclude that those in the Court uphold such unbelief, merely because their ministry manifested the unbelief class; it simply means that their own faith and belief were not understood or appreciated by such unbelievers. Thus, what is Christ our Righteousness to those within, is unbelief, ridicule and scorn to many without, with “God concluding them all in unbelief” (Rom. 11:32) so long as they refused that “only name under Heaven” – ­refused to accept God’s will as their own – “that He might have mercy upon all” (Restitution blessings under less exacting requirements).

Be it noted that the outstanding result of preaching “Christ our Righteousness” was to instigate persecution upon the Faithful. With that ‘‘wall’’ now removed by R. G. Jolly, where and how are his converts to realize St. Paul’s prediction, “All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution”? His activities since Brother Johnson’s death have been decidedly toward Combinationism (the most devastating of all the six Slaughter-Weapon Men – Ezek. 9:2); and he has now succeeded in effecting Combinationism in full measure in his merger of his Campers Consecrated with Big Babylon. And such Combinationists never persecute each other. Instead, he now claims Big Babylon is aiding in bringing him new Campers Consecrated – by bring­ing many “to the Lord and to a better knowledge of the Truth....in Big Babylon” (See Jan. 1963 PT, p. 9). He and his partisan supporters are indeed being given the figurative “blood to drink” (Rev. 16:6), as they also “gnaw their tongues for pain” (Rev. 16:10), because of their errors; and the Truth will continue to afflict them thus until they “turn back from their path of error,” such afflictions being stripes for correction, and not persecutions for righteousness. Clearly enough, he no longer has regard for Jer. 51:9 – “We would have healed Babylon, but she is not healed. Forsake her (just the reverse of combining with her) .... for her judgment reacheth unto Heaven. and is lifted up even to the skies.” And his “cousin” J. W. Krewson also contends the same for Big Babylon – they still ‘agree’ on many points, as they seek to build up their “camps.”

R. G. JOLLY’S NEW CAMP

R. G. Jolly now contends he is not casting aside previously accepted Truth when he tells us that now that same curtain, which aforetime was a “wall of unbelief’’ to those in the Camp has now become a “wall of faith” to his Consecrated Campers. If that be true, where, then, is his ‘‘wall of unbelief” in his present Tabernacle? Does he have a clear answer to this? While he has not said so in so many words, yet when he now says the linen curtain is a ‘‘wall of faith” to those within and to those with­out, where are we now to look for his “wall of unbelief’’? Does he now have any wall of separation at all between belief and unbelief? We know he has attempted to remove the wall (veil) of separation between the Holy and the Court, as he freely enters the Holy now to secure a new doctrine. And in attempting this palmistry he is telling his trusting adherents that he hasn’t changed anything – just as King Saul (a type of crown-lost leaders—E-14:5) also said, “I have Performed the Command­ment of the Lord.” He himself admits that there are millions upon millions yet in his Camp (Big Babylon is there, he says – and we agree with this!) who are still in measurable or total unbelief. Just what conclusion, then are we to reach from this jumble? Both Messengers taught during their entire lives that no one could make an acceptable consecration without entering the embrace of that curtain; but R. G. Jolly says they can now do this without coming inside. But he isn’t changing previously accepted truth; oh, No!

Furthermore, there is now no separation – according to him – between those con­secrators in the Court and those in the Camp – the linen curtain means the same on both sides, which is precisely the attitude Big Babylon has followed all during the Age. This is well expressed in Poems of Dawn, p. 19:

“Half shyly the Church approached the World

And gave him her hand of snow.”

We now ask, Who is afflicted with spiritual blindness in this analysis? Let us remember that he now has tentatively justified Youthful Worthies within his curtain, and tentatively justified Campers along with the tentatively justified unconsecrated quasi-elect Campers outside his linen curtain. And he tells us that any one who can’t understand such a picture is “spiritually blind.”

The fact that Brother Johnson taught that the linen curtain would represent Christ as Savior and King in the extreme end of the Epiphany does not set aside Brother Russell’s teaching that it represents Christ’s righteousness to those within – nor does it nullify the “wall of unbelief” to those outside, or the “wall of faith” to those within (the ‘wall’ of separation between the Household of Faith and the Restitution Class still exists).

R. G. Jolly’s jumble on the linen curtain is just one more of his many perver­sions of Parousia and Epiphany Truth. Let him show one word from either Messenger that the curtain would at any time before this Age ends mean a “wall of belief” to those within and to those without. And, as we have so repeatedly inquired, Since a place in the Tabernacle type represents a condition in the antitype, what condition is now represented in his Camp? Will he answer this? And by what symbol is the consecration of his Campers shown in his Camp? Of course, this Campers-Consecrated perversion was fed to him by his “cousin,” J. W. Krewson; and, He who says “A” must eventually say “B.” Thus, he must offer one perversion after another to support this error, ever sinking deeper in the quagmire of error – losing more and more of the Truth he once saw clearly. As Brother Johnson has so well stated in E-11:278, “Truth is an uplifter of the faithful, and a stumbler of the unfaithful.” Also, he has stated that a clear understanding of the Tabernacle and Tentative Justification will prevent the faithful from losing the Truth, That Evil Servant eventually was forced to give up entirely Tabernacle Shadows, because of his many perversions of that book, and the sharp and unanswerable refutations of these errors by Brother Johnson. His (JFR’s) advice to his readers to study his “new light” that was appearing in the Watch Towers could not occupy the same program with Tabernacle Shadows.

R. G. Jolly still attempts to reconcile his errors with that book, but it will remain to be seen how long he can continue to do so. Therefore, we urge all our readers to study Tabernacle Shadows, as basic for all Parousia Truth and much Epiphany Truth; and we suggest for Epiphany studies The Epiphany Elect, Volume 4. as basic for Epiphany Truth and doctrines. As Brother Johnson states, those who pervert Tabernacle Shadows and Tentative Justification will eventually lose the Truth; and we have seen this actually demonstrated among the various sects in little Babylon over the post forty years – and we are now witness to this same course in the LHMM. We call upon such to turn from their “path of error” before it is too late for them – ever keeping in mind that this Campers Consecrated perversion was taught to R. G. Jolly by his “cousin” J. W. Krewson. Now with the sharp differences between them on so many points (primarily precipitated by which of them should be “greatest” – the “Pastor and Teacher” yet beholding the spectacle of them walking “arm in arm” as they attempt to uphold and defend this Campers Consecrated false doctrine (“strange fire”), while setting the Truth aside “once delivered unto the Saints” – the Star Members – we are forcefully reminded of Nahum 1:10, “They be folden together as thorns.” (See Berean Comment) As things stand now, R. G. Jolly has his Campers Consecrated with Tentative Justifi­cation (a faith justification), but the only evidence he offers that they have such justification is that they are looking in the general direction of the linen curtain. This is the kind of “logic” we should expect from one who has been building upon “Christ as the sand.”

RESPECTING THE ANCIENT WORTHIES

Inasmuch as Tentative Justification in the Tabernacle is shown only in the Court (inside the linen curtain – Christ our Righteousness), some may inquire concerning the status of the Ancient Worthies, since their sacrifice was burned “without the Camp,” as explained by the Red Heifer sacrifice on pages 105-112 of Tabernacle Shadows (the Red Heifer Class representing the Ancient and Youthful Worthies). Most of the Ancient Worthies were under the Law Covenant, and were, therefore, in the Court, even as were the quasi-elect Jews, as evidenced in E-11:504:

“Israel’s typical justification put them typically in the antitypical Court. The typical Court’s curtains correspond to the walls of the typical Holy City (Neh. 11:1).”

We realize, of course, that some of the Ancient Worthies lived before the typical Tabernacle was erected; and, from the standpoint of their time, they could not be in the Tabernacle Court at the time they lived (such as Abel, Abraham, and others), but they were anticipatorily counted there (just as some were thus counted in the Ark before it was erected—E-5:75), because they, too, were of the Household of Faith, and the Household of Faith is pictured in one place – IN THE COURT. All the Ancient Worthies were a fully-faithful Class, so the standing would be the same for all of them.

Brother Russell tells us this: “It is our understanding that, ultimately, they may be granted a place with, and as a part of, the Great Company, the antitypical Levites of the antitypical court condition.” So the only difference in those Ancient Worthies and the Youthful Worthies in the end of this Age is that some of the Ancient Worthies lived before the Tabernacle was erected, typically or antitypically, therefore could not be pictured in something that did not exist in their time; but the Youthful Worthies are won while that antitypical Tabernacle is in existence (from 1881 onward), at a time when all the Tentatively Justified are in the Court condition, and this Court will be available for all to enter who have sufficient heart desire – so long as Tentative Justification is available for them. As Brother Johnson tells us: “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 (and it will not set in yet for a number of years – JJH), for whom there are no crowns available, and hence no Spirit-begetting for Gospel-Age purposes possible, will be the Millennial Associates of the Ancient Worthies in reward and service, they will be able by Scriptural, reasonable and factual thinking completely to over­throw every argument....” And this sage summation by Brother Johnson applies with equal force to the erroneous presentations of R, G. Jolly and J, W. Krewson on their Campers Consecrated and Quasi-elect Consecrated. Therefore, let each one decide if he wishes to adhere to the “faith (Truth) once delivered unto the Saints” – Star Members (Bro. Russell & Bro. Johnson), or if they wish to become defiled by the “faith” (?) – ­actually, Error – now being offered by the “cousins.” Manifestly, we ourselves are still adhering to and earnestly contending for that “faith once delivered unto the Saints” – those who faithfully built upon “Christ as the Rock,” as opposed to R. G. Jolly, et al, who have built upon “Christ as the sand,” To offer a living illustra­tion of this Truth by Brother Johnson in E-5:473/529, we cite the experience of a beloved Brother who entered a used-book store in Detroit in search of certain liter­ature, and was told this by the proprietor: “Pastor Russell’s books are usually gobbled up in a hurry; but Rutherford’s books, we can’t give them away.” Those of the JW’s who joined JFR in building upon “Christ as the Sand” should by such facts be shocked into a realization of their own past mistakes, and resolve to correct them “while it is called today.” And the same applies with equal force to those who have been “building” in like manner with R. G. Jolly.

