NO. 73: SOME EPIPHANY OBSERVATIONS

No. 73

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

In view of the sharp and extended differences respecting the Epiphany as a period of time, and the things to be accomplished during the Epiphany, that have arisen among the erstwhile staunch adherents of Brother Johnson, we consider it most opportune at this time to recapitu­late some of the salient features that have been presented by the last two Star Members on this important period, with the Scriptures pertinent thereto. At the outset, we accept the same position toward Brother Johnson that he accepted toward Brother Russell; namely, even his personal observations should carry great weight with us, and should not be discarded unless time itself or clear Scripture statements nullify those opinions. So we all know that the Last Saint, in the person of Brother Johnson, was NOT GLORIFIED IN 1956, as he expected. There is nothing in the chronology that designates 1950 in any way whatever. The only thing the “cousins” have produced is a Pyramid calculation; and, when we consider the 27 fraudulent calculations they gave us in the January 1947 Present Truth, then we here want no more of their Pyramid “corroborations” on any item whatever. Be it remembered that the Pyramid is not designed to set aside the Scriptures; it is simply a “witness” for the Bible, by which “witness” they now nullify 1st Thes. 4:17; Zech. 8:10; Psa. 46; Gen. 3:15 – and the interpretations of Brother Johnson himself on these Scriptures.

In the Parousia Day it was not the “due time” for those brethren to see the details, or the period of time, or the work to be accomplished during the Epiphany. Therefore, when Brother Johnson was clearly convinced by self‑evident time features that Brother Russell's conclusions were either immature, premature, or completely wrong on future Epiphany occurrences, he did not hesitate to make the necessary cor­rections – although he still stoutly maintained, and properly so, that Brother Russell was the Parousia Messenger and That Wise and Faithful Servant. And that is now our position with respect to some of Brother Johnson's teachings that time itself has proven immature, or premature or completely wrong in his expectations, although we still regard him as the 49th Star Member, the Epiphany Messenger and the Eighth Principal Man. We believe the same generous spirit should be extended to both Messengers in their mistakes that Brother Johnson himself magnanimously offered for Brother Miller in his faulty conclusions on his time features: “Instead of censuring him for inexactness, we are warranted in admiring the general correctness of his time pro­phetic views.” (E:8‑209)

With this introduction, we now offer a resume of what Brother Johnson believed and taught with respect to the Epiphany, starting with E:4‑14 (7): “We understand that the Epiphaneia, in the first sense of the word (bright shining, manifesting principles, persons and things), has the same primary meaning as the word Apokalypsis (revelation) primarily has. This is evident, we under­stand, because they do the same thing: the Epiphaneia as an action, reveals persons, principles and things as they are. Thus the Lord now epiphanizes or apokalypsizes Jehovah, Himself, the Church, the Great Company, the Truth, the hidden things of darkness, the counsels of hearts ... Hence the Epiphaneia, the Apokalypsis, of our Lord means, not Jesus making Himself visible, nor simply Jesus making Himself known, but His making every other person and every principle and everything clearly known that is to be made known in the end of the Age. Apokalypsis, like Epiphaneia, also means the EPIPHANY PERIOD l Cor. 1:7; 2 Thes. 1:7; 1 Pet. 1:7,13; 4:12)...... Accordingly, the words Epiphaneia and Apokalypsis, in the sense of an action, and in the sense of a period, are synonymous.... This is the reason why the Time of Trouble is emphatically the Epiphany, the Apokalypse, for it clearly with more distinctness than the preceding period (the Parousia – JJH), manifests pertinent persons, principles and things.” (R. G. Jolly and J. W. Krewson teach contrary to the Epiphany Messenger's teach­ings – one teaching that we entered into the Basileia concurrently with the Epiphany, the other that we are in the Apokalypse period as distinct from the Epiphany period. Each of them do this while holding on to the date of 1954‑56 as the end of the Epiphany. All of us know that Brother Johnson expected the violent features of Armageddon and Anarchy to take place by that date; but we know from the Scriptures if the 1954‑56 date had not accomplished these violent features of the Time of Trouble that the Epiphany as a period did not end there in either its restricted, “narrow” or its wider sense, because the Time of Trouble and the Epiphany are one and the same).

Continuing in E:4‑21 (14): “Remembering that the Epiphaneia and the Apokalypsis are one and the same time and that this period is for the benefit of the world and the Great Company, i.e., that the Lord Jesus in this period manifests His presence to them in their interests – we can readily see that the Scriptures teach that the Epiphany, as a period, is the Time of Trouble. Luke 17:28‑30 is a passage to the point.”

Further in E:4‑53 (51) and 55 (53): “The expression, the Time of Trouble, is used in two senses. In its wide sense it covers the period from 1874 until the end of Anarchy and of Jacob's Trouble. In its narrow sense it covers the period from the beginning of the World War in 1914 until the end of Anarchy and of Jacob's Trouble .... (R. G. Jolly teaches that its _restricted’ sense, or _narrow’ sense, ended in 1954‑56 – JJH) We will now quote and expound passages that prove the Epiphany will end with Anarchy and Jacob's trouble, i. e., will end with the end of the trouble ... 2 Thes. 1:7,8; Zech. 12:1‑10; Ezek. 38:39 – “They shall look upon Me whom they have pierced (Rev. 1:7); and they shall mourn for it” (the piercing, I.V.), etc. All Truth people recognize at once that this passage refers to the end of Jacob's trouble, and that it proves our Lord's revelation of Himself to Israel as their long rejected Messiah. Hence these two verses prove that the Time of Trouble and the Epiphany are identical.”

Then some more in E:4‑65 (63): “The Epiphany is the last special period of the Gospel Age, and therefore it will continue at least until the last member of the Little Flock leaves this earth, and probably nearly until about the establish­ment of the earthly phase of God's Kingdom. This probability is due to the fact that the Epiphany implies a revelation (apokalypsis, uncovering) of the Lord's Second Advent to the world as the Present King.”

The foregoing quotations can leave not the slightest doubt that Brother Johnson himself firmly believed that the Epiphany would not end in its narrow, or restricted sense, or in any other sense, until the Time of Trouble had also ended. And, before this can be properly ignored, we should have some clear Scripture to justify such an act. And, when J. W. Krewson contends that the years in the life of Moses offer such Scripture, we reply that this is just thin and transparent nonsense. And the same may be said for R. G. Jolly in his contention that the Epiphany ended in its “restricted sense” in 1954‑56. The Epiphany and the Time of Trouble are identical, so Brother Johnson teaches, according to clear Scriptural proof, although the date 1954‑56 is nowhere revealed in Scripture passage or chronology; it was merely Brother Johnson's expectations based on a parallel which did not materialize. All of us know that identical twins are alike in features, size and characteristics – ­so much so that the unskilled eye often mistakes one for the other. And the same may be said for the Epiphany and the Time of Trouble. However, there is no such thing as “identical” twins in persons – because there is some little difference to be found upon close scrutiny; but there is such a thing as one and the same thing in the Time of Trouble and the Epiphany, or Apokalypsis period, as that is a Scrip­tural teaching.

If the Epiphany ended in any sense whatever in 1954‑56, then the Time of Trouble has ended also to that same “identical” degree. Certain­ly, no one with a “sound mind” (and the Lord gives the Faithful the 'spirit of a sound mind’ – while he sends “strong delusions” to the measurably faithful) would take such a contention (that the Epiphany, or Apokalypsis, ended in 1954‑56 and the time of Trouble ended there, too). Brother Johnson also taught that by 1554‑56 Babylon would be destroyed and the last member of the Great Company would have come into Present Truth! See E:10‑114. No one possessing sound mentality would contend that those things had transpired by the end of 1956, and most certainly not by 1950, the date now claimed by the “cousins” for the passing of the last Little Flock member. In fact, there are fewer members of Great Company in Present Truth even now at this late date than there were in 1954 – ­even for those who claim the LHMM is now “Present Truth.” And R. G. Jolly's con­tentions about his “Attestatorial Service” are also just thin and transparent non­sense. The Little Flock's Attestorial Serviceä in 1914‑16 garnered every member of the Little Flock into Present Truth, and thus stamped that effort as a genuine and clean work; whereas, the 1954‑56 effort did just the reverse – it manifested the uncleansed condition of its leader and his prominent accomplices. Brother Johnson taught that the Great Company would have a fruitful ministry after their cleansing; therefore, any abortive effort on their part is a sure indication to all unbiased minds that they are not yet cleansed and are in an unfit condition to perform a fruitful work pleasing to God. The LHMM, as part of Little Babylon, also followed in its predecessors' footsteps (the Society and others) in the attempted conversion of Israel (before “due time”), which also has proved to be abortive. Also, one of the Dawn leaders freely admitted that their effort toward Israel's conversion was not being received, nor doing the work they had expected.

The unsound contentions of both the “cousins” (R. G. Jolly and J. W.Krewson) force them into all sorts of ridiculous contentions. These are partly punishments from the Lord to “make manifest their folly before all,” and partly the efforts of Azazel to humiliate them, and, if possible, to remove them completely from the Household of Faith. It is certainly not our wish to offer “profusion of words to no purpose,” soä we once more offer a Scripture that proves beyond the slightest doubt that we are still in the Epiphany period – that we are not in the Apokalypse period, as distinct from the Epiphany period, according to “cousin” Krewson, or in the Basileia period concurrently with the Epiphany period, according to “cousin” Jolly. This Scripture is 2 Thes. 2:8 (Dia.): “Then will be revealed the Lawless One (The Man of Sin) whom the Lord Jesus will ... annihilate by the appearing of His presence” – äby the epiphaneia of His Parousia. Since the destruction of the Man of Sin is so unmistakably an Epiphany work (see Berean Comment), it leavesä a clear brand­mark on all those who claim we are no longer in the Epiphany. One of the “cousins” is now proclaiming that this destruction will take place in the Apokalypse, while the other says it will occur in the Basileia (although irrefutable evidence forces R. G. Jolly to cling feebly to the Epiphany also); but St. Paul, Brother Russell and Brother Johnson all correctly teach that this destruction is exclusively an EPIPHANY WORK! To all who have succumbed to this deceptive mirage we now offer the exclamation of St. Paul (Gal. 3:1 – Dia.): “O thoughtless Galatians! Who has deluded you!”

It is well in order to point out here that the foregoing Epiphany truths have been repeatedly and sharply stressed, so that the “cousins” are without excuse in their present pursuit of their perversions (Azazel means Perverter). Therefore, their course identifies them clearly enough as persistent Revolutionists, and is certain to remove the both of them completely from the Household of Faith if they do not speedily reverse their wayward course.

In this connection, be it observed it was also the Epiphany Messenger's teach­ing that when deflectors from the Truth throw away any vital truth, they must then embrace other errors to reconcile their position; and that is just what has happened with the “cousins” when they forsook the truth about the Epiphany and the Time of Trouble being identical: They were forced to produce the “strange fire” (false doctrine) of Campers Consecrated, with the two of them contradicting each other even on some features of that brand of spiritual hybrid. None of this would have occurred had they adhered to the Truth on the Epiphany period as presented by the Epiphany Messenger. The Epiphany being identical with the Time of Trouble is a Scriptural, fundamental foundation Epiphany truth; once that is disturbed, there is emphasized confusion in a variety of ways.

And these “strong delusions” have revealed yet another “oddity.” There were many who claimed to be in full accord with the Epiphany Truth when Brother Johnson was still with us, but who then had not the courage of a mouse to proclaim or defend that Epiphany Truth; but, now that they have repudiated it, they manifest the cour­age and boldness of a lion in attacking the Epiphany Messenger and Epiphany Truth they once accepted, and in defense of the error they have accepted in its place. They also show the same determined zeal (a zeal _not according to knowledge’) toward their respective sect in Little Babylon as was done by many in Big Babylon during the Parousia Day, to the point of espousing their errors at the expense of that Truth which once sanctified them. Of course, this is a clear revelation to those of us who still retain that truth that such have now become victims of the Sixth Slaughter ­Weapon Man, Revolu­tion­ism, that the “plague (of “leprosy” has come nigh their dwell­ing” (Psa. 91:10). Here is a timely observation by That Servant on this point, in Parousia Vol. 3. p. 181:

“But we have no intimation in the Scriptures, nor any reason for supposing that God ever used or recognized that church‑nation (Israel), its rulers and representatives, after it was cast off. And this same lesson should be recognized here, in connection with Babylon. She is spewed out of the Lord's mouth: and neither the voice of the Bridegroom nor of the bride shall be heard in her any more forever. – Rev, 18:23.

“It is in vain that some attempt to make a plea for their quarter of Babylon, and while admitting the general correctness of the prophetic portrait, to claim that their sect, or their particular congregation, is an exception to the general character of Babylon, and that, therefore, the Lord cannot be calling upon them to withdraw from it formally and publicly, as they once joined it.

“Let such consider that we are now in the harvest time of separation, and remember our Lord's expressed reason for calling us out of Babylon, namely, “that ye be not partakers of her sins.” Consider, again, why Babylon is so named. Evidently, because of her many errors of doctrine, which, mixed with a few elements of divine truth, make great confusion, and because of the mixed company drawn to­gether by the mixed truths and errors. And since they will hold the errors at a sacrifice of truth, the latter is made void, and often worse than meaningless. This sin of holding and teaching error at the sacrifice of truth is one of which every sect of the Church nominal is guilty, without exception. (And we here say the same for every sect in Little Babylon – JJH) Where is the sect that will assist you in diligently searching the Scriptures, to grow thereby in grace and in the knowledge of the Truth?. Where is the sect which will not hinder your growth, both by its doctrines and its usages? Where is the sect in which you can obey Jesus' words and let your light shine? We know of none.”

During Brother Russell's Day there were many who came with him but still re­tained their Babylonish characteristics. Some of these prominent brethren went back into Big Babylon, as well as some of the less prominent, in the separation after Brother Russell's demise. Of course, many others went with the various “Little” Babylon groups. And so we find it since Brother Johnson's demise – there are some who have gone into “Little” Babylon now that once faithfully assisted Brother Johnson in resisting the errors of Little Babylon during his lifetime.

Another pronounced “oddity” of this Epiphany period time is the rash of so‑called teachers, who take parts of the Parousia and Epiphany Truth and garble and confuse it with admixture of their own foolish errors. Note what Brother Johnson says about them in E:14‑383:

“Therefore God Himself is against the false preachers, who plagiarize the Truth teachings from His servants, and with changes palm it off as their own; for God op­poses those who preach their own knowledge as God's Word.”

An outstanding example of this is to be found in R. G. Jolly and his articles on Genesis. His article on Genesis 24, starting on page 26 of the March‑April 1961 Pres­ent Truth, is superb, with very little of criticism to be offered for it. But those of us who know him well also know very well that he has not the capacity to construct such an article without a Star Member's help. We are not contending here that the exact wording of that article is by Brother Johnson; but we do contend the basic con­cept is what he had left at his death, and was to be included in his proposed Vol. 16, which he had promised to us in the January 1950 Present Truth. Be it observed that R. G. Jolly, in self‑will, rushed headlong to produce Volumes 18 and 19, labelling them Nos. 16 and 17 (in his abortive attempt to 'convert’ Nominal Christians, as well as natural Israel), labelling them Nos. 16 and 17, while allowing the Genesis teachings of the Epiphany Messenger to “cool” sufficiently to palm them off as his own now. It will be very interesting to observe, if he now presents Volume 18 on Genesis, whether he corrects some of his errors he has injected into those interpre­tations – such as antitypical Abraham rescuing Campers Consecrated in 1950 (four years before any of them appeared on the scene, even according to R. G. Jolly's own teach­ings); and his error on Sarah as the step‑sister of Abraham instead of his half‑sister.

J. W. Krewson was quite emphatic at the 1956 Philadelphia Convention that Brother Johnson had left just a bare pittance of teachings at his death, because (so he informed us personally) R. G. Jolly had told him that. But Brother Johnson informed us before his death that R. G. Jolly was the most secretive person he had ever known. Secretive­ness is a virtue, used by God and His faithful people, in harmony with sincerity and honesty; but “the abuse of secretiveness makes people untruthful, deceitful and hypocritical,” says Brother Johnson – it then becomes a “dis”grace. This sin and its resultant bad qualities explain in large part R. G. Jolly's “bad conscience” (see E:10‑585), and account for much of the evil he has espoused since he was abandoned to Azazel – October 1950.

There is much more that could be presented along these lines, which we hope to continue in due course, but for now we close with a statement from Brother Johnson respecting his own vexing experiences with uncleansed Levites and would‑be teachers in God's House (E:10‑559):

“As in all other cases in this book, not the Levites' attempts to refute these are typed, but their criticizing him (the Epiphany Messenger) on personal matters in connection with their pertinent controversy is set forth. They denied him to be wise, claiming that he was answering with error and was filled with endless strife.... They accused him of expelling from his heart reverence and from his mouth proper speech in matters pertaining to God, and of having utterances coming from iniquity and of choosing to use a crafty speech. They claimed that his teaching, not they, proved him an errorist, his doctrines witnessing against him, reminding him to re­member that his elders were abler than he was who was but young ... They accused him of ambition that covetously sought others' positions, even making him turn against God and speak evil words ... They falsely accused him of being corrupt and imbibing iniquity.”

Many older Great Company members now accuse us of being a “Youthful,” and thus unqualified to teach them; but, just as Brother Russell gave Brother Johnson a pil­grim appointment with instruction to teach his elders and fault‑finders, so Brother Johnson also gave us a similar appointment for similar purposes. And just as the early Epiphany errorists accused Brother Johnson of being “corrupt” and wanting “to be a somebody,” so J. W. Krewson now also accuses us – although we are now merely offering instruction to the General Church as we did when Brother Johnson was still with us. We have clear authority from God through the Epiphany Messenger to address the General Church; whereas, the best rating Brother Johnson could see for J. W. Krewson was that of Evangelist. Brother Johnson was also vexed with the Toms, Dicks and Harries, who arrogated to themselves the office of General Elder – after Brother Russell's demise – in addition to many duly‑appointed Pilgrims who had revo­lutionized against Parousia Truth – in much the same vein as we now find ourselves. Be it observed that during Brother Johnson's life, no one, so far as we know, ever offered the protests and complaints about us that now emanate from uncleansed Levites and power‑graspers since his death.