If it be argued that the Ancient Worthies are not anticipatorily counted in the antitypical Court because they are represented in a sacrifice “without the Camp,” we may with equal logic present the same case for Azazel’s Goat, which was typical of the Great Company. It was “sent away by the hands of a fit man into the wilderness” (Lev. 16:21); but no one with even a smattering of Present Truth would contend that the Class represented in Azazel’s Goat did not have their justification standing in the Court – even though they violate their justification and consecration during their uncleansed condition; and the Ancient Worthies and the Little Flock have always lived above and beyond the nominal masses, by whatever name we designate those masses. The offering of the Ancient Worthies “without the Camp” was to stress typically (See our paper No. 82 – These Things For Types”) that they are no part of the Sin Offering, as was true of the Bullock and the Lord’s Goat, which were the only Atonement-Day sacrifices offered in the Court, and their blood sprinkled in the Most Holy.

None of the three elect classes (AW, YW and GC) are shown in that Court picture of ‘sacrifice’ because there was only one Sin-Offering in two parts: Jesus and the fully Faithful Church, “which is His body.” But all who offer themselves to “do the will of God” under conditions of evil must separate themselves from the nominal masses­ “Go to Him without the Camp” (not remain in condition with the nominal masses within the Camp, as R. G. Jolly now tells his Campers Consecrated); and the standing of such is shown in only one place – THE COURT. While the Elect are divided into four classes, they are all grouped in the Household of Faith, with their standing inside the linen curtain – Christ our Righteousness. Therefore, if the quasi-elect were a faith class, as R. G. Jolly claims for some of them, they, too, would logically appear in the Court in the finished picture – with their faith-class brethren – to have their standing inside the linen curtain. However, Brother Johnson states clearly and emphatically of those who fail to consecrate that their justification and standing in the Household of Faith will lapse (See E-4:406, aforegoing).

If any should contend that the Youthful Worthies are not represented in the Epiphany Court (the Household of Faith), but are in the Camp with the nominal people, they are forsaking the Epiphany Messenger’s clear Scriptural teaching on Youthful Worthies; and, if persisted in, will lose their class standing and eventually lose the Truth. Instead of “contending for the faith once delivered unto the Saints,” they would be setting aside that “faith” (Truth) that once sanctified them. (Please see “The Fourfold Tabernacle Picture” in Jan. 1940 PT, p. 13, in which Brother Johnson describes the elect and quasi-elect in their respective places in the Epiphany Taber­nacle, which is still with us.)

CONSECRATION ALWAYS IN ORDER

Repeatedly does R. G. Jolly offer this caption in proof of his present course; but this statement is simply a half-truth until properly qualified. Was it always “in order” for Cornelius to consecrate? Certainly, it was not “in order” as an operative condition until the “due time” (until the ‘way’ was opened up for him – although it is always proper for any to be in a submissive and consecratable condition) –­ that his “prayers and his alms came up for a memorial before God” (Acts 10:4); and Cornelius was in much the same position then as would be true of those now wishing to consecrate to restitution blessings (‘unto life’) before the Highway of Holiness is available for them (their ‘way’); as there is no ‘way’ yet open for Restitution­ists. There are two parts to consecration – the offer by the consecrator, and the acceptance by God; and such acceptance must always be predicated upon the agreement to do “the will of God” – which is now, as it has been all during the Age, an offer­ing “by faith,” and not “by works” (it is for the Household of Faith only).

Many are those who have consecrated themselves to good works; to attempt to glorify God by ascetic monastic life; to bind up human wounds, etc.; and, while many such have been working for God, they have not been doing God’s work – which mainly toward others for this Age, has been the gathering of the various elect classes. Aside from perfecting ourselves in every good word and work to the extent of our ability, this we still consider our most important work; whereas, the “cousins” (Jolly-Krewson twosome) have now busily locked hands with their elder “Brother” in Little Babylon, and have joined the JW’s in attempting to win an upper­crust restitution class – seeking to perfect (develop) them in consecration now. Therefore, we are the only ones formerly associated with the Epiphany Messenger who still teach, and are being motivated by his Stewardship doctrine – “The Epiphany in its relation to the Epiphany Elect.”

Many of those failing to see God’s purposes will eventually be found among the quasi-elect, because they failed “rightly to divide the Word of Truth.” We do not discount such in toto, because we are in sympathy with every good work, with every heart that “is feeling after God,” although we still are acutely cognizant that God has provided a “better resurrection” for us (a reward for all who have done His will in faithful consecration during the “reign of sin and evil” of the non-spirit-begotten classes); and our advice to all consecrators yet to accept Christ as Righteousness is to come inside the linen curtain (not outside in a conglomerate tabernacle jumble, as described by R. G. Jolly), and seek the “better resurrection” that is yet available to those who covenant to do “God’s will” – “until Restitution sets in” (See E-4:342). And to such we commend that “wisdom from above” which maketh truly wise unto salvation.

Some may wonder why we are so persistent and detailed in our refutations of the various errors appearing all about us, so we quote just a few lines from Brother Russell on the subject (written in 1914):

“The days that are almost upon us (the Epiphany period – the Great Tribulation—JJH) will surely bring ‘weeping and gnashing of teeth’ to many of the Lord’s people; for whoever stands for error (as the leaders and many ledlings are doing in the var­ious sects of Little Babylon—JJH) will be in opposition to God. They are about to go into a great Time of Trouble (about to enter the Epiphany period—JJH), and it will be their own fault.... It is the desire further to sound-out this present message.... It represents the voice of God, telling them their present duty as Christians.

Thus, we counsel all to “buy the Truth, and sell it not.” (Prov. 23:23)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace and peace! It gives me pleasure to express my appre­ciation of your papers, as I note that you continually refer to Brother Johnson’s writings for proof of your presentations; and you usually hit the nail on the head, so to speak. I feel sure that Fred Blaine now regrets that he wrote that letter that was printed over his name in the Present Truth last fall. It is a great tragedy in his life, and I hope this mistake will lead to his recovery. He cer­tainly started something he could not finish when he wrote that letter. Most likely R. G. Jolly asked him to write it, and had expected to gain a little confidence from his followers. But it boomeranged for both Fred Blaine and R. G. Jolly. I think your letters are having a good influence.

The more I study Brother Johnson’s writings, the more I realize there has been a prophet among us. Brother Russell’s writings are truly wonderful, and Brother Johnson’s writings are based upon, and elaborate Brother Russell’s thoughts ... At present I am studying Epiphany Volume 12, and I am lost in wonder, love and praise. I don’t feel any need of R. G. Jolly’s writings. Your writings are very good, because you follow closely Brother Johnson’s teachings ....

The Lord’s people that are watching can truly see the Combinationism sifting working all around.... Greetings to you and to all in your Class.

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

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

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

It has been quite awhile since I have written you – nevertheless my prayer for you is always at the Throne of Heavenly Grace. I heard from Bro. ------- sometime ago and received ----- lbs. on your account. Yes, dear Brother, the fight is still strong and the battle long yet, but victory is not for the swift and strong but for those who endure to the end. Psa. 92 is my comfort for you. Oh! how we do enjoy your papers ... although the unfaithful cannot see or appreciate them. Accept my love for you, Sr. Hoefle and the dear brethren with you.

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

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

TRINIDAD EXPERIENCES

Accompanied by Sister Hoefle, we effected another pilgrimage to Trinidad over the period August 13-19; and we believe our presence there refreshed and strengthened those brethren individually and collectively, even as we ourselves were also blessed as they in turn reciprocated to us in warm-hearted and hospitable manner in “the spirit of the Truth.’’ Thus, ‘‘He that watereth is himself also watered”! There is indeed a very healthy zeal in evidence in that Ecclesia for the Lord, the Truth and the brethren, which we believe was encouraged by the ministry we extended to them. In addition to a Baptismal service, it was also our privilege to visit an aged blind brother in Manzanilla who received the Parousia Truth under Brother Russell, and who is now filling out his years in a very remote and isolated section of the country. Thus, our visit – accompanied by six others – was a welcome surcease to this aging “good soldier.”

All was harmony and good will among those with whom we met, which for the various meetings constituted about three-fourths of all in Trinidad who are now influenced by “Present Truth.” However, we were once more engaged in considerable degree with the turmoil and division there, and the flimsy and profuse charges of Clericalism which are still directed at our dear Brother Roach and others. In all of this we were sharply re­minded of Brother Johnson’s observation that it has always been the crown-losers and mal­contents who stir up the strife among brethren by their errors and false conceptions of order, etc.; then they blame the trouble upon the Faithful. From all we could learn, this seems to be repeated in Trinidad now.

At the outset, let us note (if we are correctly informed, and we would not take space for this if we were not fully convinced of its veracity) that the name Hoefle had never been mentioned to the Trinidad Ecclesia individually or collectively by Bro. Roach until R. G. Jolly himself addressed two typewritten pages of his usual “foolish effusions” to that Class in typical tirade against JJH early in 1962. And in this effort by R. G. Jolly we again see where “He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.” (1 Cor. 3:19) That letter was the real beginning of the division there last year – and that Brother Roach had been Brother Johnson’s faithful representative for many years – and he had served in the same capacity with R. G. Jolly for about twelve years – with never once a clericalistic charge raised against him until he (Brother Roach) made it clear he would have no part of R. G. Jolly’s “strange fire” of Campers Consecrated. This is strongly reminiscent of the hypocritical Pharisees who “watched Jesus, whether He would heal on the Sabbath Day.” (Luke 6:7) They, too, would be meticulously correct in observing the Law, all the while they were the very worst of Clericalists themselves. Very odd, is it not, that Brother Roach’s clericalism was never before noticed until he refused to go along with R. G. Jolly’s errors and false doctrine of Epiphany Campers Consecrated? May the Lord bless others with this kind of clericalism!

R. G. Jolly’s present representative in Trinidad – Errol Robertson – wrote Brother Roach eleven closely-packed typewritten pages on June 22, 1963, filled with charges of clericalism. We have never met Errol Robertson, so we may only gauge him by what he has written. However, in the hope that he and R. G. Jolly may both profit, we now quote from Parousia Volume 6, p. 475, par. 1:

“The duty of arranging and ministering this Memorial devolve upon them (the Elders) as a service to which they have already been selected by the Church.”

The reason for this special responsibility finds full support in our Lord’s words, “This do in remembrance of Me.” Therefore, if 90% of the Class voted to have no service at all, it would be the obligation of the Elders to ignore their edict and proceed to arrange the service regardless. This means they would determine the time, place and manner of the service without any previous consultation with the Class. As we understand it, this is all Brother Roach ever did during years past. But, we believe it in order here to de­clare also that a General Elder would likewise be fully subject to the local Elders in this matter, unless such local elders should specifically give him erroneous charges –­ in which case the General Elder should present the Truth and refuse to concur. With this exception, a General Elder such as R. G. Jolly would not be privileged to conduct such a service to the complete, or even partial, exclusion of the duly elected Elders of the Class.

Although Brother Roach requested that the Robertson 11-page letter be published in Present Truth, not so much as a comment has been forthcoming about it (we write this on August 21, 1963—JJH). Therefore, we shall treat of just a paragraph or so of that letter, with our own observations – although we expect eventually to publish Brother Roach’s answer to it, D.v. Note now the quotation from Errol Robertson to Brother Roach:

‘‘Your first marked divergence from the Truth teachings was in connection with Youthful Worthies in relation to the Narrow Way. For years you stoutly resisted the Truth that the Youthful Worthies are on the Broad Way, and persistently held to the error that they are on the Narrow Way.... You reasoned also that “The Elect” are on the Narrow Way, and because the Youthful Worthies are an elect class, they there­fore must be on the Narrow Way also. On one occasion you went so far as to apply Heb. 10:20 to them, in support of your erroneous view .... You held that the Great Company were on the Narrow Way. But the mere fact that they will not attain to the Divine Nature (A 214:1) – the only prize to which the Narrow Way leads (A 211:1) – is in itself positive proof that the Great Company are not on the Narrow Way.”

Let us now examine some comments from R. G. Jolly on this subject, set forth on page 57, col. 2 (bottom) of the July 1955 Present Truth, and top of page 58:

“The Youthful Worthies (and the Consecrated Epiphany Campers) also conse­crate unto death.... in their opposition to sin and in their service of righteousness (The Campers “service to righteousness” is outside the linen curtain of Righteousness, according to R. G. Jolly—JJH). The evil conditions that must be opposed in such a course wear out and take away life. Thus they also walk A narrow way of deadness to self and the world and aliveness to God....; as members of the Household of Faith (The Court only contains the Household of Faith—JJH) they partake of the antitypi­cal Passover Lamb.... Thus the Youthful Worthies (and the Consecrated Epiphany Campers), like the Great Company, are surely traveling A narrow way, of which also it may truth­fully be said: ‘And few there be that find it.’” (Yet he tells his adherents that there are many quasi-elect to be found and become Epiphany Campers Consecrated, which is one of their main services since 1954—JJH)

From the foregoing, it would seem — if both have stated themselves as they believe – ­that R. G. Jolly and his present Trinidad representative, Errol Robertson, are not even “in harmony” with each other (They “agreed not together”!); they don’t even agree on the errors they now teach – to say nothing about the Truth on the various items. In this same connection, when Fred Blaine was in Trinidad last February we actually advised some of our readers to attend his meetings, because we were persuaded that the more they heard of his bungling attempts to defend the Jolly-Robertson errors, the more fully would they be persuaded to cleave unto the Truth teachings of the Star Members as we have been pre­senting them. Did Errol Robertson direct any of the brethren in his Ecclesia to attend any of our meetings August 13-19? Thank God, dear Brethren, that “God hath not given US the spirit of fear.” At every turn it becomes more apparent that the LHMM is not only in Little Babylon, but they are also actually in Babylon (confusion) among them­selves. It is a sorry spectacle indeed when those who once tasted of the Good Word of God (the Truth) come to such bedlam, and it should serve as a sober warning to all – ­not only in Trinidad, but to the entire Household of Faith throughout the earth,

There will probably be more on the Trinidad situation in due course. We now observe, however, that the reason for their confusion is this: Just as in the above quotation from R. G. Jolly, the very Scriptures he quotes to support his errors, actually defeat him.


NO. 99: RESPONDING TO THE TRUMPET'S CALL

by Epiphany Bible Students


No. 99

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

“If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Cor. 14:8) This query by St. Paul is undoubtedly prompted by the record of the two silver trumpets which the Lord told Moses to make (See Numbers 10), and which Brother Johnson has explained typify the Old and New Testament Bible mes­sages. That these would be typical is evidenced by the fact that they had to do with the law and the Tabernacle arrangements and the march of the Israelites from Egypt to Canaan. They were to be blown “for the calling of the assembly, and for the journeying of the camps.” That these trumpets served more than one purpose is clearly stated in v. 5 – “blow an alarm”; and in v. 10 – “in your day of rejoicing and in your appointed seasons.”

While the main purpose of this article is the feature of v. 5, we first offer some comment on the second feature – the “Appointed seasons.” Chief of these was the sounding of the Jubilee Trumpet every fiftieth year, which was to proclaim a special year of rest for man and land; and to set at liberty such of the Israelites whose improvidence had forced them into a state of slavery with their brethren.  This Jubilee trumpet year was typical of the grand year of Jubilee, the great thousand ­year day, the reign of the Christ which is to free mankind from the slavery of sin and death now more than six thousand years gone. This is described in Revelation 10 and 11 as the “seventh trumpet,” whose sounding began in 1874 and will continue through­out the entire thousand-year day during which Satan, who “has the power of death” (Heb. 2:14) is to be bound that he may deceive the nations no more.  Thus, we our­selves are now living during the sounding of this trumpet.

And, since we are so directly concerned with the seventh trumpet's sounding, it is well that we consider a few of its more important messages. Among the first of these is that given in Rev. 10:6: “There should be time no longer.” This statement has been accepted literally by the great bulk of Christendom, even to using the hymn, “When my work on earth is ended, and time shall be no more.” Just a little reflection must impress us that time must continue so long as there is any intelligence remain­ing to note and be influenced by time; and, since Jehovah Himself is without begin­ning or ending, so also time itself must be. Therefore, the hymn is a self-evident inanity.

That Evil Servant also offered a perversion of this text almost equally ludicrous when his 'Millions Now Living Will Never Die' and his 1925 deadline were time-proven error. To divert attention from his colossal blunder on that date he proposed the interpretation that, since so many mistakes had been made on time interpretations, therefore, no more consideration should be given the subject. This also caused him to cast aside the Pyramid with its many time-feature truths.

To answer this revolting perversion Brother Johnson directed attention to the proper translation of the text from the Diaglott: “The time shall be no longer de­layed” – that is, the long-awaited “manifestation of the sons of God,” for which the slave-burdened human race has been waiting with groanings and travailings, would be­gin to be made manifest by their proceeding to establish the Mediatorial Kingdom in power and great glory for the “blessing of all the families of the earth.” And among the first blasts of the Seventh Trumpet was That Servant's declaration that the Millennial morning had most certainly appeared to extirpate the rule of sin and death.

Another of the initial features of the Seventh Trumpet is given in Rev.  10:7, “The mystery of God should be finished” – that “mystery which was kept secret  since the world began” (Rom. 16:25) that the Christ is not an individual, but a composite company (See Berean Comments). It was this text that furnished the name for Volume Seven, “The Finished Mystery,” and which caused the sorest of trials upon God's people in 1917-1918. That book, which was made a test of fellowship by the Society then, has since become “expurgatus,” with the present-day Society adherents forbidden to read it. Those of us who became involved in that grievous trial should have learned well the lesson that we should approach with much trepidation and minutest scrutiny any new publication by crown-lost leaders; but, sad to relate, so very few profited by the experience. At that period were there not only “great voices in Heaven, but the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead that they should be judged.” (Rev. 11:15-18)

THE CALL TO BATTLE

But, not only did the seventh trumpet announce “your day of rejoicing,” it also gave out the call for all spiritual Israel to gird themselves for the battle of this Great Day, and to wholeheartedly respond to the Harvest message of Present Truth, to proclaim the controversial messages of the Harvest time the Truth against error. ''And if ye go to war in your land (the sphere of the Truth and its spirit) ... ye shall be remembered before the Lord your God, and ye shall be saved from your enemies.” (Num. 10:9) Here, then, is the promise of victory to all those who wholeheartedly respond to the Trumpet's call – “saved from your enemies” – the same being sin, error, selfishness and worldliness. And the rules of the conflict are the same for all – ­“Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger (the Youthful Worthies), as for one of your own country” – the Church of the Firstborn. (Lev. 24:22) Typical of the conflict in the beginning of this Millennial day is the record of Gideon and his fully faithful band of three hundred (Judges 7:15-23), wherein the Truth people went forth to do battle with the antitypical Midianites (present-day errorists). And in that type it was Gideon blowing his trumpet (v. 18) that signaled the others to blow with their trumpets, the which brought consternation and complete demoralization to the Camp of Midian. The blowing of the trumpet was the call to Battle.