Brother Johnson said of the “false‑accusing Epiphany crown‑losers” (and the same would be true of their Youthful Worthy soulmates) that they are “loquacious, repetitious, presumptuous, full of false criticism and foolish effusions” (E:10‑591); and it seems that the many humiliations and harrowing experiences that have come to them are yet sadly inadequate to reform them. “Can the leopard change his spots?” Nor should we think it “strange” if these same people still reveal that the years have not changed them! Clearly enough, it will require “great tribulation” to cleanse them, that they may “offer to the Lord an offering in righteousness” – ­a consummation devoutly to be wished. And to all who read comes our prayer for suf­ficient “eye salve” that you may “know the Truth, and that the Truth may make you free indeed.”

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Our dear Bro. Hoefle: – Jude 2!

We thank you very much for the picture of yourself and look forward to receiving (as you say) a better one of yourself and also of Sr. Hoefle. Words are inadequate to express our gratitude to you for the monthly letters we receive. We thank the Lord for your faithful devotion to duty in refuting error. To assist our wayward brethren it is necessary to continually reprove for wrong teachings and practices.

When the perfect day is here, error will no longer raise its head to deceive.

We notice you say that Bro. Johnson in the fall of 1946 was desperately ill, emaciated and bed‑ridden. When he was taken ill in Glasgow June 1946 Sister.... diagnosed nervous prostration. Bro, Johnson did not like the sound of that, so she then said – “well, nervous exhaustion,” to which he better appreciated......

Our dear Brother wore himself out for us. We have faith to believe he is with our Lord and all the risen elect of God – therefore, we can rejoice that his trials are over. We pray you will be kept faithful. Psa. 91; Ruth 2:12 –

Brother..... has received the 2 lbs. Will send again when we can. Our dear Jamaica brethren must have many trials. We pray for them. 1 Peter 1:7 –

Our united love to you both and all those with you.

Your Bro. & Sr ------- ENGLAND

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

Dear Bro. Hoefle: – Greetings in our dear Master's Name!

It is happifying to know that we have Servants in both the periods who endeavor to keep the “Truth stream pure.” God's blessing be yours!

Kindly forward a quantity of Where are the Dead .... So then may I join you in pursuit of Zeba and Zalmunna and in mind in the coming Memorial.

By His kind favor, Brother ------- New Jersey

NO. 72: IN HIS STEPS

No. 72

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

"To this you were called; because even Christ suffered on your behalf, leaving you a copy, so that you may follow in His footsteps; Who committed no sin; neither was deceit found in His mouth"--l Pet. 2:21 (Dia,). Here is a concise summation of the Christian's duty - and privilege; he has set before him a "copy" which he is to emulate to the best of his ability--although it is fully conceded that none of the fallen race can, or will, imitate in fullness that great "copy" which has been left for us. The Apostle Peter is telling us that our Lord left us a perfect example in word and deed--He committed no sin, did nothing wrong; and He spoke always the truth --no deceit found in His mouth. Those who clearly grasp the import of our great "copy" will have no part in "whispering campaigns" or political wire-pulling in the election of officers in the Church; theirs will be a character which is actuated in all ways by the principles of righteousness--not according to what some people may think of us, but according to the standard of righteousness found in the Scriptures. Therefore, in order to develop that character which is pleasing to God, we should in every detail of life consider carefully what is right and what is wrong, according to that standard. This course is Scripturally termed meditating in God's law. When we reach that development of character in which thought, word and deed are measured by the principles of righteousness, we shall have attained godlikeness--Psa. 119:97.

What the Lord desires to see in his people is not merely an outward manifestation of devotion to him and to his brethren, but a development of love in our hearts and our dispositions. If we profess to love one another and yet pursue a course of self-seeking, wherein do we manifest love? So St. John admonishes to love not in word only, but in deed and in truth--. John 3:18.

Primarily, the godly are those who are in Christ Jesus, members of his mystical body, having presented their human bodies living sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God through the merit of the great Advocate. Secondly, the term godly includes those who live righteously, in sympathy with Christ Jesus, even though they may not live up to the full standard which the Lord has set, because they shrink from the suffering that results from godly living. Thirdly, the term godly includes some in the remote past, who, believing in the promise of the Lord that the "Seed" shall some day come, separated themselves from the rest of the world and, having obtained new aims, new ideas, were out of touch with the remainder of the race because of having a different standard--Heb. 11:13-16"

The Ancient Worthies composed this third class, who had a share in the suffering of the godly and a participation also in the blessing. Moses, for example, preferred to suffer affliction with the people of God, rather than to participate in the honors of the Egyptian Government. Although adopted into the family of Pharaoh, he had respect to the promise that the Messiah would come. Hence he suffered on account of his faith in the promise. So all the patriarchs desired to be in harmony with God, in accordance with His promise made to Abraham, and because of belief. In that promise they suffered more or less persecution- -Heb. 11: 24- 26; 36- 38. And those godly ones of the Old Testament record find their counterpart today in the fully faithful Youthful Worthies, who now have the opportunity--because of increased knowledge combined with the experiences of the past--to develop even better characters than did many of their forerunners. Those noble characters of ancient times did not comprehend the scope of agape love, that disinterested good will toward all men which adorned the Saints of this Gospel Age; but their counterparts of today have had the personal friendship, the noble example, and uplifting instruction of the last two "principal men" as living examples of agape love in operation. Once more we direct attention to E:4-319 (5), where Brother Johnson correctly identifies the "godly" of all Ages--namely, the Little Flock and Great Company, and the Ancient and Youthful Worthies, as the four "elect" saved classes of Joel 2:28,29. These, with the "sons" (the quasi-elect) and the "daughters" (converted Gentiles of the Millennial. Age), and the repentant Angels comprise the seven saved classes retrieved from the reign of evil--the "sons" being the believing, but unconsecrated, Jews and Gentiles from the Law Covenant to the full end of this Gospel Age, the same including the Epiphany Campers (unconsecrated) in the finished picture. There is nothing here or anywhere else in the Scriptures to substantiate a class of Epiphany Campers consecrated.

Some one may ask, "Why should the godly suffer?" The Bible answers that sin has brought the world into opposition with God, Whoever, then, would have all men speak in commendation of him would not be in harmony with the divine arrangement, for the masses of the world are pursuing a course that the Lord does not approve. We are not saying that everything which the world does is sinful, but that the standards of God are so high that because of their fallen condition the masses of the world are not subject to the law of God, neither, indeed, can they be, for they are carnal, sold under sin. (Rom. 8:7; 7:11-15) Those who wish to have influence with the world must cater to popular prejudices. On the contrary, those who would be God's people must be loyal to the principles of righteousness and consequently must go in opposite direction to that of the world. Hence they are opposed by the world.

A striking illustration of this condition is to be found in the person of a man swimming upstream at a time when the River Jordan (a type of the curse) was flood-swollen and rushing rapidly to its entrance into the Dead Sea. From the standpoint of God the course of the world is sinful. There is a tendency in our flesh to go with the world, who are laboring under false views of various kinds, because that course is in sympathy with the desires of our own fallen flesh. Hence to live godly is to live in opposition to the course of the world and of our own flesh. This would include not only living uprightly and avoiding Sin, etc., but also the making of sacrifices as well, where principles are not involved. We are to beware, however, lest we be deceived along this line. Not only are we contending with the world, but we are wrestling with wicked spirits in high positions.--Eph. 6:12

Sometimes Satan's arts seem to be employed to get those who are trying to live godly into contention with each other. One of his devices is to make unimportant things seem important, and in this way to make people think that they are contending for righteousness' sake, and that the sufferings that they bring on themselves in this manner are for righteousness' sake. Another device is to deceive people into"busy-bodying in other men's matters," --1 Pet. 4:15

Our influence upon each other should be uplifting; we should not cause others to grieve, except where suffering is absolutely necessary. Hence the Lord's people should cultivate the fruits of the Spirit increasingly--meekness, gentleness, patience, brotherly kindness, love. The cultivation of these fruits of the Spirit is a law respect to the Lord’s people. All who would live godly in Christ Jesus are to seeto it that they are not the cause of suffering to others--especially to those of the Household of Faith.

While it is true that all who will live godly in this world will suffer to the extent to which they are out of harmony with the present evil conditions, yet the promised blessings of the Scriptures are to those who live godly in Jesus Christ, those who are Christians. Of these St. Peter says, "If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed.--l Pet. 4:16. 

A Christian is a follower of Christ, one who has cast in his lot to suffer with Christ (or for Christ), that he may also be glorified with the Lord (or be included the 'better' resurrection, as the case may be). (2 Tim. 2:12) From the Apostle's standpoint, therefore, no one could suffer as a Christian unless he had become a Christian.

Every painful experience which our Lord had was suffered for righteousness' sake--not only the great sufferings, not only the great fight against sin, but also all the little, unpleasant experiences common to the world. Being "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners" (Heb. 7:26), there was no reason why he should suffer. We do not understand that the Heavenly Father has provided sufferings, trials and difficulties for the angels who are in harmony with Him. Nor do we think that Jesus, being a Son in full accord with the Father, would have suffered were it not for his covenant of self-sacrifice. All of His sufferings were because He had come into the world to be man's Redeemer. They were all parts of His necessary experience.

The sufferings which our Lord endured were the result of his activity in the service of the Father; and none of His faithful followers should expect to escape similar sufferings under similar circumstances. These were His weariness, His weakness after giving out His vitality to heal others, His bloody sweat, his ignominious buffetings, and all the reproaches, the sneers and the bitter words incurred on account of his faithfulness, to all of which he meekly and quietly submitted until his suffering on Calvary terminated his human existence.

There is no question that suffering in general is not suffering with Christ, but with Adam. Our physical infirmities which are of heredity, are not sufferings of Christ. Rather we should speak of the sufferings of Christ as being voluntary and not involuntary. When the Apostle says that if we suffer with the Lord we shall also reign with him (2 Tim. 2:12), he means the suffering which we bring on ourselves through faithfulness to our covenant. St. Paul speaks of filling up that which is left behind the afflictions of Christ for his Body's sake, which is the Church, (Col.1:24). These experiences are not for Adam's sake.

In St. Paul's own case he had, we believe, weak eyes as a result of his wrong course in persecuting the Church; and that wrong course was, no doubt, largely the result of heredity. When the Apostle speaks of the sufferings he endured on account of his eyes, he does not speak of them as the sufferings of Christ, but says that his affliction was a messenger of Satan to buffet him. (2 Cor. 12:7) We might then say that all physical sufferings resulting from heredity are ministers of Satan opposing us, causing us much difficulty.  However, we believe that the Lord is pleased with us if we resist these ministers of Satan.

If we should think of all our physical pains and aches as sufferings for Christ, then we should be obliged to think of our mental defects also as sufferings for Christ. For instance, a man who had a disabled hand might have a comparatively even temper; another might have a perverse temper, leading him into trouble, leading him to busybody in other men's affairs, etc. Thus his disposition causes him to suffer as a busybody and not for Christ. Paul tells us that our defects in character are works of the fallen flesh. (Gal. 5:19-21). If the sufferings that come to us because of imperfect mental conditions are sufferings of heredity, the physical sufferings which result from imperfect physical conditions, cannot be counted as sufferings for Christ.

In the case of a Christian, inherited weaknesses and those brought upon himself by the violation of the laws of God previous to his entrance into the family of God as a son, while not sufferings with Christ, will be made advantageous to him. These weaknesses our Father sees fit to leave with us, but assures us that His Grace will be sufficient for us. (2 Cor. 12:9) While the realization of such care for our interests is humiliating in that it forces conviction of our weakness, yet it is refreshing and inspiring in that it proves our Father's love for us. "The Father Himself loveth you." --John 16:27.

But when one has undertaken to follow in the footsteps of Christ, whatever affliction that person undergoes because of following the Lord, is suffering as a Christian; and whatever our experiences in suffering may be, these are not necessarily the portion of the sons of God, for the angels do not suffer; but He permits the Church to have them in order to develop and crystallize character. If we rejoice that we are found worthy to share in the sufferings of the present time, every trial will be turned to advantage as a part of our Christian experience. "They are not of the world.'" (John 17: 16) Therefore all of our experiences must be regarded as Christian, for correction in righteousness and for educational purposes.

But this is taking a broader, deeper view than ordinary. Certainly a Christian is not ashamed of what he may suffer because of his loyalty to the Lord, to the Truth and to the Brethren. In these sufferings he is to glorify God and to be thankful for them. He is to be glad for the opportunity of enduring something, to show not only the Lord, but himself also that he has endured something for Christ's sake. Every sacrifice that we make is for the purpose of suffering as a Christian, and we are not ashamed so to suffer.--1 Pet. 4:16

There are others who suffer more or less as Christians suffer, but they are suffering from a worldly standpoint. People sometimes say, "This worldly man has his trials and sufferings, and shows such patience, such resignation, that surely he is suffering as a Christian." But we do not understand that anyone can suffer as a Christian unless he takes the steps necessary to make him a Christian. We are to view matters from God's standpoint. Doubtless many have suffered as Christians from a human viewpoint who were not Christians. In the dark ages many were put to death for the sake of principle. In our own day there are people who give no evidence of being Christians, but who would rather die than have the Bible taken out of the public schools. Although they do not understand the Bible, yet if these were times of persecution, many would die at the stake in order to keep the Bible in the public schools.

A point may properly be made here that there is a wide gulf between our consciences and our civil or legal rights. Our Lord instructed His people (Matt. 5:39, 40): “Whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also … if he take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also." Certainly, if an adversary should smite us unjustly on the cheek, that would be a trying violation of our legal rights, but it would be no violation of our conscience to permit him to do so, or to turn the other cheek to him, Or, if he unjustly prevail in the courts to seize our coat, that would be a moral violation of our legal rights; but it would be no violation of our conscience to accept the verdict graciously and nobly.  Or, if some claiming even to be brethren should slander us, this, too, would be a violation of our legal rights; but it may sometimes be better for the general cause that we "suffer it to be so." Many of us are familiar with Brother Russell's suit against the Brooklyn Eagle for the contemptible and slanderous statements made about him in that publication-- a case in which he was most unjustly defeated.  He was certainly justified in the action he took; but he accepted the unjust verdict as "suffering as a Christian," and let the matter rest there. It is all too easy to allow resentment to overwhelm us when we are defeated in a cause where we are so preeminently right; and the beloved Parousia messenger there showed his strength and nobility of character when he accepted the result as "of the Lord." "This is thankworthy if a man, for conscience toward God, endure grief, suffering wrongfully." He cannot always tell whether suffering is for Christ's sake. But where people have suffered for conscience' sake, they have thus cultivated characters, and will get a blessing in the next age for that suffering. Suffering with Christ, as we have seen, is not the ordinary suffering common to all in the fallen state, but only such experiences as are the result, more directly, of following Christ's example in advocating unpopular truths and in exposing popular errors, Such were the causes of the sufferings of Christ; and such will be the causes of suffering, persecution and loss to all who follow in His footsteps. Such will have fellowship in his sufferings now, and in the end will be counted worthy to share in the reward given for faithfulness to principle.

Throughout the Gospel Age this course has meant self-sacrificing labor and endurance of reproach in the sowing and watering of Christ's doctrines. Now, in the end of the Age, it means a similar fidelity and endurance in the separating work and the gathering of the "Israelites indeed" (the elect). The Epiphany will make manifest the 'counsels of hearts.’

Our Lord forewarns us that in the end of the Gospel Age, many who have a love for Christ will allow their love to grow cold because of the iniquity and sin in the world. (Matt. 24·:12) It will be a test for such to decide whether they will partake of the worldly spirit.  We see this test in operation now. A great many people who name the name of Christ, who really love the Lord, who appreciate much of his character, who would like to see the right prosper, nevertheless have no thought of making a spectacle of themselves before men.  They would like to do right, to walk honorably, and to have the favor of men as good citizens.  But as to being warm and faithful followers of the Lord through "evil report and good report” (2 Cor. 6:8)—their faith and zeal are not sufficient to endure the test.

The Lord Jesus has very clearly informed us that to follow in his steps will mean trials and difficulties in the flesh. He says, "In the world ye shall have tribulation,"· (John 16:33) St. Paul repeats the sentiment, saying, "He must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God"; and he emphasizes the thought, saying, "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." (Acts 14: 22; 2 Tim. 3: 12) There is no other way to enter the kingdom than by self sacrifice, deadening of the flesh, mortifying it.  In proportion as the New Man grows, the old man perishes, until the sacrifice shall have been completed in death.

The Lord’s people should thoroughly understand the terms and conditions upon which they have been called. They should therefore not think it strange when trials come upon them, no matter how fiery, no matter how severe. The Apostle Peter lovingly counsels the Church: "Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that when His glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy. If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you; on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part He is glorified." (1 Pet. 1:12-14). The Lord is to be not only the Instructor, but also the Refiner to purge out the dross, that we may be made ready to share with Christ in the Kingdom.

The Scriptures plainly teach that special trials may be expected in the church amongst the brethren. And we find it to be true that our severest trials come not from without, but, as the Apostle in substance says, "From among yourselves shall arise false brethren," to injure the flock in general through personal ambition. (Acts 20:30). This becomes a test not only to the church, but to all those who are in contact with us, for if one member suffer, all the members suffer with it,--1 Cor. 12:26.

We are not, therefore, to think it strange if there are trials and difficulties, if more or less dispute arise in the church. We are to cultivate gentleness, meekness, patience, loving-kindness toward all. Nevertheless, if a dispute arise amongst the Lord's people, we are to recognize that such things are unavoidable amongst those who have the truth. Our heads are imperfect, and consequently it requires time to come into line with the teachings of the Lord's word. Even disputation makes life an activity, and is better than a dead condition--not to care what is spoken or not spoken. Nevertheless, those who have zeal should be careful that they manifest the Spirit of the Lord, as above indicated--gentleness, patience, meekness, brotherly kindness, love, humility.

“Think it not strange that there are fiery trials amongst yourselves, arising from one cause or another, that will make it "particularly severe for you. Those amongst whom you are thrown in contact will cause you suffering, because of your zeal and their misunderstanding, their imperfection, etc. All of these fiery trials will work out good for you. It is far better to be amongst those who are fervent in spirit than to take place amongst those who are lukewarm and thus lose the privilege of being one of those who are footstep followers of Christ.  Perhaps those who are lukewarm will, in the time of trouble learn a lesson. But the faithful are to learn their lesson in the present time--allowing the experiences of life to work out for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.--2 Cor. 4:17.