AS “GOOD SOLDIERS”

And be it remembered that it was only after very minute instructions that Gideon and his three hundred proceeded to that battle – typical of the fact that the fully faithful in the end of this Age would also be thoroughly instructed in the cause, the method, and the art of the battle of the Great Day – “the weapons of our warfare are not carnal,” but are the “sword of the spirit, which is the Word of God.” Thus is stressed the necessity for knowing the Truth and imbibing fully of its spirit – and emphasized in the Manna comment for December 20, “Only the studious find the narrow way to the Divine approval and acceptance.''

It is well that we bear in mind that our Lord, “the Captain of our Salvation,” never sends forth His soldiers without sufficient instruction to gain for them com­plete victory, so long as they are faithful. None are ever asked to do more than they are able to do. We recall an instance that was told to us very early in the Epiphany, wherein it was related how Brother Russell on a certain occasion was assigning some symposium topics to various brethren. One of them, receiving a sub­ject which was difficult and new to him, began to make excuse, whereupon Brother Russell asked if he were going to whimper and whine his way out of the battle, or if he would be a “good soldier.” The brother accepted without further protest, and gave an excellent account of himself for the service.  Apropos to this incident are the March 28 Manna comments: “The true soldier does not debate his cause. He is rightly supposed to have settled upon its justice and righteousness before he enlisted to serve it.” Therefore, we may properly conclude that we must first learn the rules, then resolve to obey them in every circumstance, whereupon we shall certainly be able to “endure hardness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.”

Nor does “hardness” come in a day, a week, or a year;  it is the result of “patient continuance in well  doing – perseverance  in  good  works”  (Rom.  2:7—Dia.) – just as the successful boxer must do miles of 'road work' in training for a bout, skipping rope, etc., to develop hardness and stamina in his legs, back and arms if he would eventually prevail. And by similar comparison must we engage in persistent study of the Truth if we would be “weaned from the milk” (Isa. 28:9) and become “skillful in the word of righteousness” (Heb. 5:13), if we would see victory as “good soldiers.” And it is by the victories of such good soldiers who “endure hardness” that the Truth progresses. Most of us have been witness to this, retrospectively or actively, all during the Parousia-Epiphany days. It is the controversies with error that have advanced the fully faithful in Grace, knowledge and privilege of service –­ even as those same controversies have scattered and discomfited the errorists, so well typified in Gideon's victory over Midian.

A “BAD SPIRIT”

And all during the Gospel Age, but particularly now at its close, when the errorists have been so badly routed that they become speechless, they have then embraced the battle cry of last resort –Those who wield the Truth against them have a “bad spirit.” To this day the foremost argument of the Roman Catholics against Martin Luther is that he showed a “bad spirit,” because he stunned them with the unanswerable truth against their many errors. It needs no argument that dear Brother Luther did not assail his opponents with 'kid gloves'; in fact, his wording was at times so rough and vivid that for a time Brother Johnson questioned his saintly standing – he found it difficult to understand how any one using the language Luther did could be of the Little Flock. But he finally came to realize that the times then prevailing required such a person as Luther to make his message effective with the people of that day. Respecting Luther, we emphasize that Brother Johnson in final judgment counted Luther as one of the fully faithful 49 Stars – held in the Lord's “right hand” (Rev. 1:16) – regardless of his “bad spirit.”

And in 1917 the same retort of “bad spirit” was hurled at Brother Johnson, too He described H. J. Shearn, of England, as the most cunning hypocrite he had ever met; yet that trickster gave answer, “You see, brethren, the 'spirit' that he shows.” Others of the discomfited Levites embraced the same weapon, as he smote their errors hip and thigh, and sent them into demoralized retreat, yelling “bad spirit” back over their shoulders as they ran. In answer to a letter we sent That Evil Servant, he said, among other things, “Paul S. L. Johnson is vilifying me.” Yes, J. F. Rutherford was really being vilified – by the Truth, poor fellow!

Be it emphasized that the errorists have always been good runners, instead of “good soldiers” – just as the Midianites ran over each other that night in the valley of Moreh in their effort to separate themselves in haste from the small handful of men who were blowing their trumpets in no uncertain sound. Moreh means “teacher,” in allusion to the fact that so many errorists set themselves up as Pastors and Teachers in defiance of God's faithful mouthpieces. Instance the case of Arius when he boldly faced the overwhelming odds at the Council of Nice – “the Midianites like grasshoppers for multitude” (Judges 7:12). And against that horde came one old man, supported by but two others, to do battle as a “good soldier” against about 380 opponents. Arius, then almost 75 years old, was banished from the Roman Empire, a sentence sufficient to crush even a young vigorous man; yet this “good soldier,” who blew the trumpet message that “THERE IS BUT ONE GOD,” accepted that trying edict, not as a runner, but as the good soldier that he was; went to North Africa, and there organized a virile group of Christians in the remaining eleven years of his life. And what did they call themselves? Why, Arians, of course! Having responded to the trumpet's call, Arius was a good soldier to the last.

Thus, it does not surprise us that we ourselves have had similar experience since Brother Johnson's death, especially in recent months. As example, Fred Blaine in Trinidad, who also proved himself a good runner when we invited him to meet with us on the platform before the brethren there – although we assume he did his usual good job of talking “proven sifter,” of whispering about the “bad spirit of JJH” – at a safe distance from the battle front. And the “cousins” also (Jolly­-Krewson) have been profuse with their accusations of “bad spirit,” even as they con­fuse and contradict each other – in like manner as did the Midianites at Moreh. As example, the correct date for the Memorial: J. W. Krewson contends it is a Little Flock developing Truth (although Brother Johnson himself clearly states it is a Great Company developing Truth) – as R. G. Jolly is silent on this feature, appar­ently fearing to handle that point at all. Note the similarity here with Mark 14:56: “Many bear false witness against Him, but their witness agreed not together.” Also, J. W. Krewson says our quotation from Brother Johnson – “Never before the Vernal Equinox” – is a quotation from Josephus (more “false witness”)” – even as R. G. Jolly ignores Brother Johnson's statement completely. Other similar instances could readily be offered, but we would spare you, not wishing to make this article over-­lengthy. But in all of this the “cousins” have been excellent 'whisperers' about the “bad spirit” of JJH, as note J. W. Krewson's paper of March-April No. 49, pp. 9 and 14; but “their witness agrees not together.” (Mark 14:56)

The feature of response to the trumpet's sound throughout this Gospel Age may be stressed in the good fight against sins of teaching and practice in entrenched strongholds of error. The fight against sin, selfishness and worldliness, indivi­dually considered, has been more of the head and the heart within the “good soldiers” themselves; but the conflict with errors of teaching and practice is the phase of battle that has made voluminous record in the pages of history. It was Jesus' faith­ful “witness to the Truth” against Jewish priestcraft that cost Him His life—­John 18:37 (See Berean Comment). It was exposure of errors by the faithful against the papal system that brought upon them the excruciating persecutions, indescribable for their heinous cruelty, and which spilled “the blood of prophets and of saints” (Rev. 18:24). It was That Servant's attacks against the Midianite strongholds of eternal torment and inherent human immortality that brought upon him the venom and slander of Christendom – so much so that when one brother once said to him, “Brother Russell, you are the most loved man on earth,” he replied, “Yes, and the most hated!” The same may be said for Brother Johnson. When he discomfited the crown-lost errorists, and put them to complete silence, they then proceeded to whisper, “He hath a Devil –­ He is Satanized – He is an insane usurper.” And, since “The Disciple is not above his Lord,” need it concern any of us if we receive the same treatment, we who were counted among his disciples? All thus abused have the strong assurance of our Lord's inter­ceding prayer on our behalf, “Rise up, and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee” – let the errorists do the running, as the faith­ful “good soldiers” do the pursuing with the Truths at their disposal.

“GIVING ALL DILIGENCE”

When St. Peter appeals to the Fully Faithful to “give all diligence” (2 Pet 1:5), he also offers the appealing assurance that those who do as he counsels “shall never fall” – even though we have need of reminder, though we know these  things  and “be established in the PRESENT TRUTH.” It is also the counsel of  the  worldly  sage  that  “Diligence is the mother of good fortune” – to which may be added  the  words of  Solomon, “Seest thou a man diligent in his business? he shall stand before kings.” (Prov. 22:29) And the chief striving of every “good soldier” who answers the trumpet's call should be diligence to “put on the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the Devil” (Eph. 6:11) – the especially deceptive false teachings of the errorists, the antitypical Midianites. And to all such who give such diligence in response to the trumpet's call, to all such the promise is sure, “There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling” (Isa. 91:10) – no sifting error can possibly contaminate our abode.

Sincerely your brother,

John J.  Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – On pp. 55,56 of this July Bible Standard Brother Jolly announces another new tract for special distribution to Jehovah's Witnesses. What is your opinion of the tract?  Is it doctrinally true?

ANSWER: – When R. G. Jolly says, “Israel as a nation will be the first of the nations to come into harmony with the new order of affairs on earth,” he is stating a generalized truth, somewhat after the manner of Brother Russell in Volumes 1, 3 and 4; but this forces us once more to inquire, Is it motive or ignorance that prompts him to avoid clarification? Brother Russell offers a correct and detailed explanation of the question in Reprints 5164, Jan. 15, 1913 Watch Tower as follows:

“The New Covenant will begin to swallow up the old Law Covenant as soon as the Kingdom is established. The Scriptures indicate that the first to receive it will be the Ancient Worthies. Raised from the dead to human perfection, they will form the nucleus of the new arrangements in the earth. Next in order will be those who have been known as Christians (the quasi-elect—JJH), but who have not consecrated to death (as R. G. Jolly claims for his Campers Consecrated—JJH), and Jews who have been consecrated to the law, but who have been blinded. Gradually the light will come to all who love righteousness and hate iniquity. Sprinkled from all sympathy with evil, they will make their declaration of full loyalty to God. In due time this light will spread to all kindred and tongues and nations.”