The above quotation embraces That Wise and Faithful Servant's exact words on the matter. Some of our readers may recall that at the Philadelphia Convention last Labor Day it was stressed from the platform that there is full harmony and tranquility at the Philadelphia headquarters; and similar comment has come to us respecting other groups in Little Babylon. Very strange, is it not, that uncleansed Levites are so quickly able to "improve" upon the experiences of their betters (our Lord, the Apostles and the Star Members)? Note the words of the Apostle Peter: "Beloved, be not surprised at the fire among you, occurring to you for a trial, as though some strange thing was befalling you.” (1 Pet. 4: 12--Dia.)  We all know the fiery trials that befell our Lord from those in His own group and physically near Him--the same with the Apostles, as testified by Paul and Peter -- the same at Bethel under Bro. Russell -- and the same with Brother Johnson at Philadelphia. But now, behold!  Uncleansed Levites all about us are not having the "fire among them!" It will be noted Brother Russell emphasizes that it is "zeal for the Truth" by the Faithful that enkindles the "fire among you."  Therefore, with perfect peace now "reigning" among the Levites, can it be that the true "zeal for the Truth" has departed from them?

Our knowledge of God is limited; yet it is only what we should expect of the Heavenly Father, that any whom He accepts as his children will have divine love and care in the supervision of their affairs, which will make all things work for good to them. The tendency toward lukewarmness is becoming more and more pronounced as the Age draws to a close, and the Adversary is resorting particularly through the Slaughter-Weapon Man of Combinationism to bring this about. It's not important what we believe anymore, according to the great mass of church-goers, so long as you are "headed in the right direction." And, accepting this premise, it matters not in what sect we may dwell in Big or Little Babylon, with Mohammed or Confucius, so long as our desire is an abode in Heaven when we die. This was decidedly NOT the attitude of the last two Star Members, who "contended for the faith once delivered unto the Saints" to the pouring out of their souls unto death. Unswervingly and continually did they hold before them that Great "Copy" in their defense of the Truth in a determined effort to "follow in His footsteps." We know of some who care not how many conflicting opinions may be held on the same subject; in fact, we have met individuals who hold two or three different opinions on the same subject, with none of those opinions being right. Yet these people abide in smug complacency, which will apparently only be changed by the "great tribulation" just ahead. All of us know Brother Johnson's pronounced aversion for Combinationism (a worse evil than sectarianism, because it lulls into complete sleep those who once had "a zeal, but not according to knowledge"--they now have no zeal); and those who yet hold him in that. respect, love and devotion which is his due, as a faithful teacher in God's House, will give full heed to his teachings on this matter.

Since the Lord is our Shepherd, no one is able to pluck us out of his hands. (John 10:28, 29) We are as dear to him as the apple of his eye. He that began a good work in us is able to complete it in the day of Jesus Christ. (Phil. 1:6) So the more faith we have the more we appreciate the text, "We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them that are the called according to his purpose." (Rom. 8:28) This includes even the things that seem to be very contrary, very evil, very disadvantageous .

Our Lord said, "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent." (John 17:3) To know the Father means to be in fellowship with him, to have an intimate acquaintance with him. Experience corroborates this fact. The more obedient we are as children the more intimate is our acquaintance with Him. And if we are unfaithful, even for a little space, we shall fail to make development along spiritual lines. But in proportion as we are seeking to walk in His ways, we become intimate with Him in the particular sense in which a child knows his father. This knowledge gives us the trust that He cares for us as His children, and makes all things work together for good to us--Rom. 8: 28; 1John 1: 6, 7.

Ours is a covenant of sacrifice. There are certain laws and principles which are not to be broken. Along these lines the Lord Jesus tells us that the Father will appoint those next to the Lord who have demonstrated most of the Spirit of the Redeemer. He will not put anyone in such a position or into the Kingdom arbitrarily.  His character, His words, stand pledged that He will make the best of us that He is able to do, while at the same time recognizing our wills as paramount in making the best of us.

Jehovah does not seek those as His children who need to be forced. Our Lord said that the Father seeketh such to worship Him as worship Him in spirit and in Truth. (John 1:23) We are to work to the best of our ability, But with all of our stumbling the Lord stands pledged that He will not leave us if we are faithful, and that He will make even our stumbling work out for good to us, provided they do not "stumble" into the pitfall of the sixth Slaughter-Weapon Man of Revolutionism (forsaking the Parousia or Epiphany Truth or Arrangements), because such persistent "stumbling" would manifest such as having lost their Class standing.

But those New Creatures who must be forced to a compliance with the rules-who, as the horse or ass, "must be guided with bit and bridle"--will eventually be among those who bewail that "the summer is past, the harvest is ended, and we are not saved." We emphasize once more that there has never been a "call" to the Great Company Class, because God would never issue a "call" to anyone to fall; they are the failures for whom God has graciously provided a serving place "before the Throne" instead of "in the Throne" with the crown-retainers, who "through fear of (sacrificial) death were all their lifetime subject to bondage." These are the ones temporarily abandoned to Azaze1 by our Father,  much the same as an earthly father disinherits a wayward son pending his reformation; they are "such as sit in darkness, and the shadow of death, bound in affliction and iron; because they rebelled (revolutionized) against the words of God, and condemned the counsel of the Most High." (Psa. 107:10,11) In the Great Tribulation He shall "bring down their heart with labor ... brake their bands in sunder ... and save them out of their distresses." And companion with these will be the measurably faithful Youthful Worthies who have aided and abetted them in their wayward course.

Much of the foregoing is taken from Brother Russell's writings, which we consider most timely for this particular season; and it is our hope it may "provoke to (agape) love and to good works," "The fear (reverence) of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; and a good understanding have all they that do His Commandments:  His praise endureth forever." Psa. 111:10

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Our dear Brother Hoefle: - Sincere and loving greetings in our Lord's Name!

We thank you for the second binder received in goodorder on Monday ….Also for the parcel of letterheads….

So our LHMM brethren have some in their midst who "are now denying that there is such a thing as "Little Babylon"! They say Brother Johnson was wrong when he labeled the groups as such. Well I hope to write out a few very clear and convincing proofs that Brother Johnson was absolutely correct in regard to all he said in this connection, giving in all cases his own statements ….. which are quite convincing enough to the faithful, and should be to all the LHMM brethren. Of course, you, dear Brother, have so often reminded us, the majority, if not all the brethren of all existing Levite groups, "talk all sorts of nonsense"--and will, I may add, continue to do so until the full force of the coming near future events hits them so hard as to sober them up. Then they will be glad to call upon the Lord in 'their distress’; then He will in His own time and way deliver them from their Babylonish condition into which they have gotten themselves, and in which they still are--some more and some less--standing guilty before the Lord. They will some day realize their folly and be greatly ashamed, not only on account of their doctrinal errors but for the part they have taken against their brethren who refused to repudiate those teachings given to us by the Lord through the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers. See Isa. 66: 5 -- I have always contended that all Truth given by the Lord should be regarded as a sacred trust--and this is something our Great Company Truth brethren have not done; they are rapidly falling from the Truth and its Spirit in all existing groups, including the LHMM group. True we all make mistakes, even as Brother Russell and Brother Johnson openly and honestly, as Star Members, stated so. But there was a vast amount of Truth from the great Divine Storehouse which was so faithfully delivered to us by them.

Brother Russell asked us all in that last Watch Tower he was privileged to publish - "Have we been taught of the Lord in vain?" There is only one correct answer to that question, so far as the majority of brethren are concerned. This is all in the Lord's hands and certainly best left with Him.  We are still in the Epiphany--the period of manifestations of persons, principles and things, and these manifestations are going against all. Truth groups, as very soon now they will have to humbly confess.

We have just heard of the passing of a dear LHHM brother whom we have known since 1912, dying on a grass verge near his home. This is the fifth death in peculiar circumstances in the last four or five years belonging to the …..Ecclesia.

Now we close with our love in the dear Redeemer's name, God bless you both and all the dear ones with you! Your Brother and Sister in the Lord ...... ENGLAND

……………..

Dear Brother Hoefle: - Greetings in the Name of our Lord and Master!

Your kind letter of Nov. 18 is to hand. I have also received your … paper and have been just wondering what answer Brother -------- made to your letter.  When 1 saw it in the December article, I thought Oh! what profusion of words! No wonder the Scriptural terms such as "dogs" that bark for their sects, are used against them. Certainly Brother Johnson rightly states that when these uncleansed Great Company are in Azazel's hands they talk all sorts of nonsense--for the light that was within them becomes darkness, and how great is that darkness! Your experiences are well in keeping with that of Brother Johnson, and we pray the dear Lord will help you as you strive in defending the Truth. You can be assured of my supplication on your behalf--that you may be faithful to the end.

With this comes my warm Christian love for you and the dear ones with you.

Yours by His Grace - Brother……..JAMAICA

NO. 71: LEVITES - TYPE AND ANTITYPE

No. 71

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

“And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of the firstborn among the children of Israel: therefore the Levites shall be mine.... I am the Lord” – Num. 3:12,13. With this terse statement by Jehovah God was laid the foundation for the first system of an organized religious system for God's faithful people. Previously, the head of each house was mainly his own priest; he built his altars, and offered his own sacrifices for himself and for his house. (See Gen. 22:9) But, with the call of the Levites things would be decidedly differ­ent; and as time developed the religious routine did indeed become most pronouncedly different.

As all Bible Students know, the Levites were the descendants of Levi, one of the twelve sons of Jacob –  the “thirteenth” tribe of Israel. This oddity developed when they were called out from among their brethren to perform the various services of the newly‑formed religious system that was to regulate them after their deliver­ance from bondage in Egypt. Thenceforth, the names of Joseph and Levi were no longer counted among the twelve tribes, these two having been supplanted by the two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh. Here comes the logical query, Why were the Levites thus chosen and separated out from among the other tribes? The episode in Ex. 32:25-­29 may give us the answer: “When Moses saw that the people were naked... then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the Lord's side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him .... Moses said, Consecrate yourselves today to the Lord (margin).” But now that the Levites had been separated from their brethren, they in turn experienced a distinct cleav­age into priests and Levites. “Thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest's office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death,” the Lord had told Moses (Num. 3:10 – see also Num. 18:1‑8). Then in turn Aaron's house was given two clear separations – Aaron the high priest, and his four sons, Eleazar, Ithamar, Nadab and Abihu, as the underpriests (Ex. 28:1‑2). Each of these had their specialized services to perform; and the rebellion of Nadab and Abihu from their proper place had brought about their death (Lev. 10:1‑8), leaving then but two underpriests, Eleazar and Ithamar, the elder of which was to advance to the office of high priest as a matter of succession, and the same with his eldest son after him – much the same as the kingship in England and other monarchies. None of the Levites –  Priests or lesser Levites – were to have any inheritance in Canaan land when Israel took over there: “Unto the tribe of Levi Moses gave not any inheritance: the Lord God of Israel was their inheritance.” (Josh. 13:33)

Just how pronounced was the distinction between priests and lesser Levites is set forth in Num. 3:9: “Thou shalt give the Levites unto Aaron and to his sons; they are wholly given unto him.” (See also Num. 8:19) When we consider the service of the Tabernacle and all the ceremonial features related thereto, it becomes clearly apparent that it would have been impossible for Aaron and his sons to perform even a small part of it; thus, the necessity for the help of the lesser Levites – a point that will have consideration in viewing the antitype of this arrangement.

And the words of Jesus leave no doubt whatever that the priesthood, the lesser Levites, the Tabernacle and its pertinent services were typical in every feature: “Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matt. 5:18); “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” (Luke 16:17). Therefore, St. Paul knew whereof he spokeä in 1 Cor. 10:11 – Dia.: “These thing occurred to them typically; and were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the Ages have come.” At the first Advent the Jews had come to “the ends of the Ages” – the final “end” of the Jewish Age and the first “end” (or beginning) of the Gospel Age; as we also now are in the “ends of the Ages” – the closing “end” of the Gospel Age and the open­ing “end” of the Millennial Age. Therefore, those who complain about so much “typ­ing” by Brother Russell and Brother Johnson are in effect condemning the clear teach­ing of St. Paul; those types are for our special help in this Epiphany time, which is the last special period of the Gospel Age. That is why Brother Russell taught that every feature of the Tabernacle ceremony must continue until its antitype appears; otherwise, the law would pass away before it was fulfilled – or “filled full” –, thus putting to naught the words of Jesus and St. Paul.

Having now this firm foundation, it well behooves us to “earnestly look into” some typical aspects of the Levites. In Tabernacle Shadows Brother Russell explains that the Aaronic priesthood was typical of the Gospel and Millennial‑Age “royal priest­hood”; and St. Peter (I Pet. 2:9) emphatically states, “Ye (the saints) are a royal priesthood.” And of this Gospel‑Age “royal priesthood” Jesus said, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” Here again the type and antitype are clearly set out by St. Paul: “And no one takes the honor on himself (the “priestly” honor), but he being called by God, even as Aaron was.”

Here it is well to note that each successive high priest in Israel was merely a continuation of that one grand type exemplified in Aaron –  just as his great anti­type Jesus was but one antitype. And, as every antitype must be greater than its type, so in this instance it is so clearly evident that Jesus, the antitype, was greater than Aaron, the type. The same would apply for the underpriests, Aaron's sons: they were far less than their Gospel‑Age antitypical “royal” priests. Aaron was a virile priest, honorably, zealously and unselfishly fully devoted to his office. Similar observation can be made of Jesus and His Fully Faithful of this entire Gospel­-Age. However, sad to relate, this was not true of some of Aaron's descendants. Time, ease and temptation made wretched examples of some of them. It was a true and righteous priesthood when Aaron occupied the office. By the time of the prophet Jeremiah that priesthood had deteriorated into a priestcraft; and that priestcraft was no more than priest“graft” when Caiphas sent Jesus to the cross.

And all during the Gospel Age the same sad history has been re‑enacted. All of the grand and eloquent Star Members were a true “royal priesthood,” as instance just a few of them: Arius, Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer, John Wessley, Brother Russell and Brother Johnson. And so often there followed them the priestcraft, then the priest “graft” in those movements they inaugurated. Our own day offers an outstand­ing example in the “Society.” When Brother Russell died he was possessed of about $200.00, having freely spent his own sizable fortune to enhance and ennoble his priestly movement. He was truly “That Faithful Servant!” But, hardly had he left us before That Evil Servant rushed to the priestcraft, then the priest“graft,” as he “made merchandise” of his trusting adherents through his collection of royalties on the books they sold, etc.

Now, another typical feature should draw our attention; namely, the Levites. Brother Russell says they typified the tentatively justified of the Gospel‑Age –  ­those believers not of the “royal priesthood.” These, too, were “wholly given” unto the priests. Without their help the true Gospel‑Age priests would have been so few in numbers and so limited in resources as to make it impossible for them to do the work appointed them to do. There has also been a tremendous multitude of the “Great Company” all during the Age, who also contributed a good and a bad adjunct to the Christian army; but these are not shown in the personal performers of the Taber­nacle, the reason being there was no Great Company Class during the Gospel Age until we came into the Epiphany period, when this group as a Class came into much prominence; and they will become yet much more prominent in the near future. Although they are the antitypical “sons of Levi,” this expression is not synonymous with the Gospel‑Age sons of God, a “sleight‑of‑hand” attempted by R. G. Jolly in his Nov‑Dec. 1960 Present Truth, p. 92 (of which we hope to say more in another paper; but we observe here that his jugglery in this instance offers just one more proof of his unclear mind and uncleansed condition).

But in this Epiphany time another class of Levites has appeared –  the Youthful Worthies –  a class treated in great detail by Brother Johnson in his Volume 4, in the Present Truth and in other publications. And with this Class – as with the New-­creaturely “sons of Levi” – there is to be found the measurably faithful and the fully faithful. Inasmuch as the Great Company are the measurably faithful “sons of Levi,” we should expect Youthful Worthies to gravitate to the various groups who are inclined to the evils of that group. Of these Brother Johnson says in E:9‑232 (52)‑bottom:

“It will reach its climax in the mourning of the Great Company, reprobate Youthful Worthies, tentatively justified and campers when they recognize their real standing later in the Epiphany, .... this mourning includes every kind of sor­row, fear, restraint, discouragement, etc.”

There is much more here on pages 233‑235, which is most profitable reading at this time. Of course, as with many of the New Creatures who become fully reprobate and go into the Second Death, so with the fully reprobate Youthful Worthies –  they will “die” as Youthful Worthies, though not as human beings – as is true of the Second Deathers. With such, they will mostly experience the fate of Korah and his group (Num. 16:1‑32): “the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up” – that is, they will retrograde to the social order whence they came.

However, of the fully faithful Youthful Worthies Brother Johnson says they, too, are a special class of Levites, transitional Epiphany Levites, decidedly different from that Great Multitude of transitional Levites who must “wash their sullied robes by great tribulation.” Note the following from E:4‑322 (9):

“It must be kept in mind that the Great Company Transitional Levites are different from the Youthful Worthies as persistent Gospel‑Age Levites in the transi­tion time. Excepting the Good Youthful Worthies (who were with the priestly move­ment of Brother Johnson when Vol. 4 was written – JJH), the three groups of each class are associated severally with one another.”

A further confirmation of the foregoing is to be found in E:9‑230 (50): “The Par­ousia Congregation, with the exception of the Little Flock, was an evil congrega­tion, the faithful Youthful Worthies here as everywhere else being ignored in this picture.”

In Mal. 3:3 we are told the “messenger of the covenant” (the Lord Jesus –  see Berean Comment) will “sit as a refiner and purifier of silver.” That this text is pointedly for this Epiphany period is so very clearly explained by Brother Johnson. The “silver” is the Truth; and the word “purifier” should be translated “polisher” –  ­furbisher or shiner. What is the meaning here? It is simply that the Lord would “polish” or brighten the Truth as one of His special Epiphany missions by sharp con­troversies that have extended throughout this entire Epiphany period; and will wax sharper and warmer as the Epiphany reaches its grand climax in the “appearing” of the Son of Man toward the end of “Jacob's trouble.” Thus, those who object to the Epiphany controversies are in effect telling the “Messenger of the Covenant” that they do not approve of what He is doing. And of such Brother Johnson has this to say in E:4‑42 (41):

“Those who do not appreciate the Epiphany will stumble at its teachings, exposures and work, while the others will stand amid them, declaring Righteous are Thy judgments, 0 Lord! Yea, they are entirely righteous.”

During the Parousia and the Epiphany our Lord elected two brilliant and fully faithful mouthpieces in His mission to “polish” the Truth. Their Skill in contro­versy is a refreshing and sacred memory to all the fully faithful; and we may rest in the assurance of the Lord's mighty declaration in Malachi that He will not be wanting for fully faithful brethren to continue “the good fight” of “polishing the silver” even brighter and brighter until the full close of this Epiphany period. “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it!!”