The foregoing is a true definition of the quasi-elect, which is explained in the same exact manner, but using different words, by Brother Johnson in E-10:209 – ­“The Epiphany Camp in the finished picture is the condition of truly repentant and believing, but not consecrated Jews and Gentiles.”

It should not require much spiritual understanding to realize that the foregoing statements by both Star Members will not embrace the Jewish nation in all its living individuals throughout the earth, but just a representative part – even only a part of those now in Palestine, or yet to arrive before Jacob's Trouble – any more than could be said of all individuals of the Jewish nation in the Jewish Age (although our Lord presented Himself at His First Advent to the Jew – the first to receive the Gospel Message, even though only a representative few accepted Him). The large majority of them failed to receive the blessings of the Mosaic Covenant, almost all of the “ten lost tribes” losing it, with the majority of the remaining minority also losing it. “Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh.” (Rom. 11:7) “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly.” (Rom. 2:28) If we are very exacting, then we are forced to state that the qualified Jews in Palestine at the time the Kingdom is established (those still trusting in the promises to “the fathers”) will begin to receive the blessing of the quasi-elect even before their Christian section of the same class of “sons” (Joel 2:28) begin to receive theirs.  The promise, “To the Jew first” (Rom. 2:9,10) is certain of accomplishment – if for no other reason than that they will be “on the ground floor” – right there in the land of Palestine when “the fathers” appear on the scene; but in addition to reason and facts, we have “also a more sure word of prophecy” (2 Pet. 1:19) given by our Lord as cited above, which is all-sufficient for us, But, before that time arrives, the undesirables – those not of the quasi-elect – ­will have been eliminated – “half the city shall go forth into captivity” (Zech. 14:1-3).

It is our conviction that R. G. Jolly understood all of the foregoing when he was under the benign supervision of the Epiphany Messenger. Why, then, is he com­pletely silent about it in his new tract? Can it be he is back to his old trick of “misrepresentation” (See E-10:585), of which Brother Johnson warned the General Church? He has been telling his Campers Consecrated that they will be chief above all the quasi-­elect, because of their “consecration unto death,” and would naturally be the first to be blessed under the Worthies – with a higher standing before the Lord than the unconsecrated quasi-elect; whereas, his new tract says the Jewish nation will be first to be blessed.  The JW's use similar technique by telling their “Great Multitude” that they will precede all others – so there is little to choose between the promises they make to their hybrid non-existent class than there is of the promises R. G. Jolly is making to his Campers Consecrated, with both of them offering “strange fire” (false doctrine) in their attempts to “run ahead of the Lord” and create a special Restitution Class not described in the Scriptures or taught by either of the last two Principal Men.  This reminds us of two unscrupulous political parties, each trying to out-promise the other, with the voters asking in disgust, “Why change? What can you give us that we don't already have?” Certainly, there is not much incentive for the JW's “Great Multitude” to decide to become Campers consecrated; so we ask if R. G. Jolly may have thought of all this when preparing his new tract, or if this is some more Parousia-­Epiphany Truth on which he is now “sitting in darkness” (Psa. 107:10)? Please note he has defined quite clearly and correctly the true four elect classes of the Kingdom – ­but not one word about his own semi-elect consecrated fifth class in his recently ­constructed Camp – the same being a very close “relative'' to the JW's “Great Multitude.” Just an oversight, would you say – or “handling the Word of God deceitfully”?—2 Cor. 4:2. In our Three Babylons Tract we have presented the true view on this subject, exactly as Brother Russell and Brother Johnson taught it – as we have also analyzed the erroneous views of the JW's and LHMM on their hybrid non-existent classes, and have shown them to be perversions (Azazel means Perverter) by crown-lost leaders in Little Babylon of the Truth given by the last two Star Members. As for ourselves, we still accept in total the teachings of both Messengers, as defined aforegoing, the same being summarized in E-4:342 (7) as follows:

“Those faithful consecrators from 1881 until Restitution sets in, for whom there are no crowns available, and hence no spirit-begetting for Gospel-Age purposes, will be the Millennial associates of the Ancient Worthies in reward and service” – (with the unconsecrated but repentant and believing Jews and Gentiles comprising the quasi-elect, the “sons” of Joel 2:23—JJH).

And to afford credence and substance to the foregoing by Brother Johnson, we offer this from Brother Russell:

“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 ... Our thought is that whoever under such conditions as these will make a full consecration to the Lord, to leave all to follow in 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.” (This is exactly as we have presented it in “earnestly contending for the faith once delivered unto the saints” – Star Members – Jude 3—JJH) See Reprints 5761, Sept. 1, 1915 Watch Tower.

Be it noted that Brother Johnson built his Epiphany elaborations exactly in line with Parousia teachings, just as we do with both Parousia and Epiphany teachings (“The advancing Truth does not set aside the Truth formerly received, as some deceivers teach” – E-9:19 – as do the “Cousins” with their new false doctrine of Campers consecrated or Quasi-elect consecrated). And all during Brother Johnson's ministry he was refuting and denouncing the non-existent class of the Jehovah's Witnesses, just as we are now doing with the LHMM non-existent class – the only difference between Brother Johnson and us at present being that now we are burdened with just one more such non-existent class (Campers consecrated), which places an additional obligation upon us because of the deflection of our fellow pilgrims and former brethren. Gospel-Age history con­tinues to repeat itself all through its last special stage (the Epiphany period). Brother Johnson's extra burdens were also imposed by his fellow pilgrims and former brethren.

And what shall we say of the same class of leaders here in the end of this Age, but to repeat what our Beloved Lord said of the Scribes and Pharisees at the begin­ning of the Gospel Age: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves”—Matt. 23;15; and the Berean Comments on this Scripture: “With your missionary activities... One convert to your false and therefore injurious doctrines.... The effect of the preaching of the bungling argu­ments of sectarianism in India has been to turn the whole country from heathenism to complete infidelity.” (Yet R. G. Jolly claims they are bringing them to “justification”!)

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

LETTERS  OF  GENERAL  INTEREST

Dear Sirs: – Recently the husband of one of the members of my parish died. Several days later she received in the mail a copy of the Herald of the Epiphany, a special edition for August 1st, 1959. The letter was mailed from some place in Con­necticut. It was unsigned and there was no return address. It was obvious that the sender had apparently read of the death in the newspaper and had addressed the corres­pondence to Mrs. ------- in hopes that under the duress of grief, this particular point of view of death and life after death might find acceptance.

This whole thing was extremely upsetting to Mrs. -------. She and I both feel that this kind of thing is neither good taste nor good Christianity. She and her family are regularly at worship in our church. They find their faith in Jesus Christ both helpful and inspiring. One of her sons is seriously considering the ministry as his vocation.

I realize that you may have little control over this kind of activity but if you do, I hope that you will do what you can to see that it ends. I will affirm your right to publish and to distribute literature and propaganda. But I do think that it is un­fair to enter a family's life with this kind of thing at the time of death.  Certainly I cannot imagine that Jesus would do this kind of thing.

Sincerely, ------- Minister (MASSACHUSETTS)

Our answer to the above letter:

Sir: – Christian Greetings!

In your letter of March 8 you inform us that your member Mrs. ------- received one of our papers after the burial of her husband, and that the contents of our tract are objectionable to you. We have no way of knowing who sent Mrs. ------- the paper; but we are convinced that the paper contained the Truth as revealed in the inspired Record if it bore our name. Therefore, when you resent “the entrance of that Word that giveth light” (Psa. 119:130), I cannot but wonder whether you are properly motivated in your ministerial activities. Those who love God's Word seek to bless others – ­especially in “their time of need” – with the comforting assurance of His Plan of Salvation and a future hope for the dead. That is my understanding of a Christian's obligation toward others, as embodied in that “wisdom that is from above.”

When you say you “cannot imagine Jesus would do this kind of thing,” I remind you of a prophetic text concerning Him (Isa. 61:1-3): “The spirit of the Lord is... upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek... to bind up the brokenhearted.... to comfort all that mourn.... the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness.” Self-evidently, this text would have its primary appli­cation in just such a case as the death of Mr. -------; and in what better way can any of us apply ourselves to the grief-stricken than by ministering “the Good Word of God”? Surely, you yourself know that the ministers and leaders of our Lord's Day, the High Priest in particular (“he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin”—­John 19:11), resented Him because He bore ''witness to the Truth” (which exposed their errors). Since the “servant is not above his Master,” we are not too much surprised when we receive much the same treatment from present-day ministers and leaders.

When Mrs. ------- came to you with our paper, could it possibly be that its most dis­turbing feature to you was the Truth it contained, and that she herself wanted to know how to reconcile this Truth with the error that you and others have taught her in the past?

No, my dear sir, I think Jesus would have done even as we have done had He been here under circumstances similar to ours; and we may be sure that He would have re­ceived much the same 'objections' from you and others that we receive as we seek to be a good witness and “good soldier” of Jesus Christ.

Sincerely yours, John J. Hoefle – Executive Director

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

My dear Brother Hoefle – Greetings in His dear Name!

I appreciate your letter of June 7 very much, and also the last article you mentioned. I can't see how it could be better! I sure get blessings and wonder­ful help from them – in fact, all your writings are uplifting and encouraging, and are ringing true with both Parousia and Epiphany Truth. How we can “Praise the Lord for His merciful kindness is great toward us.” I am so thankful to the dear Lord for you, dear Brother, and I pray for the Lord to keep you faithful, so that we can be faithful –­ and rejoice in the Truth greatly.

I know Brother ------- got the papers, for he told me he had read them – and he, too, thought they were good....

My Christian love to you and all with you – and May the Lord's rich blessing be with you all is my prayer. Your sister in the One Faith ------- (PENNSYLVANIA)

P.S.  Please send some more tracts....Thank you!

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

OUR SPECIAL EFFORT: – In harmony with Bro. Johnson's custom, we designate October 13 through Nov. 10, which includes five Sundays – in which all may participate in serving at Church doors who have opportunity – for our Special Effort in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle. The Epiphany Messenger did this in honor of the memory of That Wise and Faithful Servant, who “poured out his soul unto death” in faithfully presenting these Truths to Big Babylon, and refuting and resisting their errors. We also invite all who are 'like-minded' to join with us in the distribution of the Three Babylons tract (which is a summary of Epiphany teaching) to individuals and groups in Little Babylon, in special remembrance and honor of the Epiphany Messenger, who likewise “poured out his soul unto death” in faithfully presenting these Truths to Little Babylon, while resisting and refuting their errors.  We call our readers' atten­tion to Bro. Johnson's statement on the Gideon tracts as follows:

“We now see that the public testimony that the Little Flock has been giving against Eternal Torment and the Consciousness of the Dead is connected with the leading of nominal-church section of Azazel's Goat from the door of the Tabernacle to the Gate of the Court .... We are certain that the faithful (Little Flock) will be the only ones to persist therein (1) unto a completion (2) in the true spirit of the High Priest,”

And to this we add: “True enough (v. 4), the dear ones who participate in this conflict are antitypically faint, i.e., they are weak in numbers and in resources: but the Lord God Almighty is with them by His Vicegerent, our beloved Gideon, the Lord Jesus, who is invested with all authority in heaven and in earth (Matt. 23:20), and with whom but one is a majority and an invincible host! And with an unwavering faith in and an implicit obedience to Him, though faint, they are yet pursuing! And with Him they will yet capture antitypical Zebah and Zalmunna, as they have struck them a blow, before which they are even now in ignominious flight with their terrified host.”See E-5:237 (64)

And we are certain that the faithful Youthful Worthies will heartily join with them, even as they did under Bro. Johnson – because we know any participation in the Battles of the Faithful will surely receive the approval and reward of the Lord. So, to all the faithful – whether Priests or Youthfuls – we gladly supply these “timely tracts” free, carrying charges prepaid, our only limitation being the recommendation that no more be ordered than will be faithfully distributed in the true spirit of a “good soldier” in this Battle. And we ask all to join with us in praying, God bless their memory!


NO. 98: OUR JULY PAPER NO. 97 (CONTINUED)

by Epiphany Bible Students


No. 98

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

Due to the time element and other considerations, we were unable to give full analysis to the May-June Present Truth, so we now keep our promise to present further comment thereon; and we begin with Brother Johnson's statement in E-5:497 (25):

''The reason for the reassertion of the Parousia Truth is that many who were once its exponents as pilgrims, elders, etc., are seeking to over­throw it. As Satan's mouthpieces, in proportion to their abilities they are attacking the Truth that they once professed to hold as dearer than life itself. Some of these attack some of its features; others attack others of its features; and by the time that the sixty groups of Levites will have been formed (the LHMM is one of those sixty groups – JJH), every feature of the Parousia Truth will have been repudiated and attacked by one or another of the sixty groups of Levite leaders.”

We now present to R. G. Jolly and Fred Blaine our Question No. 16: Do you believe the above teaching by the Epiphany Messenger? But, as we await their answer, we now proceed to explain why Brother Johnson could logically reach such a conclusion. In E-8:192, he offers this fact: “The crown-lost leaders in all cases perverted some doctrinal feature in the teachings given by the Little Flock crown-retaining leaders. “ We find this even more to the point in E-5:499:

''He (Bro. Johnson) abhors controversy with brethren (just as we also do–JJH), and at first had, by the Lord to be pushed into it, greatly against his inclina­tions (as was also our own experience – JJH).... Just as after the Apostles fell asleep, Satan used crown-losing leaders who hungered for a following to pervert the Apostolic Truth, until it was lost from the earth through their efforts, culminating in the papacy; so after That Servant passed beyond the veil, Satan began to raise up crown-lost leaders to take away from the Church the Truth that the Lord gave by him, seeking to destroy it entirely,”

Thus, it should not surprise us at all to see R. G. Jolly doing identically the same thing that his kinsmen in the other 59 groups have been doing – something he was not in position to do until he was fully abandoned to Azazel in 1950. Let us not for­get that Brother Johnson taught that all new creatures were to be regarded as Priests, and in the Holy, until they revolutionized, and were then forced into the Court. But so long as they remained in the Holy, many of them (even including That Evil Servant before he became such – and including also R. G. Jolly before his manifesta­tion in 1938) gave commendable and valiant aid to the Truth movement. It was only after their abandonment to Azazel that all of the Epiphany Levite leaders began their headlong rush to pervert various features of the Parousia Truth. That is why Brother Johnson states in E-10:398:

“As long as the priesthood does not abandon crown losers, Azazel cannot possess himself of them.”

And, according to R. G. Jolly's own admission, Brother Johnson never at any time dur­ing the latter's life abandoned R. G. Jolly (withdrew brotherly fellowship from him). That is why he retained – on the surface, at least – the Epiphany Truth while restrained by Brother Johnson's presence with us; and that is why we may be fully certain now that he is not cleansed, as he claims. Otherwise, he would not have become so befuddled by Azazel that he would have accepted and persistently retains, those perversions of Parousia and Epiphany Truth that were fed to him by his “cousin” J. W. Krewson.

And he kill continue to “wallow” in such errors until he comes to a correct understanding and sufficient honesty to admit the truth (“they admitted not the love of the Truth”– 2 Thes. 2:10, Dia.) on the abandonment procedure for all crown-losers, as set out so succinctly and clearly in E-15:525-527 and in E-4:210 – a teaching on which he self-evidently wasn't clear – although he may have understood, perhaps vaguely, its workings toward crown-losers in other groups. This is exactly as Brother Johnson taught about this Class, as it is recorded in E-4:129!

“Whatever the Lord may give during the Epiphany for the priests alone will be for them alone, until it has served its secret purpose; then it will be under­stood by the properly disposed Levites. E.g., now the understanding of the priestly matters pertinent to leading Azazel's Goat to the Gate, delivering him to the fit man and abandoning him to Azazel, is withheld from them. After they are cleansed, they will understand these things.”

Clearly enough, R. G. Jolly does not yet understand this doctrine; and this in turn is prima facie evidence that he cannot possibly be cleansed. Otherwise, he would understand it, as Brother Johnson has stated he would. Indeed, here is provided a striking example in proof of this Epiphany teaching – the most prominent crown-loser (R. G. Jolly) in the Epiphany Movement, one who was proof-reading about everything Bro. Johnson wrote, yet no more grasping its portent as applicable to himself than those who had never read the teaching – even though Brother Johnson cogently emphasized its applicability to all crown-losers in all its features before they can be cleansed – ­the same applying to the very best of them right in the Epiphany Movement (to those who lost their crowns by the “skin of their teeth”– Please see E-15:525).

Note also that Brother Johnson insisted that crown-losers were never forced out of the Holy until they revolutionized – that they must first revolutionize before they could be abandoned by the Priests and delivered over to Azazel. Yet, in the face of this clear Epiphany teaching, R. G. Jolly immediately declared all new creatures in the Epiphany Movement, and everywhere, to be crown-losers at Brother Johnson's death; and received them (of the LHMM group) and used them as Pilgrims, contrary to Brother Johnson's action with R. G. Jolly when he was manifested in 1938, and forced out of the Holy. However, since 1950 all the LHMM leaders who have embraced R. G. Jolly's errors have clearly revolutionized against Epiphany Truth and some features of Parousia Truth, thus definitely manifesting themselves – although this conclusion certainly would not apply to those Epiphany new creatures who have left him. That is why we insist that some priests are to be found among those who have not revolutionized. To all of our readers we urge another careful reading of The Epiphany Messenger's writings as cited herein. Especially do we stress this with our Youthful Worthy readers, because revolutionism by them would in principle label them in like manner to revolutionizing new creatures – a loss of their Class standing and the Lord's disapproval.

THE PARALLEL OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES

It should be kept in mind that Brother Russell here in the reaping feature of the Gospel-Age Harvest was an exact parallel to the twelve Apostles in the reaping feature of the Jewish Harvest; and, as soon as those Apostles passed from their earthly activities, the crown-lost leaders began immediately to pervert one after another of their teachings. That is why Brother Johnson could reach the conclusion he did in E-5:497; and we ourselves have been witness to the truth of his observation, even moreso than he himself had been, because the last Levite post to operate as such under a crown-lost leader is the L.H.M.M., which process could not begin until after Brother Johnson's death. And what do we see with respect to this group? Have they not matched stride for stride their kinsmen in the other 59 groups? And does this not automatically prove all of the sixty groups to be Little Babylon – confusion? Here are just a few illustrations:

(l) – They now teach Tentative Justification in the Camp; whereas, the Parousia Truth (and confirmed and reasserted repeatedly by the Epiphany Messenger because of the Epiphany crown-lost leaders' perversions on Tentative Justification) stated this condition is typed in the Court.

(2) –     In Tower Reprints, page 5526, caption “The Present Crisis,” Brother Russell says this, in part: “The present terrible war is not the great time of trouble in its fullest sense of the word, but merely its forerunner. The great time of trouble of the Scriptures (the Epiphany period in its fullest sense, because the Epiphany and the Time of Trouble are identicalJH) will be brought on by Anarchy – ­the general uprising of the people;. as the Prophet says, 'every man's hand against his neighbor' – Zech. 8:10.” (But R. G. Jolly has the 'overlapping' of the Time of Trouble – The Epiphany period – taking place when only the 'forerunner' – as Bro. Russell tells us – has transpired–JJH)

Clearly enough, if Brother Russell is right, the Prophet is here describing the Great Tribulation, the Epiphany period in the “fullest sense of the word.” R. G. Jolly now repudiates this Parousia Truth by having the Epiphany period end in its “restricted sense” in 1954; whereas, it has not yet even in 1963 arrived in the “fullest sense of the word” if the Parousia Messenger knew whereof he wrote. And the “cousin” (J. W, Krewson) has the Epiphany period as a thing of the past, before it has actually arrived in “the fullest sense of the word.” This perversion by the both of them is exactly in keeping with perversions of other truths by the crown-lost leaders in the other 59 groups, except worse for the “cousins” because of the greater light received by them from the Epiphany Messenger. This conclusion by us is also based upon another Parousia teaching, as given in the Berean Comment on 2 Thes. 2:11: “Great delusions are just before us, and some of these may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth.”