R. L. GOUGH AGAIN

Below we publish a further exchange of letters that are the aftermath of our December 1 paper, No. 67:

December 28, 1960

Dear Brother Hoefle: –  Greetings in the name of Him who loved us first!

This is not a reply to your letter of the 10th November (I told you that I would ignore your letters until you retrace your steps, and I mean to do so), but I am constrained to write to you in protest against your unwarranted attacks on Brother Motley, in your December 1, Circular. It is un‑Christian, uncharitable, and a violation of the principles of Christian ethics. When I read it, it made me sick at heart, to think that anyone in the Truth, and professing to be a leader and teacher, could retaliate in a manner so low and mean. This is surely “hitting be­low the belt,” and “playing the man instead of the ball,” –  a method of controversy in which you have certainly excelled!

I do not know if all that you have said is true –  how much of it is truth, how much is half‑truth, and how much is a distortion of the facts. I would very much like to hear Brother Motley's side, to get his version of the story. (It would have been very easy to obtain Bro. Motley's address from R. G. Jolly and get his side of the story –  JJH) But assuming that it is all true, and exactly as you have written it, you have violated the principles of decency and good behavior. Where is your brotherly love? Where is your longsuffering and forbearance? It is bad form to do a man a kindness and then tell him about it afterward; it is even more reprehensible to tell it to the world, as you have done! Even some men of the world would scorn to do that!

And what is the reason for your tirade against the Brother? Because he dares to disagree with your views, and dares to take sides against you in a religious con­troversy? If he had become one of your “supporters” the world would never have heard about the $400.00 and the “I promise to pay.” Did you think that your kindness would purchase his conscience? Did you expect it to act as a muzzle, or deprive him of his freedom and liberty to think and act? It would have been better if you had never been kind to him, than to be kind, and then use it to vaunt yourself. Your kindness had in it the venom of a rattle‑snake! What a tyrant your kindness is intended to be!

What has the Brother done you –  not repaid your loan of $400.00? The value of the blessed Christian Brotherhood cannot be expressed in terms of dollars! One brother died owing me 100 lbs ($500.00 in those days), and nobody ever heard of it – this is the first time that even this much of it is being mentioned. So what? Has the Brother hurt you? Why have you hurt him in return? Have you forgotten that “When he (our Master) was reviled, he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not”? Was the Brother ungrateful? Have you forgotten that God is kind even to the unthank­ful? (God certainly is kind to the unthankful, but He doesn't specially bless and guide them – nor does he hinder their proper experiences and chastisements for their recovery. As Brother Johnson teaches, God turns against those who turn against Him – ­Truth and Righteousness – JJH) The Brother wrote about “the hurts that we receive from false brethren.” That is something we could all say. All of us have been hurt by brethren, true and false. There was no specific reference to you. Did the cap fit you? Did your conscience tell you that you were one of the false brethren? The Brother mentioned that he was a “staunch supporter” of Bro. Jolly, and that was to you as a red rag is to a bull, so you decided to “show him up” for supporting Bro. Jolly after receiving kindness from you many years ago. What a spirit! No wonder Bro. John Krewson says that those who imbibe the spirit of your teaching develop a personal animosity toward Bro. Jolly – here we see it being extended to one of Bro. Jolly's supporters. And you claim that you and your supporters are the “cleansed Levites”! (Another “false‑accusing Epiphany Levite: We have never at any time claimed, either overtly or covertly, to be “cleansed Levites”..JJH) Would God you had never been “cleansed,” and I pray that God will deliver me from that kind of cleansing! “By their fruits ye shall know them.” I find that you are bearing very sour and bitter fruits! When you were here in 1957 I told you that your spirit was bad. What abundant proof you have given of the truth of that statement!

In my December, 1958, letter, I told you that you never seem able to make allow­ances for the weaknesses, frailties, and shortcomings of the brethren; now I tell you that you have never learned to forgive, and unless you learn to do that, you can never sincerely pray, “Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” (This self‑admitted Epiphany Levite is telling us that he knows our condition; that he knows we have never learned to forgive. Undoubtedly he must know that at some time he very seriously deflected, otherwise he would have retained his crown; yet he knows so much about the condition of others, but failed to see his own true condi­tion when he so needed to correct his sins – JJH) Admitting that Brother Motley is all wrong – that he has failed to appreciate your kindness, and that he has neglected to repay you – why should you be so resentful? (Was Brother Johnson resentful to­ward R. G. Jolly when he felt it necessary to expose his treatment of the Youthful Worthy cancerous sister – even though R. G. Jolly had repented outwardly at the time of this exposure? –  JJH) If you cannot bear with the failings of one brother here, how are you going to bear with the failings of the world in the Millennium? If you cannot forgive a brother once, how are you going to forgive anybody “seventy times seven”? Why didn't you try to obtain the Brother's address and write to him about the matter, asking him to repay the loan? (Why didn't you, Brother Gough, ask R.G. Jolly for the brother's address so you could get his 'story’ about the matter? – JJH) That would have been the proper thing, and would have been more Christlike! Instead, you have held it in your heart with a spirit of resentment, waiting for an opportun­ity to expose him. For shame! I have not so learned Christ! (“False‑accusing Epi­phany Levites” – as Brother Johnson tells us. They have all the answers with most of them all wrong! – JJH)

You write about the crown‑losers being in Azazel's hand. The Adversary has you so well tied up in a bag, that only the Lord will be able to set you free – if you will allow Him. Let me tell you straight (Emphasis ours –  JJH), my wayward and de­luded brother: if I had ever been foolish enough to support you in the past, when I read your vicious attack on Brother Motley, it so sickened me, that I would have dis­sociated myself from you immediately.

The Master says that when we do alms we must not let our left hand know what our right hand doeth, that our alms may be in secret. You rendered a kindness to the Brother in secret, and presumably you kept it in secret for many years. Then because the Brother dares to disagree with you on a religious issue, you decided to make it public, so you printed it and told the world. This is not the action of a “cleansed Levite”: only an uncleansed Levite would be guilty of such a thing! 1 John 2:10‑11

I am on the mountain top breathing the pure air (spiritual oxygen) of love – ­the love that beareth all things, that endureth all things, that suffereth long and is kind, that does not render evil for evil unto any man, that is kind even to the unthankful, that feeds and gives drink even to an enemy, that forgives seventy times seven, that covers a multitude of sins, that is not provoked to anger, that vaunteth not itself, that worketh no ill to its neighbour, that does not avenge itself, that does not retaliate, and that never faileth. How could I come down and associate with you on a lower level, and breathe the impure air (spiritual carbonic acid gas) of resentment, revenge, retaliation, bitterness, of rendering evil for evil (assuming that the brother had done you evil), of anger, of hate, and the whole lot of the works of the flesh and the devil? It would poison me as it has poisoned you.

Have you ever heard of the “mantle of love” that is used to cover the failings of the brethren? Read the Manna comment for December 14.

(Note: Brother Gough –  another self‑admitted crown‑loser –  hesitates not to proclaim his own character fitness (his agape love) in the foregoing, while denouncing the “bad” spirit of his brother. We do wonder whether he was declaring his agape love and character fitness at the time he was losing his crown to another, while at the same time castigating some faithful crown‑retainer – accusing him of having a “bad” spirit! – JJH)

There is a gulf between us – the loveless gulf of resentment and retaliation. This gulf is impassable from my end, because I will not and cannot stop loving; but it can be passed from your end, because you should and can stop hating, if you will. The Great Physician has medicines which will sweeten the bitter heart, if you will take it according to directions.

Instead of wreaking your vengeance on the Brother, why didn't you leave the whole matter in the Lord's hand? The Lord says, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” Isn't that good enough for you?

Why don't you return to the mountain top where you once were? The atmosphere up there is so sweet and pure; so refreshing and stimulating! Can I invite you to come back? I would welcome you, my wayward brother. Your present activities have robbed you of the sweet spirit of love. The truth sanctifies; it brings forth the fruits of the spirit, the summum bonum of which is LOVE. But your “new light” or “advancing truth” has robbed you of love, and developed the opposite spirit – that of resentment, retaliation, etc., etc., etc. There is a saying that “ambition killed Caesar.” And the ambition to be “teacher” has almost killed the spirit of brotherly love in you.

Are you going to come back to the mountain top? I am waiting and looking out for you. “I write not this to shame you, but to warn you.” “Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.” “Knowledge puffeth up, but love buildeth up.”

Have you forgotten what the Lord says? Though you speak with the tongues of men and of angels; though you understand all mysteries and all knowledge; though you have all faith; though your monthly circulars are filled with “New light” and “advancing truth”; though you claim to be a “cleansed Levite”; though you condemn everybody else as “uncleansed”; though you scoff at the crown‑losers and claim to be superior to them, if you have not LOVE, you are just “sounding brass, or a tink­ling cymbal” – you are exactly, NOTHING.

I love you, my erring brother. Brother Russell said that love must never let go its hold on a brother man, until God's unerring judgment declares him to be ir­reformable. So my love will hold unto you in prayer, that God will convert you from the error of your way, and that He will show mercy unto you in that day.

With Christian love, and prayer that the Lord will sweeten your heart, and fill it with His own sweet Spirit of the love that covers a multitude of sins, and that “never faileth,” I remain, Sincerely your brother, (Signed) R. L. Gough

P.S. May I ask you to publish this letter in your February Circular? I doubt if it will be in time for the January one.

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

January 12,1961

Dear Brother Gough: – Christian salutations!

In your letter of December 28 you tell me I am unchristian, uncharitable, and violate the principles of Christian ethics by what I published concerning H. H. Motley. Just what is your opinion of him, when he refers to me as a “false brother” and a “liar” – statements from him unwarranted and without any provocation from me toward him personally? You have made similar accusation about my treatment of R.G. Jolly – although, apparently, it is quite acceptable to you to have him slander me, resort to much abusive name‑calling, and multitudinous falsehoods.

You say I present a “tirade against the brother, because he dares disagree with my views.” When he makes the charge – “Brethren that we esteemed highly turn from the Truth to lies of their own invention” – are you classifying that as a mere dis­agreement? Or, isn't it a clear charge – publicly made – that I am a reprobate and a fraud?

When you consume three pages to express yourself in this matter, you do indeed manifest that you are a true kinsman of R. G.Jolly. He also takes three pages to state what would more effectively be given in three paragraphs by Brother Russell or Brother Johnson. To give you a clear and pointed example: On pages 12, 13 and 14 of this January Present Truth R. G. Jolly several times refers to “the aforemen­tioned sectarianizing errorist,” thus using thirty‑nine letters to say what would more directly and clearly be stated with just nine letters, had he simply stated the name of J. W.Krewson as the one he was criticizing.

It now becomes painfully pointed why Brother Johnson felt compelled to publish to the General Church that R. G. Jolly and his soulmates are “loquacious, repetitious, false‑accusing and foolishly effusive.” In case the full forceful meaning of these words does not fully register with you, Brother Johnson was telling all of us on p.591 of his Volume 10, in genteel manner, what the man in the street would colloquially classify as a lot of gasbags, or hot‑air artists. And with this background, you im­plore me to “return to the mountain top” with you. No, Brother, I much prefer the same low position that Brother Johnson occupied! With him, I prefer rather the appeal of the Scripture, “Blessed is the man that standeth not in the way of sinners” (the Great Company).

Just what do you know about H. H. Motley, that you now arise to champion him? Have you ever met the man? At least five different brethren have given me unsavory news about him, some of which I know to be true of my own knowledge – some of it much worse than I published; yet I made no attack upon him until he himself attempted to Publicly vilify me. If you had wanted to know H. H. Motley's side of this situation, why didn't you write and ask him for it before bothering me? Then you could have been sure of your ground; but, then, if you had done that, you might have seen beforehand just how ridiculous you now appear.

You speak about “ethics” of men of the world; and it seems your education here also is very limited. Had H. H. Motley had such ethics, he would have hesitated long before publicly attacking one who had shown him nothing but kindness and generosity. Even without his public attack against me, I would have been justified in what I did, since others have informed me he has tried to wheedle money from them – offering some of the same lopsided arguments you now present. Knowing that some of our readers do give him a measure of brotherly fellowship, such exposure may have protected others. In his case, the same as it was with R. G. Jolly when I exposed his evil practices, my long‑suffering could no longer be in harmony with justice and 'love for the brethren’ had I continued to remain silent after his false charges against me before the General Church.

R. G. Jolly didn't hesitate at all to inform all his readers that I had asked him for a substantial loan (not a gift), although he didn't inform them that he had just been the recipient of about $11,000 through a direct contribution from me. I assume that what he did there was quite all right with you, even though he was “eating my bread” at the time he did it –  just the reverse of this Motley situation. Nor do you take excep­tions to R. G. Jolly's name‑calling when it applies to this “errorist” (?) when he refers to me. He has indulged in all sorts of cheap appellations – all false (“false ­accusing”) – such as 'shyster lawyer,’ etc., etc.; while anything I have labelled him has been mainly taken from Brother Johnson's writings (when he found it necessary to expose R. G. Jolly).

When H. H. Motley refers to me as a “false brother,” is he there exposing my false teachings, or is he indulging in the very thing you now so loudly condemn in others (your charges being made mainly and specifically to me – even commending J. W. Krewson if he has any false accusations to make against JJH, although his falsehoods in regard to my Pilgrim appointment from Brother Johnson have been exposed and proven false, as well as many other items); namely, personalities, without corroborating evidence? What I said about him, I stand ready to prove, and the same applies to what I say about R. G. Jolly. Let him then prove what he said about me! As Brother Johnson has so aptly stated, When these crown‑losers fall into Azazel's hands they talk all sorts of nonsense, and can no longer think clearly on Scriptural matters. You say I and my supporters claim to be “cleansed Levites.” Show me one place in any of my writings where I've ever made that claim! You, like R. G. Jolly, just open your mouth and say something, whether you know whereof you speak or not.

You use this expression “cleansed Levites” in a manner that clearly reveals your mind is badly befuddled on the subject –  very badly befuddled. The fully faithful Youthful Worthies occupy the same standing of consecration as do the Little Flock; but the measurably unfaithful among them are in nowise pictured with the Great Company “sinners” against their covenant of sacrifice – even though some of them may experience similar chastenings. But the faithful Youthful Worthies keep faithful by purifying themselves daily – as do the Little Flock –  by rendering up a daily account to their Father. However, the measurably unfaithful Youthful Worthies are nowhere said to be abandoned to Azazel; that is exclusively a Great Company characterization, and comes to them exclusively for the destruction of their fleshly minds to make them once more acceptable residents in God's Household – to cleanse them (that their spirits might be saved in the Day of the Lord Jesus!).

Along this same line, you tell me I have “never learned to forgive.” Here again, with all your “loquacious and foolishly effusive” words (quotation from Bro. Johnson), you clearly reveal you do not understand the fundamentals of forgiveness. I refer you to the Berean Comments on Luke 17:3‑4: “If he repent – but not otherwise.” Also, the Berean Comments on Luke 23:34: “There is no mention in the Scriptures of forgiveness on God's part without the requirement of repentance.” In harmony with this, Brother Johnson has written – “God never forgives the impenitent; to do so would be to encour­age sin.” And in the face of your sad limitations in understanding, you are now boldly championing the cause of others who are as limited as you are!

You speak about “breathing the pure air of love.” You certainly demonstrated that "pure air of love”) when you attempted to cudgel and browbeat the aging and ailing widow of your erstwhile bosom‑friend, dear Brother Condell. Of course, it was my “unchristian” spirit then that finally silenced you. You gave an excellent demonstration there of that “love” about which you are now prating so profusely! And I'm going to let you in on a secret here, my Brother: My “unchristian spirit” that silenced you a few years back will once more silence you here in this matter.

You ask me to publish your letter. Why don't you ask R. G. Jolly to do it – as he did with that other letter from you? And have him publish this answer at the same time, if you wish. Brother Russell and Brother Johnson always said the Pilgrims were their personal representatives. If R. G. Jolly feels the same way about it, why not suggest to him that he have H. H. Motley write an answer to my public exposure – for publication in the Present Truth? That way all may know all the details, which won't be true if this is kept as a private matter between you and me. I do not approve of the “whispering campaigns” R. G. Jolly conducted under Brother Johnson, nor do I approve his “whispering campaigns” against me. If he is ever cleansed he will cease such underhanded and nefarious machinations (of Azazel), and seek earnestly to be open and aboveboard in his dealings with his brethren, with the world, as well as with his enemies. J. F. Rutherford was more of a Master at this than R. G. Jolly, but it seems that R. G. Jolly is doing his best along that line.

You haven't been the least backward in pointing out my Christian duties to me, so I shall now reciprocate: It is your duty to impress upon R. G. Jolly his obliga­tion to all those who rely upon your teachings, to publicize this matter in the Present Truth – to “make manifest my folly to all” (2 Tim. 3:9), if such is my condi­tion. You certainly do talk plenty, considering your limitations. My opinion is that R. G. Jolly will be more than glad to have this Motley episode forgotten as quickly as possible; and that he himself did not dictate your letter to me. And I am persuaded you will not receive any thanks from him for proceeding as you have.

As I told you several years ago, it is certainly not my wish to hurt you if I cannot help you; nor would I now have made public mention of you had not you your­self invited it. Many accused Brother Johnson of having a “bad spirit,” as you now accuse me; but mere words do not prove anything. The Roman Church still yells “bad spirit” at Martin Luther, as his teachings still hurt them; and the real reason for such accusations against Jesus, against the Apostles, and against the Star Members is that name‑calling was the only thing left after their clear presentations of Truth left the gainsayers “speechless.”

And so I send you once more my brotherly solicitations and the prayer that you may “turn back from your path of error” (Jas. 5:20 – Dia.) to that clear and invincible Truth you once accepted from the Epiphany Messenger.

Sincerely your brother,

(Signed) John J.Hoefle

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

“The fear (reverence) of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; and a good under­standing have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth forever.” Psalms 111:10

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle

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

QUESTION: – Is it all right for us to distribute the antitypical Gideon tracts that are published by the L.H.M.M. and other groups?

ANSWER: – This question presented itself in similar substance to Brother Johnson early in the Epiphany; and it will be recalled he went to the Society and to the P.B.I., requesting such literature with the understanding that he would be willing to distribute it with their name on it. Their refusal was undoubtedly over­ruled by the Lord, because Brother Johnson would not have considered such a thing ten years later – after he saw from the Scriptures the true condition of those leaders. We now should profit by his experience. We all know that The Resurrection, Soul, and Where are the Dead tracts, which the two Star Members presented were, and still are, 100% the Truth; but the Truth is deprived of much of its beauty if it is sullied by a tainted background furnished by the revolutionistic uncleansed Levite leaders of these Movements.