Therefore, we now propound our Question No. 17 to Fred Blaine and R. G. Jolly: Do you believe the foregoing teaching by the Parousia Messenger, a teaching which was accepted in every detail by the Epiphany Messenger?

CERTAIN SCRIPTURES IGNORED

In E-4:341 Brother Johnson makes this comment: ''This method of making people forget certain phases of a doctrine by ignoring them,, and by talking as the purpose in view required on others of its phases exclusively, whenever discus­sion of that doctrine occurred, was characteristic of, and conducive to the great falling away in the beginning of the Age..”

Surely, all of us know – even as those now truth-repudiating leaders of the LHMM themselves know – that it has ever been a characteristic of all errorists to stress such Scriptures as suit their purpose, even as they ignore, or even repudiate, other Scriptures that would utterly destroy their position. Early in the Epiphany we were refuting an errorist on the state of the dead, etc., at which he cited Elijah's whirl­wind experience, to prove that here at least was one that had gone to Heaven. When we quoted in offset John 3:13, “No man hath ascended into Heaven,” he violently cast down the Bible, and shouted, “I don't believe that!” – and walked away.

Thus, also, Jehovah's Witnesses are now forced to ignore certain Scriptures which destroy their present contentions. In their funeral discourses they no longer quote 1 Tim. 2:4, “God will have all men to be saved, and to come to a knowledge of the Truth”; just as they also now pass by 1 Cor. 15:22, “As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” Likewise, a Christian Science reader made use of Rom. 8:17 in his funeral oration, “If children, then heirs, and joint-heirs with Jesus Christ.” And right there he stopped, knowing that the remainder of the text, “if so be that we suffer with Him,” would cause him to appear imbecilic, since they contend there is no suffering – it's all just a state of mind.

CONSECRATION IN THE CAMP

Come now R. G. Jolly and his henchmen no longer using Heb. 13:13, “Let us go forth therefore unto Him without the camp, bearing his reproach.” In times past this was always an appropriate and often-used text in consecration discourses; but not so any longer in the LHMM. Even the merest beginners might want to know just how they are to “go to Him without the camp,” even as they are now being told that they come to Him ''within the camp” – as Consecrated Campers. Last Fall at the Chicago Convention August Gohlke made quite some point in his discourse of how one section of those formerly associated with them had gone to one extreme, while the other section had gone to the other extreme – even as they themselves were occupying “the golden middle.”. Indeed, there was much more Truth mixed in with his error than he himself realized. Had he but omitted the word “golden,” his statement would have been the full truth; for they are now decidedly occupying the “middle” when they place their proselytes in the Camp. It is truly the “middle” between the Court, which contains the truly justified, and “without the Camp.” (“Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee,” saith the Lord – Luke 19:22)

Be it ever remembered that Big Babylon also has occupied “the golden middle” all during the Age; they also are in the Camp, which places R. G. Jolly's Campers Conse­crated right where they belong – right with Big Babylon (confusion). Repeatedly did Brother Russell warn that we are not to follow wayward brethren, or prospective new­comers in their forbidden paths outside the Court; rather, we should call to them to join or rejoin us, as the case might be. But it is no longer a matter of calling such into the Court; to offer consecration hopes to new ones it becomes necessary to join them in the Camp, as that is the only place in which they can logically be served –­ that is where they are. Note now a further comment by Brother Johnson on this Camp position (E-8:566-89):

“The faith-justified (the unconsecrated) in their three groups were privileged to be assistants of the new creatures in this work, and they succeeded in working in the people a measure of pleasement with God, that much as they would allow with their being parts of the antitypical Camp.... God did not expect that degree of pleasement with Him from the unjustified antitypical Camp.... Their development in these respects would stop short of repentance and faith, which are the transitional steps out of the antitypical Camp (away from Babylon – “Come out of her, my people,”! Rev. 18:4 – JJH) into the antitypical Court.”

Now comes another quotation from E-8:13 on this subject: “It is only a narrow view that, leaving out of consideration certain Scriptures (as R. G. Jolly is now doing – JJH)... facts as well as sound reason, moves some Truth people to deny that the tentatively Justified are also pictured forth by the Levites.”

Here is a clear statement that the Levites type the tentatively justified; or, stat­ing it in reverse, the Gospel-Age tentatively justified are antitypical Levites. Does R. G. Jolly now include his tentatively iustified Consecrated Campers as anti­typical Levites? Let him give a clear answer to this question also – if he has one. And we emphasize again that there is no Tentative (faith) Justification after the Gospel Age. (Please see E-11:169 and E-11:482.) Brother Russell offers further con­firmation of this question of antitypical Levites in the Question Book, p. 694:

“All who are in harmony with God in any sense of the word are, tentatively, Levites.... will become actual Levites.... they make an entire consecration.”

MORE ON HOW SIFTERS SHOULD BE HANDLED

It will be recalled that in the May-June PT R. G. Jolly assumes an attitude of disdain toward sifters; he won't cheapen himself by engaging any of them in contro­versy – that is, since he himself is now wallowing in the quagmire of error. Be it noted that in that 1909 encounter with M. L. McPhail Brother Johnson did not even wait for a challenge from that sifter; he went directly to where he was and sought him out – in the presence of a large number of the Chicago Church. And his reason for this is clearly set forth in E-5:489, top: “In delivering us now our Lord does two things: (1) He rescues us from all the snares that the Devil (who is the leader and motivator of all sifters – JJH), the world and the flesh lay for us; and (2) He gives us victory in all our conflicts with them.” This is quite in harmony with St, Paul's conclusion in 2 Cor. 2:l4: “Thanks be unto God, which always causes us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savor of His knowledge by us in every place,” The “savor of His knowledge” was not made manifest in Chicago that April day by Brother Johnson refusing to face the sifter; rather, it was “Made manifest” by his bold encounter with the sifter through the “savor of His knowledge” to the bless­ing of the sheep in that congregation. Brother Johnson did not allow the sifter there to chase him away and send in a written answer to the burning questions at issue – ­which would have been the case had Brother Johnson failed to have the Truth on his side.

Of course, at that time Brother Johnson was faithfully building upon Christ as The Rock; whereas, R. G. Jolly has been building upon Christ as “the sand.” (Please see Epiphany Volume 5, p. 473 onward – “Two Houses Built and Tested.”)

We now quote a little from E-5:491 – “In sickness and wounds they (the Fully Faith­ful) must be hopeful of cure; and in all things endure hardships as good soldiers.. of Jesus Christ.... Such come off more than conquerors.... in this the best of all wars... (19) But crown-losers do not so wage war (as exemplified in the counsel R. G. Jolly now proffers to Fred Blaine and others – JJH).... These accept the defeatist mental attitude. They attempt to act out and often do act out, in many a fight the couplet of certain cowardly earthly soldiers:

                                                He who fights and runs away

                                                Lives to fight another day.

(20) However such a sentiment may occasionally be true in earthly wars, it certainly is not true in our warfare of the Spirit. To yield in, and flee out of its battles, leads to discharge from the army of the King's Own. Moreover, such yielding and flee­ing expose one to greater danger than facing the foe.”

Certainly, all of us who have borne any measure of the heat and toil of this trialsome day know from personal experience the clear and indisputable truth of the foregoing. R. G. Jolly and Fred Blaine at one time in their warfare, under the sus­taining and skillful leadership of the Epiphany Messenger, knew it, too. When R. G. Jolly urgently prevailed upon JJH to engage the foe in battle in 1951, he did so because he was fully persuaded that JJH would not return from the wars all cut and bleeding –­ just as he knows now that is exactly what would happen to Fred Blaine if he gave him a similar assignment, in an attempt to defend his errors. If we are indeed that “sifter” he heralds now with his “profusion of loud words,” then, of course, there would be no hope of rescuing JJH from the 'snare of the fowler.' But what about his duty to the sheep in Trinidad? Just how is he “taking heed to the flock” (Acts 20:28) when he leaves them at the mercy of the “sifter”? Of course, for one who has built his house upon “Christ as the sand,” such erratic drivel is now all that is left to him. And, when we compare the valiant soldiers both of these were under the inspiring leader­ship of the beloved Epiphany Messenger with their present abject crawling, truckling and fleeing, we can but once more quote the words of 2 Sam. 1:25: “How are the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle.... and the weapons of war perished” – THE TRUTH, which is ever the weapon of warfare of the Fully Faithful.

Thus, we join with St. Paul (1 Cor. 15:57) in meeting all perverters (Azazel means Perverter) and sifters alike with the blessed assurance: “Thanks be to God which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” It is the privilege of the Faithful to think ever in terms of victory; there is no such thing as defeat in our battles so long as we are fully obedient soldiers to the instructions of the Good Cap­tain of our Salvation. If we are faithful in putting on “the whole armor of God” in this evil day, then we may rest in the strong consolation that “no weapon (of sifter or perverter) that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the (fully Faith­ful) servants of the Lord.” (Isa. 54:17)

And for now, “I will praise thee forever, because thou hast done it: and I will wait on thy name; for it is good before thy saints,”

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – You continue to refer to brother Jolly's “bad conscience,” mentioned by Brother Johnson in E-10:585. Aren't you being unjust and evil to cast up today something that occurred over twenty-five years ago?