This would certainly not justify us in attacking the Truth, even if it is in unclean hands. Our proper course would be to stand aloof. As Brother Johnson has clearly taught, when uncleansed Levites are abandoned to Azazel “God temporarily abandons them” (See E:15‑525), which is much the same as a father disinheriting a wayward son until he repents of his “wilfulness, rebellion and waywardness.” (E:15‑526) For us, then, to place our stamp of approval upon such while God abandoned them would be much the same as telling God we think He is wrong in the treatment meted out to them. However, for those in the various Movements who have these 'timely’ tracts, it is to their credit that they concentrate their efforts on these known Truths rather than on tracts and literature produced by these uncleansed Levite leaders.

It is our understanding that J. W. Krewson recommends the distribution of R. G. Jolly's tracts – which does not surprise us (he may have helped produce some of them), as he has repeatedly revealed how unclear he is on some Parousia and Epiphany teach­ings. Even if R. G. Jolly does eventually cleanse himself – and J. W. Krewson is not at all sure he will do so –, this would be no excuse at all to encourage him while he is revolutionizing against one truth after another. The influence he has on others while afflicted with the contagion of spiritual leprosy should be a strong deterrent in our attitude toward him. Of course, we are acutely aware of the close relation­ship of these two “cousins” – and especially the “tie that binds” them in their mutual, though in some points strongly divergent, contentions on Epiphany Campers Consecrated, etc.; but we need not become ensnared by that bond in our own efforts. The tracts we have prepared are receiving excellent acceptance (see Letters of General Interest); and we ourselves are therewith content, resting in the full assurance that we need never offer apology for our perverse conduct or perversion of various features of the Truth and its Arrangements. When Brother Johnson approached the Society and the P.B.I., he did not then have the wherewith to prepare that literature under his own name. Once he did have his own literature, he would under no circumstances have re­ferred inquirers after the Truth to those organizations; nor should we do so, as they are all part and parcel of Little Babylon, and the principle would be just the same as referring such to Big Babylon.

NO. 70: SOME THOUGHTS FOR THE MEMORIAL

No. 70

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

Comes once more the Memorial of our Lord's death, and it is our hope and prayer that with it comes to all our readers the firm conviction that the past year has resulted to one and all a rich increase in Grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus. And it is with that thought in mind that we now proceed to a consideration of our subject, admitting freely that much of what follows is directly from the last two Star Members, or is prompted by the thought they have given us.

THE PASSOVER DEFINED

In 1 Cor. 5 St. Paul treated of one in the Corinthian Church who had done despite to the Spirit of Grace in limited measure, because of which he counseled that Church “to deliver up that person to the Adversary, for the destruction of the flesh ... for even our pascal lamb, Christ, was sacrificed.” With such a clear con­nection between the Passover service in type as outlined in Exodus 12, we are forced to a consideration of type and antitype in their relation to each other. While the sacrifice of the lamb by each household on that fateful night in Egypt did bring a temporary staying of death to each firstborn, eventually every one of them “slept with their fathers” in that great abode “where the wicked cease from troubling, and the weary be at rest.” But in the antitype there is just the reverse of this; those during the Gospel Age who “eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood” – ­and continue therein in sincerity and in Truth – pass from death unto life. And, while a very large number of them did experience a sleep, they entered that sleep in the strong assurance that they would “awake in His likeness“ – a state not promised nor anticipated by those firstborns in Egypt who eventually entered the death state.

Therefore, we observe that the typical Passover in general represents the de­liverance of God's people from Satan's rule on the basis of the antitypical Lamb's blood; its emphasis, therefore, is mainly on justification through faith in Christ's merit. The feast of the Passover, celebrated Nisan 14‑21 represents mainly the sal­vation of the Gospel Age and it joys, etc., particularly that of the Gospel Church, which is the antitype of the account in Ex. 12; but celebrated the 14‑21 of the second month (as done by those unable to partake of it on the first month), it types mainly the salvation of the Millennial Age, particularly that of the world of mankind, which is the antitype of the account in Numbers 9:6‑14.

THE CORRECT DATE

The correct date for the Memorial has ever been a subject of much controversy, and it still continues. First of all, it is clearly established in the Scriptures that the crucifixion of Jesus took place on a Friday, which has become generally labelled “Good Friday” throughout Christendom. Regardless of how we may describe it, Mark 15:42 leaves no doubt about the day being Friday. Thus, all Christendom has had at least a common and mutual starting point for many generations, although even this is now attacked by a limited group of errorists, who are contending that the day was Wednesday. And how do they reach this conclusion? Why, because it tells us in Dan. 9:27, “in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice (Messiah be cut off) and the oblation to cease.” That their conclusion is so very clearly con­tradicted by Mark does not seem to bother them at all. As all of us know who are even reasonably informed in Parousia Truth, those 70 weeks of Daniel 9 are not literal weeks, but figurative weeks, “a day for a year” – 490 literal years. And Messiah's cutting off in the midst of that last week prophesied the crucifixion just 3½ years after our Lord was baptized in the River Jordan – 3½ years being the exact “midst” of the 70th symbolic week. Whatever else of Truth such people may know, we have here evidence of gross revolutionism against Parousia and Epiphany Truth when they attempt to give this 70th week a literal application in their attempt to nullify the clear statement of Mark 15:42. (See also Matt. 27:62; Luke 23:54; John 19:31; the text in John 19:31 also contradicting in direct words this attempted perversion of the Truth)..

But, even among those of us who do not succumb to such nonsense, there is still some variation in arriving at the proper date. The Jewish rabbins use the full of the moon after the first new moon nearest the Spring Equinox; but there is just nothing in the Bible to support this view. Last year (1960) this reckoning made them a full two days askewä on their date. Seemingly the Dawns followed the same method, or a similar one, because they observed the Memorial on Sunday night, April 10, after six o'clock; whereas, our own participation occurred on Friday night, April 8, after six o'clock. Exodus 12 commands, without qualification, that the Passover be killed and eaten on Nisan 14, regardless of the condition of the moon on that date. In fact, the moon is not even mentioned in the Exodus account; therefore, any variation from Nisan 14 can be none other than V4,32 the tradition of men.”

In Ex. 12:6 it is reported that the Jews were to kill the lamb “in the evening”; but the marginal reference makes this “between the two evenings” – that is, at six p.m. Inasmuch as the Jewish days began at six p.m., it could in all truth be said that our Lord kept the Memorial of the type and yet also became the great antitype “in the same day.” After six p.m. Thursday He and His disciples killed and ate the typical memorial; and before six p.m. Friday He had said, “It is finished,” indicat­ing He had filled to the full the antitype of the first passing over in Egypt, as Exodus 12 relates it.

The Jews partook of the type by first purging out of their houses all leaven (Ex. 13:7 – a type of sin); they ate it “with bitter herbs” (typical of the trial­some experiences of those who would partake in the antitype); and only the circum­cised were to partake of it (indicating it was only for the consecrated in the anti­type). Such consecration up to 1881 when accepted by God, placed that person in a condition of vitalized justification; and since that date the principle, though not the actuality of vitalized justification has applied to all the antitypically circum­cised. And it is only such as persevere in that justification to the extent of their ability to cleanse themselves of the Adamic condemnation and depravity as are truly qualified to commemorate the Great Antitypeä – although we realize that millions throughout Christendom partake of the “Lord's Supper” without even the knowledge that this is their real obligation in the service.

OUR OWN ATTITUDE AT THIS SEASON

It is well to consider that it is not our obligation to pass judgment upon any who attempt to memorialize the Antitype; especially, at this season it is much more to our blessing to consider the words of St. Paul in Titus 3:4‑7 (Dia.): “When the Goodness and the Philanthropy of God our Savior, appeared, He saved us, not on account of those works of righteousness which we did, but according to His own mercy, through the bath of regeneration, and a renovation of the Holy Spirit, which He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior.” And, having clearly this thought in mind that “we are saved by faith, and not by works” – through “the Goodness and Philanthropy of God” – we may then fully comprehend St. Paul's counsel in 2 Tim. 2:25, “In meekness correcting the opposers; perhaps God may give them a change of mind in order to a knowledge of the Truth; and that they may be recovered from the snare of the Enemy.” Thus, considering our own condition before the Truth found us, we should clearly recognize that others may now be in the same condition in which we once were, and from which we were recovered by “the Goodness and the Philanthropy of God.” This thought should greatly help us to “keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and Truth” – in true humility (a proper self‑estimate) and thank­fulness of heart and mind. In this attitude, we may reflect upon all the years past, and particularly over the one just passed, as we ponder the words of Joshua, after he had conquered the nations of Canaan (typifying how the Fully Faithful all during the Gospel Age have conquered their enemies – the world, the flesh and the devil), and have transformed their minds with the Truth and the Spirit of the Truth unto making themselves “mete for the inheritance of the Saints in light”: “Behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which the Lord your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you.” (Josh. 23:14)

CONCERNING UNCLEANSED LEVITES

At various times the question has come to us, Should we partake of the Memorial with known uncleansed Levites? We now attempt to answer this by the same rule we observed in Brother Johnson; namely, we should not seek the association of uncleansed Levites for this service. Rather, it would be preferable to partake of it alone than to appear to encourage them in their wayward course. “Better is a dry morsel, and quietness therewith, than an house full of sacrifices with strife.” (Prov. 17:1) When we are alone, and the Lord present with us, we are at least certain of the com­pany we keep. “It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawl­ing woman in a wide house,” says the wisest of men in Prov. 21:9; and particularly was this accentuated during the Harvest when the call went forth to “Come out of her, my people.” Once the “brawling woman” (Babylon), who had consorted with the Kings of the earth, and had become “drunken with the blood of the saints,” was fully cast off, then it was indeed far better to retire to remote and humble surroundings (“the corner of a housetop”) than to partake of the glamour and pomp of discarded and deceptive ritual. And the same principle would apply during the Epiphany to Little Babylon.

However, should uncleansed Levites gravitate to our Memorial meeting, we should certainly forbid them not. All during the Epiphany Brother Johnson knew that un­cleansed Levites sat in his Memorial service and partook of the emblems with him; but he never raised the question except in the case of those that had been formally disfellowshiped. As Brother Russell so clearly taught, there are two reasons – and only two reasons – for disfellowshiping any one; namely, gross immorality and gross doctrinal deflection. As all of us know, many of the good Epiphany Levites (though uncleansed prior to Brother Johnson's death) were not guilty of either of these two deflections, so Brother Johnson forbade them notä – hoping and praying all the while that good association might tend to “turn back a sinner (a Great Company member) from his path of error.” (Jas. 5:20‑‑Dia.) This also is our attitude.

In this connection, we believe it apropos to offer a quotation from Brother Russell (Reprints p. 1453, col. 2) – although this is not taken from one of his Memorial articles, and should be considered with that limitation: “Those who reject the Scriptural statement that our Lord Jesus gave Himself a corresponding price, a substitute, a ransom for all, are to be rejected from recognition as brethren, and even to be avoided. The Apostle John says, “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you (man or paper, professing to be a teacher), and bringeth not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is par­taker of his evil deed.” (Compare 2 John 9‑11; Gal. 1:8,9; 2 Tim. 3:5; Titus 3:10) Thus it is evident that we who would follow closely the way marked out for us have not much liberty or choice in our attitude toward those who deny the very foundation of our faith – however much they may desire to company with us. Compare also the rules respecting immoral persons who desire fellowship (1 Cor. 5:11; Eph. 5:11; 2 Thes. 3:6‑14, although there is generally less danger from such than from those who become doctrinally corrupted.”

At first thought, some might be inclined to be astounded by the conclusion afore­going that there is generally less danger of corruption from the immoral than from doctrinal deflection; but St. Paul clearly shows us in 1 Cor. 5 that there is hope of the morally weak gaining life, whereas, there is no hope whatever for those guilty of gross doctrinal deflection; such are “twice dead, plucked up by the roots.” (Jude 12) Therefore, we do well to consider those who prate about making the “outside of the platter clean” – those who have no surface vices – as decidedly more dangerous than those who manifest these objectionable features, but who are not defiling the Temple of God with their death‑dealing errors. We know that the sixth “Slaughter Weapon” (Eze. 9:2) is Revolutionism; and it has been especially active during the Epiphany. Of course, the ideal and desirable condition is to be free from both ailments, but fleshly weaknesses are the less dangerous of the two evils. “If a man eateth and drinketh unworthily, he eateth and drinketh condemnation to himself”; that is, his fleshly weaknesses cannot, and will not “rub off” on the one sitting elbow to elbow with him in the meeting. But this is not so easily spoken of the sixth Slaughter­weapon men. Their Revolutionism can – and does – often contaminate those with whom they come in contact; therefore, the mistake in accepting the supervision of such for our Memorial service.

We would offer here a further observation from Brother Johnson: When the world sees a man in the gutter prone from alcoholic excess, the general tendency is to view with generous sympathy such a derelict, and this attitude is commendable enough. But many who are drunken with error are in much more deplorable condition, yet they are often respected and even honored by the world because of their physical, educa­tional or financial veneer. How forcibly do the inspired words come to us, “Man looketh on the outward appearance.” And, even with God's people who earnestly strive for proper appraisal by the “spirit of a sound mind,” even they are often deceived by “outward appearance”; we are indeed “touched” by this infirmity so prevalent in the human race. So befitting are the words of St, James (Jas. 2:1‑9 – Dia.): “My brethren, do not hold the faith of Jesus Christ. our glorious Lord, with a respect of persons. For if a man enter your synagogue, having gold rings on his fingers, in a splendid robe, and there also enter a poor man in dirty clothing; and you look on the one wearing the splendid robe, and say, Sit thou here in an honorable place; and say to the poor man, Stand thou; or sit there on my footstool; Do you not make distinctions among yourselves, and become judges from evil reasonings? .... If indeed you keep a royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thy­self, you do well; but if you respect persons, you commit sin, being convicted under the law as transgressors.”

James was undoubtedly aiming his remarks at those hypocritical Scribes and Pharisees of his time who were willing enough to ignore that inner corruption “that cometh of evil” in those of imposing outward show, as they attempted with painstaking scruple to ascribe outward corruption to our Lord, who knew no sin, by accusing Him of being a winebibber and a glutton, who plucked corn on the Sabbath for His hungry followers. And their kind have been ever with us, and especially so in this Epiphany time – ever ready to ascribe outward uncleanness to the Fully Faithful in an effort to cover their own inner taint that cometh of error. We are yet in the Epiphany, which is the last special period of the Gospel Age, the “time of Harvest,” and “Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest” (Josh. 3:15). Therefore, we may expect at this time a pronounced accentuation of looking on “the outward appearance” ­especially, a judging of the Fully Faithful by such standards; while the Lord looketh “on the heart.”

As was the habit of Brother Johnson, so we now also urge all to read the Passover of the New Creation in Parousia Vol. Six, as our comments herein are in nowise in­tended to replace that clear and timely exposition. It is also well for those who can possibly find the time to read one or more of the Gospel accounts of our Lord's passion and the pertinent Berean Comments in the days preceding the service. Thus will come to all the full blessing of this year's Memorial service. And to such we pray the Lord's rich blessing upon their preparation for, and participation in the service. This year we will observe the service at 7:30 p.m., March 29, at 1507 N. Donnelly, Mount Dora, Florida; and we extend a cordial welcome to any and all of like mind who may be in our vicinity, who wish to join us then.

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

SOME MORE KREWSON NONSENSE

In his January paper No. 36, J. W. Krewson once more displays his flummery and railing falsehood in about four pages of “Do‑You‑Knows” – many of them so flippant and unsound that we had at first thought determined not to humor them with any rec­ognition whatever. However, some of our readers have observed that we are bounden to “make manifest his folly to all”; hence, these comments. At the outset it should be kept in mind that he doesn't believe those “Do‑You‑Knows” himself; he's either asking for information or indulging in a “kind of repartee” (quoted from his paper). Repartee is ever the tool of the evasive and unscrupulous politician, of the trick­ster and confidence man, of the big‑town smart aleck – thus far beneath the dignity of one claiming to be a teacher in the Lord's House.

THOSE TWELVE STONES IN JORDAN (Joshua 4)

On page 25 he offers several quips about our refutation of his interpretation that the twelve stones which Joshua ordered gathered from Jordan's bed is simply so much nonsense; and he now magnifies his previous nonsense by his present “Do‑You‑Knows” nonsense. He says they were not boulders, as our “inept reasoning would imply,” because they were carried on the shoulders of the twelve Hebrews. Even today, a muscular large man could carry a two or three‑hundred‑pound boulder on his shoulder; and certainly those twelve “selected” men of Israel would have been able to do as much then when the race was much more virile than it now is. Webster's dictionary defines a boulder as “from a size distinctly larger than a cobblestone to one ten or more feet in diameter.” When he tried to compare those stones with the twelve stones in the high priest's breastplate, he is resorting to “sleight of men and cunning craftiness” (Eph. 4:14) in addition to his nonsense. When he made reference to E:14‑292, why did he leave out the word “precious” from Brother Johnson's comment on the precious stones in the breastplate? We answer that, had he included the word “precious,” then the weakest and least observant of his readers would have readily grasped the nonsenseä of his contention. It is the descriptive adjective “precious” that is the real crux here, and not the “stones” – just as in “green” grass or “dry” grass, it is the descriptive adjective that carries the weight, the only similarity being in the grass root of such expressions.

Furthermore, the record says the altar constructed from those twelve stones is “there unto this day.” Had they been stones of the size in the breastplate, they would have been toppled over and scattered by the first cat or rabbit that brushed against them; they would not be “there unto this day.” And when he intimates that the “144,000 of the elect” (the correct reading of the Berean Comment, as opposed to his paraphrase) and the twelve graces of the Holy Spirit are interchangeable expres­sions, he reveals further his shallow and unreliable thinking – this same J. W. Krewson who refers to our “inept reasoning.” We know of another sifting Evangelist who charged Brother Johnson with the same thing (inability to reason and “officious”), so we “think it not strange” for this present‑day Evangelist to use the same toward us. All schooled Truth people know that Jordan is a type of the curse, or sin; and the twelve stones of that altar by Joshua are emblematic of the “stone‑wall” opposition to sin by the faithful Little Flock all during the Age – whereas, the graces of the Holy Spirit are “the hidden man of the heart” (I Pet. 3:1‑7), and often not seen or appreciated by hardened sinners. Therefore, when J. W. Krewson asks if the Hebrew word “eben” carries any weight as to the antitype, the answer is NO!; the antitype must be determined from all the surrounding circumstances, and not alone by the Hebrew word. Therefore, when we branded his interpretation as non­sense, it was the mildest word we could find for it; a more acerbic description would be “spiritually moronic.”

He says our “aspersions ... are on a par with our attempts to refute the teachings re the Quasi‑elect Consecrated.” Yes, indeed, they are on a “par”; we've repeatedly demonstrated that teaching also to be the same sort of nonsense, inspired by the same Deceiver, as the twelve stones of Jordan. In grateful reverence to our Great Teacher do we accept the accusation! And in further refutation of his nonsense on the twelve stones (eben) of Joshua, we direct attention to Judges 9:5,18, where Abimelech is said to have slain seventy men on one stone (eben). Does J. W. Krewson want to compare this stone (eben) with those in the breastplate? Another instance is 1 Kings 18:31,32, where Elijah “took twelve stones” (eben) – which he did himself without eleven others aiding him – and built an altar large enough to accommodate the burning of an entire bullock. Shall we now compare these stones (eben) with those in the breastplate? In our paper No. 60 we correctly defined “eben” as any­thing from a small pebble to a huge rock,” and that the stones in Joshua's altar and in Elijah's altar represent the “true church”; and Brother Russell's Berean Comments confirm this interpretation.

THOSE PYRAMID CALCULATIONS

On page 25 J. W. Krewson says our criticism of those 27 computations in the January 1947 Present Truth “is in reality casting innuendos at the Epiphany Messenger over the back of R. G. Jolly.” Why doesn't he speak for himself? It seems too much for these “cousins” (R. G. Jolly and J. W. Krewson) to be able to give a straight answer to anything. If he (J. W. Krewson) had no part in that colossal hoax back there, he could be saying so with less words than he has now used. However, in the fall of 1946 – when those compilations were presented to Brother Johnson – J.W. Krewson was right in Philadelphia, so he knows – as well as we know – that Brother Johnson was then desperately ill, emaciated and bed‑ridden. Several months later Brother Johnson told us in detail that his physical forces had been so dissipated that he realized he was continuing to breath by the faintest of effort. Therefore, he was in no posi­tion to determine the veracity of that system of error that came to him from (shall we say?) the “cousins” (R. G. Jolly and J. W. Krewson). In any event, time has indis­putably proven those “mathematics” to have been a revolting structure of “witchcraft” – ­(“witchcraft” being the Scriptural description for especially deceptive false teach­ings) – and Brother Johnson would be easily able to see that now if he were still with us.

AND NOW JOHN'S BAPTISM AGAIN

On page 24 there is the statement that “Baptism was a Little Flock developing Truth .... correct as given by 1914.” Those words taken by themselves are certainly true; but where is his proof that John's Baptism enters into that? The main con­tention here is the date that John's Baptism ceased to be efficacious. Brother Russell did not give that date; neither did Brother Johnson; nor have R. G. Jolly and J. W. Krewson done so. This certainly would have been done had it been a part of the Harvest Truth on Baptism (Little Flock Developing Truth); but all of us know that this fact yields not one iota of influence upon our present performance of the service. All the profuse talk by the “cousins” on this matter is prompted by their belief that they thought they had at least one point upon which they could stigmatize JJH; but it seems R. G. Jolly has had more than enough by now; and our prediction is that J. W. Krewson will be equally silenced in due course. Up to now neither of them has made one word of comment on Acts 18, which is the introduction to Acts 19:1‑6. Why do they continue in silence here if they have an answer?

ABANDONMENT TO AZAZEL

On p.26 he presents nonsense extreme when he says “R. G. Jolly was at the time of his initial revolutionism in 1938 in Azazel's hands.” (R. G. Jolly is quite a specimen according to J. W. Krewson – he can still receive not only brotherly help and favor from the World's High Priest, but can also receive priestly fellowship and STILL BE ABANDONED TO AZAZEL – which both “cousins” teach). To accentuate his inane conclusion here let all of us note carefully that while R. G. Jolly was pre­paring his motion for the Philadelphia Church – and at the very time he did present it – he had not yet even been manifested as an Epiphany Levite; he was being given priestly fellowship! And the one who now presents this weird and novel conclusion is the same, THE VERY SAME, who accuses JJH of “unethical and untruthful statements”! Just think of it, Brethren! Before any crown‑loser could be abandoned to Azazel, his sins had to be manifested to all, at least in the local Ecclesia (see 1 Cor. 5); but J. W. Krewson now has one abandoned while he was yet given priestly fellowships. Note the contrast by Brother Johnson who says abandonment means the withdrawal of “all brotherly help and favor”; that is, they are disfellowshiped. This propounder of nonsense (who complains at our description of him thus), who accuses us of revo­lutionism – sets forth an unbelievable supposition, when compared with Brother John­son's clear presentations of the abandonment process in E:4‑210, E:15‑525, and in E:6‑364, the latter of which we quote:

“How do we lead Azazel's Goat to the gate? By resisting its revolutionism. How do we deliver it to the fit man? By withdrawing priestly fellowship. How do we deliver it (abandon it – JJH) to Azazel? By withdrawing all brotherly help and favor.”

What a contrast between the real and the pseudo Pastor and Teacher! Brother Johnson's clear and Scriptural teachings on the Great Company, and especially the abandonment process, cannot be set aside – although some are attempting to do so. The “cousins” gross revolutionism on this item alone (of Epiphany Truth) brands them as Revolutionists, and their continuing in such revolutionism in the face of the clear Truth presented against them (from Brother Johnson's writings), means that they are persistent REVOLUTIONISTS against Epiphany Truth. Need we say more?

ANCIENT WORTHIES UNTIL PENTECOST

On p. 26, D‑Y‑K No. 3, there is some more “dreaming” re Jews being of the Ancient Worthies up to Pentecost. He, like R. G. Jolly, often reads Brother John­son's writings, but doesn't understand what he has read after he reads it. In E:6‑715 Brother Johnson says some of those won at Pentecost “had been” of the Ancient‑Worthy Class. Why wait till Pentecost? J. W. Krewson could have been equally correct – and equally confused – to say the Apostles “had been” until they joined a higher class. But does that make them “Ancient Worthies” after John the Baptist? The words of Jesus should be clear enough in this matter (Luke 16:16–Dia.): “The Law and the Prophets were till John; from that period, the Kingdom of God is proclaimed, and every one presses towards it.” This statement of Jesus was quite some time before Pentecost; in fact, it was quite some time before Jesus' death. And this same J. W. Krewson is the one who complains that we label many of his expressions as “nonsense”!

OUR PILGRIM STATUS

Once more does J. W. Krewson malign our Pilgrim appointment. We “desire so intently to be a somebody among the brethren,” he says. In view of this latest calumny by him, we are much moved to inquire if he is being wilfully dishonest, along with his nonsense. Repeatedly have we directed his attention to E:10‑249, as follows: “J. was commissioned (by God) finally, according to the Divine wisdom given into his care (Ezra 7:25), to appoint for Epiphany, not for Parousia, purposes auxiliary pilgrims and pilgrims, to assist the Lord's people in teaching ways.” If there could be the slightest doubt of Brother Johnson's intention and firm belief as set out above, such doubt is completely dissipated by the letter of October 11, 1942, which carried the apointment to us:

“I am enclosing a certificate of your appointment as a Pilgrim of the Epiphany Bible House of the Laymen's Home Missionary Movement, signed by myself and sealed with the seal of the Movement.

“Upon entering this phase of the work, my dear brother, you can be assured you will have the special opposition of the Adversary (a prediction that has been most painfully fulfilled in our case – JJH) and those who have his spirit, and thus will have severer trials. On the other hand, remember the Lord is on our side and will give you special help and blessings, if you faithfully use your privileges of ser­vice. (This prediction also we acknowledge in grateful and reverent appreciation to our Heavenly Father – JJH)

“As an Evangelist you had the privilege of accepting invitations to speak at home gatherings ... under the auspices of the Epiphany Bible House ... seeking to interest outsiders in the Truth, helping new ones already in the Truth and working toward the Levites ... to an understanding of the Epiphany Truth and its arrangements. Your sphere of service included stressing the easier features of the Parousia and Epiphany Truth to outsiders and giving them Chart talks and other simple talks .... the easier features of the Epiphany Truth.

“Then, as an Auxiliary Pilgrim you have had the same sphere of service, but your work has been particularly toward the brethren, e.g., serving them on pilgrim trips, delivering discourses at Conventions, etc. An Auxiliary Pilgrim's field of service is in any locality within a country or nation, except in some few cases where they go into nearby country; whereas a Pilgrim's sphere of service is larger and not so limited, e.g., Pilgrim trips are usually longer, over a wider area, etc. I pray the Lord to bless you and make you a blessing in this good work. Any ecclesia outside of your home ecclesia has the right to invite you to serve it.”

In further confirmation of the foregoing, we quote this from the March 1950 P.T., pp. 40 & 41: “We (Brother Johnson) call the traveling lecturers Pilgrims and Auxiliary Pilgrims; and we call those whose ministry is more limited and is especially directed to bringing new ones into the Truth, Evangelists.”

Then there is this in the body of our Pilgrim appointment: “This authorization gives the said John J. Hoefle the right and privilege of preaching the Gospel and lecturing on the Bible in any country in the world.”

In the foregoing it is well to note the classification of an Evangelist that Brother Johnson offers. It is also well to note that this is the classification with which he honored J. W. Krewson, to which had he been faithful would continue to be his privilege and honor. Thus, there is no question whatever respecting the comparative ratings that the Epiphany Messenger bestowed upon J. W. Krewson and upon the Pilgrims. Can it be that “Evangelist” Krewson is now rending his garments (his character qualities) in the same manner as did That Evil Servant and others early in the Epiphany? On occasion we asked Brother Johnson what had motivated the unbrotherly and unholy course of those who had so shamelessly and unjustly maligned and mistreated him. His answer: “It was envy, Brother!”

THIEVES – LARGE AND SMALL

All things considered, we believe it now the Lord's will that we present the technique of J. W. Krewson in comparison with certain members of the “two large thieves,” as given in E:5‑322 (68):

“The antitypical thieves,” says Brother Johnson, “are those leaders of Truth Movements who have stolen spiritual prerogatives, and their partisan supporters .... like G. K. Bolger (et al) .... who never were appointed by the Lord through That Servant as general elders, and who have stolen the privilege of addressing the General Church on Parousia matters ... These and others...are parts of these symbolic thieves. Those who continued their railing on the Large Jesus, the priesthood, into the ninth hour, the impenitent thief.” While members of the “impenitent thief” did much railing and reviling of the beloved Epiphany Messenger and his faithful adherents, none of them ­ever raised the question about his Pilgrim appointment by Brother Russell. But J. W. Krewson goes beyond the evils even of the “impenitent thief”; he has not only “stolen” the office of General Elder, but he now wishes to accuse JJH of having stolen something that was given to him by the Lord through the Epiphany Messenger (rob him of his rightful office). He accuses us of revolutionism, of unethical and untruthful statements, all in the face of the clear and direct appointment by Brother Johnson which we possess. He publicized his success at that New England secret meeting back in June 1955 (to unseat R. G. Jolly) by mentioning that he had “Pilgrims” and “Auxiliary” Pilgrims present. The only Pilgrim, so far as we know, present at that meeting was Daniel Gavin. And where did Daniel Gavin receive his appointment as Pilgrim? Why, from the identical source we did – from the Epiphany Messenger! We know not whether Daniel Gavin has a signed and sealed certificate, as we do; but we are certain he doesn't have any more than that.

It is with profound sorrow that we see J.W. Krewson falling so low; and we counsel him now to consider that the extreme humiliations he has received so often from our refutations are a punishment from the Lord to him, and a justification of us against the slander he has been circulating about us. We appeal to him to de­sist from such. “The sword” has been sorely upon him, and will continue until he either reforms or leaves completely the Household of Faith. When R. G. Jolly pauses to consider, and we urgently and prayerfully now counsel him to do so – from what sort of character he received “John's beheading,” the “Pyramid Corroboration of the Last Priest,” his “Bro. Russell's Epiphany Parallels,” and the “Campers Consecrated” false doctrine (“strange fire”), we inquire, how long can he continue to attempt defense of those abominable and defiling errors? In a threat against us (in his “Babel” – ­confusion) he says he “is baiting another hook for JJH.” If his new “hook” is at all similar to his past “hooks” he will then just portray once more the clumsy and bungling fisherman who hooks himself instead of the fish. “Thou comest to me with a sword, and a spear, and a javelin, but I come to thee in the name of the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel.”

“Great peace have they which love thy law; and nothing shall offend (turn them aside – stumble) them. Psalms 119:165

Sincerely your brother.

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

THE SPRING SPECIAL EFFORT

This year the date for the Special Effort in antitypical Gideon's Second Battle is from Sunday March 12 through Sunday April 9. In keeping with Brother Johnson's past recommendation, we specially recommend The Resurrection tract for distribution around Easter – either at church doors, house to house, or by mail. The other tracts – Where are the Dead and What is the Soul, are also for partici­pation in this Battle. The Battle against these two king errors is not yet com­plete, and the tracts prepared for this work are yet most timely for the pursuit of Zebah and Zalmunna. It will be our special pleasure to supply the pertinent literature to all who are in position to engage in this good work.

NO. 69: CHARACTERS TRIED AND TRUE

No. 69

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

In 2 Pet. 1:5‑7 are presented the essentials of Christian character, the which, if one lacks, “he is blind” (v. 9); but by the doing of which “you will never fall” (v. 10). A sober consideration of such a character structure should be the constant striving of all who are determined “not to fail.” That knowledge (the “Know‑how”) is the primary requisite herein needs no elaboration. It is not only the beginning, it is the constant companion during our earthly pilgrimage. At the consummation of his ministry St. Paul wrote, “for I know whom I have believed.” (2 Tim. 1:12) Follow­ing is Brother Rus­sell's statement of the matter in Parousia Vol. 5, p. 238, par. 2:

“As we mature, 'grow in grace,’ we will desire, seek and obtain, in addition to the milk of the Word, the 'strong meat’ which the Apostle declares is for those of fuller development. (1 Pet. 2:2; Heb. 5:13,14) The development in the “graces” of the Spirit, faith, fortitude, knowledge, self‑control, patience, piety, brotherly kindness, love, will bring us into closer fellowship with the Father and with Jesus, so that the Lord will be able and willing to communicate to us more and more clearly a knowledge of his gra­cious plans, as well as of his own gracious character.”

In giving us the Seven Higher Primary Graces, as Faith, Self‑control, Patience, Piety, Brotherly Love, Charity, Brother Johnson differs slightly from the above; but in E:1‑71, he distinctly tells us that Knowledge is an ingredient of Wisdom: "The third element of God's character is His graces. Usually we speak of the main attributes of God's character as WISDOM, POWER, JUSTICE and LOVE. But, as St. Peter shows us in his famous addition problem (2 Pet. 1:5‑7), these are capable of being re­solved into their parts as follows: Wisdom is a combination of faith, hope (which is the heart of forti­tude) and knowledge. Power (will power as distinct from omni­potence, which is an attribute of be­ing and not of character) is a combination of self‑control and patience. Justice is a combination of pi­ety (duty‑love to God; in God's case this goes out to good principles, not to any person, which, if it did, would imply that God has a superior – an impossibility) and Brotherly-Love (duty‑love to the neighbor). St. Peter does not analyze love; he simply mentions it as charity. These seven graces we call higher primary graces, because they are graces that, act­ing through the religious affections as qualities, are the chief and dominating graces. These graces in God are holy; they act in a holy man­ner and attach themselves to holy objects only."

We know that none of us can obtain 'knowledge of God' without developing it through the Holy Spirit; that no one, no matter how brilliant– even as brilliant and cunning as Satan– can obtain such 'knowledge of God' without God's help. God does not help the wicked to secure 'knowledge of God.' Nor does He help the Great Company while they are in the hands of Azazel. It would only injure them and others, while in that uncleansed condition, so they not only do not receive additional 'knowledge,' but the knowledge they have already received becomes dim, obscure and warped – includ­ing many "strong delusions."

In all such discussions it should be kept clearly in mind that none of these graces– except agape love– can be developed to perfection in ourselves or in others. During the Gospel Age the only grace required in perfection is agape love; therefore, St. Paul admonishes, "Put on love, which is the bond (or seal) of perfectness." It is the crowning top stone of character structure– just as the extreme tip of a pyra­mid is itself a perfect pyramid; and, if severed from the pyramid's top would in Feb. 1, 1961 – itself still present a full and complete and perfect pyramid. This is also grandly portrayed in the personality of Jesus, who is "above all" (except the Father Himself), Lord over all, but Himself a perfect unit, even though embracing the whole saved contin­gent of the human family in a perfect struc­ture under Him.

Altho, we believe there are but Seven Higher Primary Graces, as that is the number for Divine perfection, yet God's attributes are: Wisdom, Power, Justice and Love. He promises the Faithful that He will give them this, as much as they are able to receive. So, Love (Charity) is what we call a per­fect character, the end of all development of the Graces. Perfect Love (agape) in the heart, and that crystalized, is all God requires of His Saints. When we attain that and crystalize it, then we have actually "attained the mark" while yet in the flesh. But God tells us that He will give us the spirit of "power and of love and of a sound mind" (here are His four great attributes: Power, Love, Sound Mind – a sound mind would include Justice and Wisdom); and He gives us these attributes because of our faithfulness in develop­ing Faith, Fortitude, Knowledge. Self‑control, Patience, Piety, Brotherly Kindness‑­which if we develop and practise will give us that (Agape) love desired to the ex­tent of our capacity.

The Saints all have the capacity to develop that Perfect Love, otherwise none of them would be 'more than conquerors'; and the Great Company, after their cleans­ing, will also have to develop that Perfect Love if they gain Eternal life, although theirs will be forced by their adverse experiences during their abandonment process; otherwise, they would go into the Second Death. Brother Johnson tells us that some of the Youthful Worthies will be able to develop that Agape Love, and they should do it if they are able. But no doubt some of them won't be able to do that in this life, although they should do it as much as it is possible for them. However, they are not on trial for life – Character Per­fection – even as the Ancient Worthies were not on trial for life, but on trial for their faith (their faith­fulness in obedience to His Word and Providences). So some of the Youthful Worthies can and will be faithful who do not perfect Agape Love, even as was true of the Ancient Worthies, because their trial is not so crucial in that respect, to refine and develop character for Eternal Life at this time. While we have no proof for it, it would seem reasonable conclusion that those Youthful Worthies who do have the capacity to develop perfect agape love, but who fail to do so through indolence or wil­fulness, will in the final summation be counted as unfaithful and will not gain that Kingdom Prince­ship which will be the reward of all the faithful Worthies.