ANSWER: – There are circumstances in which the accusation of your ques­tion would cer­tainly be pertinent. For instance, the laws of our United States are humane and just enough that they prohibit calling any one a thief who may have been convicted of this felony, served a prison sentence therefor, and subse­quently resumed his place with society – that is, if such a person steals no more. This is exactly in harmony with God's law, written in Eze. 33:15-16: “If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity.... None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him.” Certainly, all will agree this is as it should be, and is accentuated by Brother Russell in Vol. 6, wherein he teaches we should not cast up past wrongs to erstwhile disfellowshiped persons who have been received back into the Ecclesia.

However, if past wrongs continue to assert themselves, then it is our duty to oppose them with even more vigor and decision than at the first offense. Thus, we continue to cast up the sins of the Papacy that are centuries old, because that System gives no evidence at all of repentance. And we should follow the same course with R. G. Jolly – or toward any one else who is in position to hurt others by their sins – ­who clearly manifests a similar disposition. It would be wrong not to do so. We be­lieve clear justification for our present course is to be found in R. G. Jolly's state­ment in the Feb. 1951 PT, p. 31, col. 2:

“I can truly say that I recognized no willfulness in anything that I did (in his revolutionism of 1938JJH), for I verily thought I was doing the Lord's will.”

It was only after the necessity of Brother Johnson's very harsh exposure that he came to see he had done a wrong – so says R. G. Jolly. In contrast to this, note that Bro. Russell, March 1, 1913 WT, Reprints 5197, col. 1, disputes this in toto:

“Blemishes are the weaknesses and imperfections of the flesh. Spots are NOT those wrong doings of which we are unconscious.”

At the time Brother Johnson convinced R. G. Jolly that what he did in 1938 was so wrong that it unmistakably manifested him as a crown-loser, then we believe he should have been able to recognize the weaknesses and sin that caused him to lose his crown – ­had he been truly repentant and possessed of a “pure heart” after his submission to that correction. Had he then fully recognized “the sin that doth so easily beset him” (a “bad conscience,” etc.), he would also have recognized the willfulness on his part when he committed the gross wrong, and would have been so much on his guard in the future that he would not fall again, realizing only too well that further “hard­ness of sin” under God's disciplin­ary hand would surely eventuate in another “sorer punishment” (Heb. 10:29). However, his rush to assert himself so dogmatically and dictatorially the very night after Brother Johnson's funeral offers clear evidence that his 1938 rebuke by Brother Johnson only humiliated him, but did not work in him a true humility (a proper self-estimate); otherwise, he would not have proceeded as he did.

Consider once more that type and antitype must correspond in every detail; then pair the performance of R. G. Jolly with his type, King Saul – 1 Sam. 15:13-24:

“I (Saul) have performed the commandment of the Lord... And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the Lord.... but the people took of the spoil... And Samuel said .... Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord He hath also rejected thee from being king. And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned.” Says R. G. Jolly: “I recognized no willfulness in anything that I did.” Said King Saul: “Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the Lord – I recognize no willfulness in anything I have done.” Note the Berean Comment on v. 13: “Manifesting considerable hypocrisy,” etc. His lie is repeated in v. 20; and it was only Samuel's stern countenance and rebuking finger that eventually forced Saul to admit:. “I have sinned,” In identical fashion does this “correspond in every detail” with R. G. Jolly's record of his 1938 “rebellion” (Revolutionism), when confronted with the caustic rebuke of a member of antitypical Samuel – Brother Johnson.

Similar to the foregoing is his Revolutionism against Parousia and Epiphany arrangements, when he attempted to set aside the Manna texts and comments for testimony at Conventions. R. G. Jolly also saw no wrong in that – “recognized no willfulness in anything I have done” – until our own rebuke for that wrong persuaded him to correct it. And for this we certainly commend him, even though his subsequent conduct bears witness of no true repentance from the heart; he still persistently revolutionizes against other important Parousia and Epiphany Truths and Arrangements.

There is no available record that he has ever “confessed” (1 John 1:9) any of the besetting sins that entered into his 1933 exposure; his only confession – under extreme compulsion – is that he did do an 'unconscious' wrong at that time. Nor do we have any record of his admitting any besetting sins that caused him to lose his crown. Until such thorough search of self, and admission of guilt – and a true repentance – no crown-loser can be cleansed, as is clearly taught by the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers, and by Scripture.

In the same Watch Tower reference (Reprints 5197), Brother Russell gives us the following:

“It is the duty of the new creature to detect the imperfections, errors and shortcomings of the flesh, and go immediately to the throne of Grace with them, to obtain mercy and forgiveness. Only those with tender consciences (the crown-retainers – JJH) will keep the garment unspotted. The failure to do this seems to be the reason why so many (the Great Multitude–JJH) fail to make their 'calling and election sure.'”

From the foregoing, it should be clear enough that R. G. Jolly did not have a tender conscience prior to 1914 (otherwise he would not have lost his crown); and it is also clear enough he did not have a tender conscience in 1938 (24 years later); it is also clear enough he did not yet have a tender conscience in 1951; otherwise, he would not have been so solicitous to cover up his past wrongs. It should also be clear enough from this that he could not possibly have been cleansed in 1951, as he claimed to be – and as he still claims to be. This is exactly the attitude we should expect from one in Azazel's clutches; such a person fails to recognize his evils, while browbeating those under him for any seeming outward offense to make himself appear righteous. Therefore, he could not possibly cleanse himself from something which he could not recognize (while 'deluded'– 2 Thes. 2:11) – “the sin which doth so easily beset him” (a bad conscience, approbativeness, prone to lying, etc.) – ­which is just the reverse of the Fully Faithful Little Flock, who did recognize their sins, and speedily corrected them and sought forgiveness for them. Has R. G. Jolly ever sought forgiveness for the sins that caused him to lose his crown? We remember very clearly – from our own personal experience with him in 1926 – that he had not then come to such recognition of himself (although he was having no difficulty at all then in recognizing other crown-losers and the “sins that beset them”), because he discussed with us personally his standing in the Body of Christ, how he would not place a mater­ial value upon his 'pearl of great price' (which self-evidently he had already done at the time he lost his crown). That was at least twelve years after he had already lost that 'Pearl' – sold his 'birthright' (crown).

Referring again to p. 31, col, 2, bottom of the Feb. 1951 PT, where R. G. Jolly is telling Brother Haviland he “verily thought he was doing the Lord's will” in his 1938 revolutionism, and whereby he was attempting to place dear Brother Haviland in the same class with himself, we now state in defense of Brother Haviland that he was never manifested by revolutionism, as was R. G. Jolly; therefore, the comparison is simply some more of his (R. G. Jolly's) perverted thinking. Maybe Brother Haviland was a crown-loser; but we have nothing – just nothing at all – to prove that he was such; yet we say also in fairness we cannot definitely assert that he was a Saint) although Brother Johnson regarded him as such, and so did many of us. And, when he said he was aware of nothing amiss in his consecrated life, he verily spoke the truth – ­from a good conscience; therefore, R. G. Jolly's browbeating of one of the Lords little ones was simply one more evidence of his “bad conscience” as late as 1951. And his similar treatment of others since that date offers further confirmation that his conscience is still “bad”..

Knowing the past as we do – knowing the teachings of Brother Russell and Brother Johnson on this subject – knowing also R. G. Jolly's present behavior – that is why we continue, and properly so, we think, to remind all of R. G. Jolly's “bad conscience.” In 1 Tim. 4:2 St. Paul mentions some “having their conscience seared with a hot iron.” Whether this is now R. G. Jolly's condition, we leave in the hands of Him who judges all things wisely and well. Once more we emphasize that it gives us no pleasure at all to expose the sins of R. G. Jolly – or the sins of any one else – even though we may appear to be “rude in speech” (2 Cor. 11:6). St. Paul admonishes us to “exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceit­fulness of sin” (Heb. 3:12). This is an obligation placed upon us all; thus, ''We use great plainness of speech” (2 Cor. 3:12) in a sincere effort to “provoke to love and good works” if by any chance we may rescue R. G. Jolly and others of like disposition from the snare of the fowler.

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

LETTER OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Friends: –

I have been receiving literature from Epiphany Bible Students, and I do not find it profitable, so please don't send anymore and save your money. I know nothing of Bro. Jolly or Bro. Hoefle or their disagreement and very little of the Epiphany Movement... To me it is sad to see two, who claim Christ as their example, quarreling so bitterly. I knew Bro. Johnson as a child when I went with my parents to meetings at the Bible House in Allegheny when Bro. Russell was living, but never read any of his books (Bro. Johnson's).... Please read the Epistles of John and try to get the deep meaning that is in them.

I read the Bible “as is” and my relationship to God is very simple, I love Him and know that he loves and cares for me. Christ is our glorious example. He died to give us life and lived to teach us of the Father. Our Father arranges the times and season, and I trust his wisdom and justice – and love. I do not have to concern myself about them I know that I am kept by his power in “the shadow of his wing.”

So much is written today to no real purpose. We need encouragement and food – real food... I appreciate written talks by brethren, but they must be uplifting – something that brings me closer to our heavenly Father and to a deeper understanding of his love. I do not believe that we judge the brethren. God alone knows their hearts and intentions, and he can handle it all without me. With Christian love ------- (WASHINGTON)

NOTE: When this dear lady says “Christ is our glorious example,” it is simply so much empty talk, devoid of meaning. Apparently she is a parlor Christian – of whom there are legion – using her Bible as a “textbook,” and believing that our Lord, the Reformers and the Parousia Messenger were all engaged “to no real purpose” as they were constantly “quarreling so bitterly” with their brethren in error. But she doesn't wish to be bothered – just let ''God alone handle it all without me!”

We appreciate the cooperation and zeal of the brethren who send us names; but we would appreciate it if they would also give us the religious background with the names, if possible. In that way we would know what kind of literature they are able to receive.