Brother Russell has this to say in Parousia Vol. 5, p. 239: "Each should ask himself whether or not he has this witness of the Spirit, this testimony to his growth as a new creature in Christ Jesus, and whether or not he is developing and maturing the kind of fruit here specified. Let us remember also that our growth in love and in all the Spirit's fruits is dependent largely upon our growth in knowledge; and our growth in knowledge of divine things is dependent also upon our growth in the Spirit's fruits. Each step of knowledge brings a corresponding step of duty and obediences and each step of duty and obedience taken will be followed by a further step in knowdedge, for so, the Spirit witnesseth, shall be the experience of all who shall be taught of God in the school of Christ. If we have this witness of the Spirit of growth, both in grace and in knowledge, let us rejoice therein, and let us follow on in the same pathway until it shall bring us, under divine guidance, to perfection, both in knowledge and in grace."

However, no one will ever reach perfection in Wisdom, which has as its ingredient Knowle­dge, because God reserves such Wisdom and Knowledge for Himself alone; even His only begotten Son will never achieve all‑knowledge. Nor will any of the Saints achieve Justice, Wisdom and Power that is inherent in God only– although they will re­ceive sufficient of these three attributes to do the Fa­ther's will. But in the attri­bute of Love, they will achieve that in its perfection for them; they will de­velop (and receive) perfect (Agape) love while in the flesh, because no one will be of the First (chief) Resurrection (to Divine Nature) unless they have developed a perfect character (perfect Love). We are told that God will give "it" (this perfect character) a "body as it has pleased him." (1 Cor. 15:38) Of course, we all know that the Saints have varying degrees of knowledge, but each one has sufficient knowledge to develop in himself Perfect (Agape) Love: each one during the Harvest came into the Parousia Truth and received enough developing Truth to perfect himself in Love (the lend of the commandment'); however, some of the Saints needed more knowledge than enough to develop their characters, as they were given further knowledge for the purpose of the work the Lord had for each of them. We cite Brother Johnson and others in the Epiphany Truth as examples. They were given additional Truth to serve Him (which they would do, because they were in complete heart‑harmony with the Lord's plans and purposes for them).

In keeping with the foregoing, the expression is often heard, ''He knows too much for his own good!" While this may sometimes be true, it was certainly not true of St. Paul, nor of any of the Star Members, nor of any of the Gospel‑Age fully faith­ful. Brother Russell has well stated that we should esteem most highly those whose zeal for the Truth – "as the hart panteth after the water brook" – goads them constantly to the acquisition of more of that blessed Truth. It is a true observation that "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Often do we read of novices crippling themselves and others by attempting to construct bombs and the like with their meagre knowledge. Thus, instead of knowing too much, they know too little. Quite often the Truth is injured also by those who know too little, yet insist upon appearing ''wise.'' The ideal, of course, is to possess the virtues and graces in perfect bal­ance, something which only Jesus Himself was able to do. But, by a system of checks and balances, to be found in Holy Writ, all the fully faithful achieve enough of bal­ance to gain the inheritance they seek. Thus, the Scriptures tell us, "Knowledge puffeth up (in one not properly balanced), but love buildeth up." In similar vein, "the generous heart shall be made fat," and "God loveth a cheerful giver"; but, generosity carried to extreme, may make one a spendthrift or an "easy mark" for the world's greed. Therefore, the admonition for "stewards to be found faithful."

It needs no argument that our Heavenly Father is perfect in generosity, and He has the wherewith to be generous – "the gold is mine, and the silver is mine; and the cattle on a thousand hills are mine." Yet we find Him also perfect in economy‑­nothing wasted. Some twenty years ago we were talking to a Government supervisor in one of the large national parks in the West. "When we first moved in here," he said, "we thought weld improve upon nature; so we made war on the mountain lions because they were eating the deer. Before long we had so many deer that great herds of them died by winter starvation; there wasn't enough food to go round. We also cleaned up the fallen logs, only to find there was no breeding ground for bugs, which deprived the birds of their food, and drove them from the park. Now the only thing we regu­late here is Man; everything else keeps in perfect balance if we just leave things alone." Yes, generosity needs economy to give it proper balance!

And what shall we say of the virtue of courage! God's army is no place for the cowardly; yet it is a proper observation that "Prudence is the better part of valor." We once knew a man who boasted he had never felt fear at any time in his entire life. Yet one night he heard a marauder at his back window, rushed right out the door with the light at his back, affording a perfect target for the gun in the burglar's hands. His courage that night was actually a liability, as it resulted in his death. Just a little prudence would have prompted a different approach to his problem. God never requires His people to be 'show‑offs'; and we need never fear we are lacking in cour­age if we attempt a sound and prudent evaluation of any difficulty before rushing to grips with it.

Much more might be said, but we offer now the words of St. Peter, 2 Pet. 1:8­(Dia.): "These things (the graces he enumerates) being in you and abounding, they will not permit you to be inac­tive (ever ready to "preach the word, in season and out of season") nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus." Here is a clear con­clusion that growth in the other graces must of a certainty yield growth in knowledge; and each advance in knowledge increases and crystalizes all our other graces– if that knowledge is received in "the love of the Truth." Knowledge is the first requirement to came into God's Household; and it must continue prominent in our progress until we hear that final "Well done, good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joys of thy Lord."

MORE ON THE EPIPHANY TABERNACLE COURT & CAMP

In the November‑December 1960 Present Truth (which reached us Dec. 15– too late for any comment in our January 1 paper) there is more volume of words by R. G. Jolly tending to bolster his bedraggled Consecrated Epiphany Campers. On. p. 90, col. 1, par. 3, he states "there is nothing in E:10‑672 that militates against the teaching that there is a class in the antitypical Camp that has been consecrating since 1954." No, there isn't anything specifically in that statement on p. 672; but there certain­ly is something definitely against it on p. 209 of that same book, where Brother Johnson states "the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture is the condition of truly repentant and believing, but not consecrated Jews and Gentiles." Repeatedly we have quoted this statement; and just as repeatedly have the Jolly‑Krewson twosome main­tained complete silence on it. WHY? It's because they have no answer for it.

Furthermore, this question is just another example of R. G. Jolly's ''Azazelian cunning" (See E:10‑646, top). On p. 672 Brother Johnson clearly states "Youthful Worthies, not yet consecrated are to be won after Babylon is destroyed." Has Baby­lon yet been destroyed? If not, is R. G. Jolly still try­ing to win Youthful Worthies, or is he denying this teaching by the Epiphany Messenger? And with this cunning is commingled that admixture of nonsense that is to be found so often in so many of his statements. In the present instance he is relying upon the short memories of so many of his readers, and relying upon their apparent incapacity to analyze the fundamental premise he is presenting. Had he said eleven years ago (while Brother Johnson was still with us) that "nothing in E:10‑672 militates against the teaching" that there would be Consecrated Epiphany Campers after 1954, the folly of his observation would then have been apparent to even the very immature among Epiphany Truth people. Why do we say this? It's because Brother Johnson never heard of Consecrated Camp­ers‑­has specifically taught just the contrary. Clearly and emphatically had he told us that, so long as the Epiphany Tabernacle was in existence, the place of justifica­tion and consecration would be found in the Court, and the Camp would contain the unconsecrated in the finished picture. Having made himself so clear in the matter, it would have been self‑evident surplus to add on p. 672 – or anywhere else in his writings – that there would not be any Consecrated in the Camp. It would have been self‑evident nonsense to refute a statement that did not then exist; and Brother Johnson was not given to nonsense – just the reverse of R. G. Jolly, from whom we have always the nonsense– just never any end to it!

Both Star Members taught Consecration in the Tabernacle Court. When any one steps figuratively one inch inside the Gate, he is in a tentatively justified condi­tion, just as he is fully without it one inch outside that Gate. But that is not nearly the end of it: One must progress toward the door of the Tabernacle as he advances toward Consecration; and Brother Russell clearly teaches it would be im­possible for any to make an intelligent consecration without first washing at the antitypical Laver. Therefore, since there is no Laver in the Camp, an acceptable consecration would be impossible in the Camp. Nor is there one hint anywhere in direct Scripture, type, picture or prophecy that there would be such a Class as Campers Consecrated in the end of this Age. That is purely and exclusively an invention of the Jolly‑Krewson twosome. No, the Parousia Messenger and the Epiphany Messen­ger could not see consecration without washing at the Laver; but R. G. Jolly has no trouble at all in seeing that. Why is that? Because he is in the hands of Azazel, and, as Brother Johnson says, when they are completely abandoned to Azazel they can't think clearly on the Truth. Nor has R. G. Jolly himself faithfully used that laver daily. Had he done so he would have retained his crown.

In this connection, we should never forget that all during the Age it was the crown‑losers who lusted for large numbers, even though the Spirit of the Truth was negligible in so many. To have the worldly (the "mixed multitude" – See Ex. 12:38) counted among the Fully Faithful has ever been det­rimental to both classes. And it has bien false promises and false hopes that have ever been the hon­eyed hoax that has attracted the "mixed multitude," and who have always continued as "Egyptians" at heart. This is pointedly noticeable in the Epiphany converts of Jehovah's Witnesses, and the promise that has won them. "Just join us," they say, 'And you'll live right through Armageddon, and never die." R. G. Jolly has hinted a similar reward for Campers Consecrated; but our continued sharp and stinging exposures have placed a measure of restraint upon him. As it is, he is saying very little to them about "a narrow way," because he is acutely aware that his "reward" for them is all out of keeping with the trying "covenant by sacrifice" that the Fully Faithful now experience. The "safety in numbers," which has ever been the goal of Big and Little Babylon, was never men­tioned by the last Star Members. Rather, they stressed the narrow way, which could be maintained unto a completion only by those who faithfully imbibed the Truth and the Spirit of the Truth.

As we have so often quoted from various of Brother Johnson's writings, we now offer some more from that very same 10th Volume upon which R. G. Jolly now attempts to lean:

"This Scripture (Ex. 19:21‑25) proves that, generally speaking, Jesus as God's Mouthpiece, and thus the exclusive Interpreter of the Word, would use in the end of this Age the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers as antitypi­cal Aaron ... to interpret to the brethren the Word as due, especially on new doctrines, prophecies and types. And any attempt of others to unravel these three things as new matters would be the prohibited gazing – specula­tion – of Ex. 19:21‑25, and would meet with a cutting off from their stand­ing, if not stopped."

Inasmuch as Campers Consecrated is a new doctrine – a weak, futile and erroneous attempt to of­fer a new interpretation of certain types – it is certainly "GAZING." Let the Jolly‑Krewson twosome persist in their Revolutionism; in view of the repeated and detailed warnings we have issued, their blood is certainly upon their own heads. To offer a new doctrine or type would in itself be serious enough; but it becomes doubly serious when such attempt also flagrantly vitiates the clear interpre­tations of both Star Members on the Parousia and Epiphany Tabernacles. Brother Johnson has clearly taught that on anything that upsets, or negates, the Tabernacle setting, the Lord's people should be very skeptical of it – i.e., if they believe and continue in these Truths. J. F. Rutherford disposed of Tabernacle Shadows altogether, and it certainly looks like the Jolly‑Krewson twosome are leaning in the same direction. To demoralize the orderly and sober interpretations on the Tabernacle by the last Star Members is in some respects even worse than denying in toto what they have presented.

As a further warning, we now offer some more from E:10‑XXV: "We are sure that during the Parousia and Epiphany, particularly during the latter, among Truth people, typing has been the most abused of all seven lines of Bible thought. Satan, knowing that by typing he could introduce error perhaps more effectively than by other means, has made this his favorite way of spreading error among the nominal and real people of God."

In his letter of Nov. 15, 1910, R. G. Jolly admitted his incapacity to interpret types (it probably caused him to lose his crown then); but it seems his costly and colossal failures in the past have taught him just nothing– he still plunges head­long into further "gazing"! And this same R. G. Jolly continues loudly and repeat­edly to shout "The Errorist" at one who is exposing his nebular visions! This is in keeping with what he continued to "repeat, repeat, and repeat" to Brother Johnson when he was telling him that he (Bro. Johnson) was wrong to oppose his erroneous course. (See E:10‑588; also E:10‑545 where J. F. Rutherford taught his followers to 'avoid' Brother Johnson's teachings, and 'avoid' him also. We don't do that to R. G. Joily, nor to his teachings, because we feel sure the more the Lord's faith­ful people look into his erroneous teachings the better enabled they will be to dis­cern between "truth and error." Let R. G. Jolly continue to 'avoid' naming the "errorist" and follow in the footsteps of J. F. Rutherford. As for us, we prefer to follow in the open and direct course of the Epiphany Messenger, so that our readers may be sure of whom and whereof we speak.)

THE EPIPHANY‑APOKALYPSE PERIOD

Then on p. 90, col. 2, R. G. Jolly attempts to offer a "parallel" between the lapping of the Parousia‑Epiphany, and the Epiphany‑Basileia. He says that since 1954 new consecrators can no longer have their standing in the Court, but must be in the Camp– a "parallel" to no new consecrators in the Holy after 1914. By October 1916 there was no longer any Parousia Tabernacle at all. Is he now telling us there is no longer an Epiphany Tabernacle at all since 1956? For his "parallel" to make any sense at all, that's the only logical conclusion to draw from his contention. As we have said pre­viously, miscalculations of time features by the last two Star Members do not in any sense disrupt God's arrangements for His people. Either we are in the Epiphany Tabernacle, or we are not. Back in the 1914‑16 lapping, the place of Justification remained the same. But in R. G. Jolly's 1954‑56 "Parallel" it is not the same; but that doesn't make any difference to him (R. G. Jolly). He's as able to ''make" types and parallels today as he was in 1910, it seems! Perhaps more so, as he doesn't have the restraining hand of a Star Member over him.

There is another point which applies here with indestructible force to annihilate his entire posi­tion, and it is this: Cod's "times and seasons" always accomplish what God designs they should ac­complish. Thus, when the "Parousia came to a full end by October 16, 1916" (see E:4‑20(13) – those features of the Harvest work that were to be finished by that date had been fully accomplished; and this same premise will apply to the Epiphany. In 2 Thes. 2:8 (Dia.) St. Paul writes that "the lawless one (the Man of Sin) the Lord Jesus will annihilate by the appearing (Epiphany – see Berean Com­ment) of His presence" (the large Parousia). The Man of Sin certainly was not "annihilated" by Octo­ber 1956, which proves clearly enough we cannot now be in an Apokalypse period (as claimed by one of the "cousins", J. W. Krewson); nor can we yet be in the Basileia period, as is now claimed by the other "cousin" – R. G. Jolly. That "son of destruction" (2 Thes. 2:3 – Dia.) is reserved for "destruction" in the period of destruction – namely, the Epiphany.

"The Epiphany is used to designate the period of the great tribulation, the Time of Trouble" says Brother Johnson in E:4‑21 (14). The destruction of "the lawless one" is in no sense a Basileia work; that must be accomplished in the Epiphany – ­before the Basileia begins to "judge the dead." In this same epistle where Paul foretells "the Man of Sin," he also predicts that those who "admitted not the love of the Truth (The Great Company and the Second Deathers) will be sent "an energy of delusion"; and "some of these delusions may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth," says Brother Russell. (See Berean Comment) Certainly, those in the Epiphany Movement have possessed "the most light of Present Truth"; and this Epiphany period (which ''makes manifest the counsels of heart") is indeed manifesting those who received not "the love of the Truth." Campers Consecrated‑­the Apokalypse as a period distinct from the Epiphany– and the Basileia as the per­iod of destruction for the Man of Sin – none of these items are to be found anywhere in the Present Truth teachings of Brother Russell or Brother Johnson. Therefore, those who champion these "strong delusions" are being manifested by the period de­signed for mani­festation and destruction – the Epiphany.

On p. 91, col. 1, he offers "Scriptural evidence respecting 1954," one of these being "Moses' twofold stay in the mountain." If our readers will refer to the Berean Comments for Ex. 34:29‑35, they will note Brother Russell correctly interprets the vail on Moses' face after the second forty days as "typifying the Ancient Worthies." Apparently, R. G. Jolly is not familiar with this teaching of That Servant, or he would not have offered his present nonsense on this item. Let him produce his 1954 "parallel" for that! His perversions of one teaching after another of the Star Mem­bers have indeed "become issues and tests upon God's (Epiphany‑enlightened) people"‑­as he states it; and his perver­sions are manifesting "who shall be able to stand" (Mal. 3:2) in this Epiphany trial time in "the things they have learned, and been assured of" at the feet of the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers.

In this connection, we cite Brother Johnson's interpretation of Numbers 7 on the offerings of the Gospel‑Age princes. Not a one of them presented a "Cup" in his offering– which is a clear and strong directive that no Crown‑loser would ever be favored by God with a new doctrine. And certainly if no Crown‑loser could do this, one now in Azazel's hands could not be so favored! This teaching also R. G. Jolly now perverts (Azazel means Perverter). And, when the Jews gathered enough Manna on the sixth day to last over the Sabbath, that also typed no new doctrines during the antitypical Sab­bath. R. G. Jolly now perverts that teaching also!

On p. 91, col. 2, he makes a pseudo‑comparison between us now and J. F. Ruther­ford in 1920; but here again he is thinking in reverse– nothing new for him! Back in 1920 the Society adherents denied a class that the Parousia Messenger had taught; R. G. Jolly is now advocating a class that the Epiphany Messenger did not teach, but in fact clearly contradicted his (R. G. Jolly's) Campers Con­secrated by his teach­ing on p. 209 of Vol. 10 that the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture would contain the unconsecrated. And by presenting this glaring dissimilarity he hypocritically shouts once more he is upholding the "true teaching of the Epiphany star‑member"! Although the crown‑losers are not full hypocrites, many of them are forced to partial hypocrisy because of their sins of teaching and practise. Brother Russell has this to say about them in the August 1, 1910 Reprints 4655: "These are not hypocrites, however, but since the time of trouble is properly for hypocrites, they will have their portion with the hypocrites..... As a result (of the "time of trouble"‑JJH) they will be granted the palm branches and the place before the throne, to serve God in his Temple."

Furthermore, we are not denying Tentative Justification – as was done in 1920. We simply contend that such justification must be obtained in the same place (the Court), and in the same way so long as the Epiphany Tabernacle continues with us. This R. G. Jolly is now denying, so it is he that is paral­leling J. F. Rutherford, et al, at present, and NOT US! He is actually perverting the faithful teaching of both Star Members by his false doctrine ("strange fire") – Consecrated Epiphany Campers. And when Brother Johnson "swept aside" the no‑covenant argument re Youthful Worthies, he produced a number of clear Scriptures to prove his point. This R. G. Jolly has not been able to do for his Camp­ers Consecrated. Let him produce just one Scripture setting forth such a class! Joel 2:28 actually names the "Youthfuls" as such; so the Scripture was there for Brother Johnson to interpret and de­fend – a very clear Scripture; but R. G. Jolly has no such Scripture for his Campers Consecrated. The name, as well as the class, are purely the Jolly‑Krewson twosome invention. While J. W. Krewson has tacitly remained mostly silent all during this altercation, even he still apparently has enough spiritual discernment to realize that Tentative Justifi­cation in the Camp is a perversion of the Truth; so the two of them now contradict each other on this point. It would be most interesting to know whether this same dis­agreement existed at the time they were first brewing this unholy libation. Will they answer this question, or just give it the silent treatment– as they both have done with so many of our exposures of their errors. Their silence on those Pyramid cal­culations as "proof" that Brother Johnson would be here until 1956 (presented in the January 1947 Present Truth), to­gether with their calculations on the Pyramid to "prove" the last Saint was glorified in 1950, is an­other manifestation of their weakness. They are ever ready to produce "proofs" for their Scripturally unsupported presentations.

On p. 92, col. 1, there is the statement that "soon after the fall of 1914 Bro. Johnson began teach­ing...the door of entrance into the High Calling closed." At best, this statement is a very loose use of the truth. Why doesn't R. G. Jolly give the date when Brother Johnson began to preach "the High Calling closed"? Or doesn't he know it was not until well into 1918 – almost four years after the fact – that Brother Johnson first saw this Truth? His shoddy sleight‑of‑hand here is habitual technique with him – in keeping with his Question re p. 672 of Vol. 10, which we discussed on page 1 of this paper.

And now, ''Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ." "The Lord redeemeth the soul of his servants; and none of them that trust in him shall be desolate." (Psa. 35:28)..

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Our dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace, Mercy and Peace be your portion;

We would be grateful to have your complete papers, as mentioned in your Nov. 1960 article. Eagerly do we look forward to your monthly papers, and thank the Lord for your lucid explanations. We continue to pray the Lord to grant to you wisdom and understanding– His Holy Spirit to guide you into all Truth; that we, too, will be teachable, through the light of the Holy Spirit. His Word and Providences in our lives remind us of the Psalmist – "I will lift up mine eye unto the hills," etc. Psa. 121 and Hymn 12 – the latter verse applying to the Little Flock particularly.

As it is nearing Christmas and the New Year 1961, we wish you and Sister Hoefle, and all the dear ones with you, a happy holiday season and a good New Year ahead of you in the service of the Lord. 2 Thess. 2:16,17.

Your brethren by His grace – – – – - England

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

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

It was a real pleasure to hear from you today, and I thank you for all the answered questions or thoughts. The tracts came in the best condition yet, and later my Advance Copy. So I feel that you have given much time to me.

As I read the letter I realized, dear Brother, that you are troubled on every side, (Bro. Gough's letter– JJH) I did not know you had such strong opposition in Jamaica. I hope that brother will be profited by your good reply.......

It is a privilege to defend his true teachings (Brother Russell's) by this renewal of Gideon's Second Battle. This is the comfort the people will need as this evil day grows more evil. May the dear Lord bless you both in your zeal amid so much affliction from those who were once brethren.

Thank you for explaining re the Volumes for loaning. I have some now on hand and assume that I can get more from you when needed,

Have read the December number once and expect to study it later. I will be glad to be of any as­sistance to Mrs .... that I can. Thank you for the opportunity.

With love in the Lord and continued prayers for your blessing and deep joys from Him, to you both and the kind friends who sent me their love....

Sister – – – – - Mass.

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

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

We continue to look forward to your monthly articles and pray the Lord's con­tinued blessing on your efforts to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (the last two Star Members in particular).

We note that R. G. Jolly published the same letter twice– first in his Sept­Oct. P.T., and again in his Nov‑Dec. P.T. If he had published this letter again several months later (as a repeat), that would be bad enough (but perhaps excusable), but to publish the same letter in two Present Truths (one right after the other) cer­tainly indicates that he is in bad need of letters to publish (against the sifters!). This Sister from New Jersey advises the Lord's people not to read the sifters' lit­erature. "They are playing with fire, and surely will get burnt" (if they do!), she says. This sounds very much like the same Sister (from New Jersey) who once was a "staunch supporter" of J. W. Krewson; he was her "Pastor and Teacher" then (upon the advice and leadership of Pilgrim Gavin). Now it seems her eyes are opened to see that R. G. Jolly is really the "Pastor and Teacher" (the Lord's Mouthpiece!). "Ever learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the Truth"! It would seem that such an unstable person should be happy just to keep silent; but they usually want to be heard– to advise others; and they always seem to re­ceive plenty of support and encouragement from "Pastors and Teachers" of the Jolly type! (being sure they are heard– just as Brother Motley and Brother Gough must be heard). R. G. Jolly is so ever ready to "repeat, repeat, and repeat" even in his publishing letters (if they are knocking the "sifters"). We heartily wish that he would "repeat" the Truths he once accepted and not try to run ahead of the Lord with his new (false) doctrines and his own ideas.

We here participated in the Special Effort (in Memory of the Two Messengers)‑­served several churches with Where are the Dead (Antitypical Gideon's Second Battle). We also had a blessed Me­morial service for Brother Russell and Brother Johnson, using Brother Johnson's funeral discourse and comments in Brother Russell's memory – ­and using your funeral discourse for Brother Johnson, in Brother Johnson's memory. We also had testimoies from all (there were 10 present). We don't know whether you want reports on these Special Efforts or not. If so, we will send you a more detailed re­port. (Note: We are always pleased to receive such reports – JJH)

May the Lord bless you as you continue your able refutations against the errors so prominently advocated by the two would‑be "Pastors and Teachers," and may you continue to bless His people with the Truth and its Spirit.

Your Brother by His Grace – – – – - N.C.

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

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

We take this opportunity in extending our warm and sincere Christian greetings and wishes for a prosperous New Year. May the dear Lord continue His blessings, keep and direct you both throughout your stay on earth.

As it pleased the Lord to direct you for the leading of His people, we pray that he will help you to be faithful as Joshua of old. We though little but a united company here, are striving to be faithful in serving the Lord and His cause. We have served quite a number of tracts......It is our desire to sow beside all waters, for we know not whether will prosper.

With this comes our prayers for you both and the dear ones with you.

Yours by His Grace, – – – – - ,Ecclesia – Jamaica

No. 69

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

In 2 Pet. 1:5‑7 are presented the essentials of Christian character, the which, if one lacks, “he is blind” (v. 9); but by the doing of which “you will never fall” (v. 10). A sober consideration of such a character structure should be the constant striving of all who are determined “not to fail.” That knowledge (the “Know‑how”) is the primary requisite herein needs no elaboration. It is not only the beginning, it is the constant companion during our earthly pilgrimage. At the consummation of his ministry St. Paul wrote, “for I know whom I have believed.” (2 Tim. 1:12) Follow­ing is Brother Rus­sell's statement of the matter in Parousia Vol. 5, p. 238, par. 2:

“As we mature, 'grow in grace,’ we will desire, seek and obtain, in addition to the milk of the Word, the 'strong meat’ which the Apostle declares is for those of fuller development. (1 Pet. 2:2; Heb. 5:13,14) The development in the “graces” of the Spirit, faith, fortitude, knowledge, self‑control, patience, piety, brotherly kindness, love, will bring us into closer fellowship with the Father and with Jesus, so that the Lord will be able and willing to communicate to us more and more clearly a knowledge of his gra­cious plans, as well as of his own gracious character.”

In giving us the Seven Higher Primary Graces, as Faith, Self‑control, Patience, Piety, Brotherly Love, Charity, Brother Johnson differs slightly from the above; but in E:1‑71, he distinctly tells us that Knowledge is an ingredient of Wisdom: "The third element of God's character is His graces. Usually we speak of the main attributes of God's character as WISDOM, POWER, JUSTICE and LOVE. But, as St. Peter shows us in his famous addition problem (2 Pet. 1:5‑7), these are capable of being re­solved into their parts as follows: Wisdom is a combination of faith, hope (which is the heart of forti­tude) and knowledge. Power (will power as distinct from omni­potence, which is an attribute of be­ing and not of character) is a combination of self‑control and patience. Justice is a combination of pi­ety (duty‑love to God; in God's case this goes out to good principles, not to any person, which, if it did, would imply that God has a superior – an impossibility) and Brotherly-Love (duty‑love to the neighbor). St. Peter does not analyze love; he simply mentions it as charity. These seven graces we call higher primary graces, because they are graces that, act­ing through the religious affections as qualities, are the chief and dominating graces. These graces in God are holy; they act in a holy man­ner and attach themselves to holy objects only."

We know that none of us can obtain 'knowledge of God' without developing it through the Holy Spirit; that no one, no matter how brilliant– even as brilliant and cunning as Satan– can obtain such 'knowledge of God' without God's help. God does not help the wicked to secure 'knowledge of God.' Nor does He help the Great Company while they are in the hands of Azazel. It would only injure them and others, while in that uncleansed condition, so they not only do not receive additional 'knowledge,' but the knowledge they have already received becomes dim, obscure and warped – includ­ing many "strong delusions."

In all such discussions it should be kept clearly in mind that none of these graces– except agape love– can be developed to perfection in ourselves or in others. During the Gospel Age the only grace required in perfection is agape love; therefore, St. Paul admonishes, "Put on love, which is the bond (or seal) of perfectness." It is the crowning top stone of character structure– just as the extreme tip of a pyra­mid is itself a perfect pyramid; and, if severed from the pyramid's top would in Feb. 1, 1961 – itself still present a full and complete and perfect pyramid. This is also grandly portrayed in the personality of Jesus, who is "above all" (except the Father Himself), Lord over all, but Himself a perfect unit, even though embracing the whole saved contin­gent of the human family in a perfect struc­ture under Him.

Altho, we believe there are but Seven Higher Primary Graces, as that is the number for Divine perfection, yet God's attributes are: Wisdom, Power, Justice and Love. He promises the Faithful that He will give them this, as much as they are able to receive. So, Love (Charity) is what we call a per­fect character, the end of all development of the Graces. Perfect Love (agape) in the heart, and that crystalized, is all God requires of His Saints. When we attain that and crystalize it, then we have actually "attained the mark" while yet in the flesh. But God tells us that He will give us the spirit of "power and of love and of a sound mind" (here are His four great attributes: Power, Love, Sound Mind – a sound mind would include Justice and Wisdom); and He gives us these attributes because of our faithfulness in develop­ing Faith, Fortitude, Knowledge. Self‑control, Patience, Piety, Brotherly Kindness‑­which if we develop and practise will give us that (Agape) love desired to the ex­tent of our capacity.

The Saints all have the capacity to develop that Perfect Love, otherwise none of them would be 'more than conquerors'; and the Great Company, after their cleans­ing, will also have to develop that Perfect Love if they gain Eternal life, although theirs will be forced by their adverse experiences during their abandonment process; otherwise, they would go into the Second Death. Brother Johnson tells us that some of the Youthful Worthies will be able to develop that Agape Love, and they should do it if they are able. But no doubt some of them won't be able to do that in this life, although they should do it as much as it is possible for them. However, they are not on trial for life – Character Per­fection – even as the Ancient Worthies were not on trial for life, but on trial for their faith (their faith­fulness in obedience to His Word and Providences). So some of the Youthful Worthies can and will be faithful who do not perfect Agape Love, even as was true of the Ancient Worthies, because their trial is not so crucial in that respect, to refine and develop character for Eternal Life at this time. While we have no proof for it, it would seem reasonable conclusion that those Youthful Worthies who do have the capacity to develop perfect agape love, but who fail to do so through indolence or wil­fulness, will in the final summation be counted as unfaithful and will not gain that Kingdom Prince­ship which will be the reward of all the faithful Worthies.

Brother Russell has this to say in Parousia Vol. 5, p. 239: "Each should ask himself whether or not he has this witness of the Spirit, this testimony to his growth as a new creature in Christ Jesus, and whether or not he is developing and maturing the kind of fruit here specified. Let us remember also that our growth in love and in all the Spirit's fruits is dependent largely upon our growth in knowledge; and our growth in knowledge of divine things is dependent also upon our growth in the Spirit's fruits. Each step of knowledge brings a corresponding step of duty and obediences and each step of duty and obedience taken will be followed by a further step in knowdedge, for so, the Spirit witnesseth, shall be the experience of all who shall be taught of God in the school of Christ. If we have this witness of the Spirit of growth, both in grace and in knowledge, let us rejoice therein, and let us follow on in the same pathway until it shall bring us, under divine guidance, to perfection, both in knowledge and in grace."

However, no one will ever reach perfection in Wisdom, which has as its ingredient Knowle­dge, because God reserves such Wisdom and Knowledge for Himself alone; even His only begotten Son will never achieve all‑knowledge. Nor will any of the Saints achieve Justice, Wisdom and Power that is inherent in God only– although they will re­ceive sufficient of these three attributes to do the Fa­ther's will. But in the attri­bute of Love, they will achieve that in its perfection for them; they will de­velop (and receive) perfect (Agape) love while in the flesh, because no one will be of the First (chief) Resurrection (to Divine Nature) unless they have developed a perfect character (perfect Love). We are told that God will give "it" (this perfect character) a "body as it has pleased him." (1 Cor. 15:38) Of course, we all know that the Saints have varying degrees of knowledge, but each one has sufficient knowledge to develop in himself Perfect (Agape) Love: each one during the Harvest came into the Parousia Truth and received enough developing Truth to perfect himself in Love (the lend of the commandment'); however, some of the Saints needed more knowledge than enough to develop their characters, as they were given further knowledge for the purpose of the work the Lord had for each of them. We cite Brother Johnson and others in the Epiphany Truth as examples. They were given additional Truth to serve Him (which they would do, because they were in complete heart‑harmony with the Lord's plans and purposes for them).

In keeping with the foregoing, the expression is often heard, ''He knows too much for his own good!" While this may sometimes be true, it was certainly not true of St. Paul, nor of any of the Star Members, nor of any of the Gospel‑Age fully faith­ful. Brother Russell has well stated that we should esteem most highly those whose zeal for the Truth – "as the hart panteth after the water brook" – goads them constantly to the acquisition of more of that blessed Truth. It is a true observation that "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." Often do we read of novices crippling themselves and others by attempting to construct bombs and the like with their meagre knowledge. Thus, instead of knowing too much, they know too little. Quite often the Truth is injured also by those who know too little, yet insist upon appearing ''wise.'' The ideal, of course, is to possess the virtues and graces in perfect bal­ance, something which only Jesus Himself was able to do. But, by a system of checks and balances, to be found in Holy Writ, all the fully faithful achieve enough of bal­ance to gain the inheritance they seek. Thus, the Scriptures tell us, "Knowledge puffeth up (in one not properly balanced), but love buildeth up." In similar vein, "the generous heart shall be made fat," and "God loveth a cheerful giver"; but, generosity carried to extreme, may make one a spendthrift or an "easy mark" for the world's greed. Therefore, the admonition for "stewards to be found faithful."

It needs no argument that our Heavenly Father is perfect in generosity, and He has the wherewith to be generous – "the gold is mine, and the silver is mine; and the cattle on a thousand hills are mine." Yet we find Him also perfect in economy‑­nothing wasted. Some twenty years ago we were talking to a Government supervisor in one of the large national parks in the West. "When we first moved in here," he said, "we thought weld improve upon nature; so we made war on the mountain lions because they were eating the deer. Before long we had so many deer that great herds of them died by winter starvation; there wasn't enough food to go round. We also cleaned up the fallen logs, only to find there was no breeding ground for bugs, which deprived the birds of their food, and drove them from the park. Now the only thing we regu­late here is Man; everything else keeps in perfect balance if we just leave things alone." Yes, generosity needs economy to give it proper balance!

And what shall we say of the virtue of courage! God's army is no place for the cowardly; yet it is a proper observation that "Prudence is the better part of valor." We once knew a man who boasted he had never felt fear at any time in his entire life. Yet one night he heard a marauder at his back window, rushed right out the door with the light at his back, affording a perfect target for the gun in the burglar's hands. His courage that night was actually a liability, as it resulted in his death. Just a little prudence would have prompted a different approach to his problem. God never requires His people to be 'show‑offs'; and we need never fear we are lacking in cour­age if we attempt a sound and prudent evaluation of any difficulty before rushing to grips with it.

Much more might be said, but we offer now the words of St. Peter, 2 Pet. 1:8­(Dia.): "These things (the graces he enumerates) being in you and abounding, they will not permit you to be inac­tive (ever ready to "preach the word, in season and out of season") nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus." Here is a clear con­clusion that growth in the other graces must of a certainty yield growth in knowledge; and each advance in knowledge increases and crystalizes all our other graces– if that knowledge is received in "the love of the Truth." Knowledge is the first requirement to came into God's Household; and it must continue prominent in our progress until we hear that final "Well done, good and faithful servant; enter thou into the joys of thy Lord."

MORE ON THE EPIPHANY TABERNACLE COURT & CAMP

In the November‑December 1960 Present Truth (which reached us Dec. 15– too late for any comment in our January 1 paper) there is more volume of words by R. G. Jolly tending to bolster his bedraggled Consecrated Epiphany Campers. On. p. 90, col. 1, par. 3, he states "there is nothing in E:10‑672 that militates against the teaching that there is a class in the antitypical Camp that has been consecrating since 1954." No, there isn't anything specifically in that statement on p. 672; but there certain­ly is something definitely against it on p. 209 of that same book, where Brother Johnson states "the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture is the condition of truly repentant and believing, but not consecrated Jews and Gentiles." Repeatedly we have quoted this statement; and just as repeatedly have the Jolly‑Krewson twosome main­tained complete silence on it. WHY? It's because they have no answer for it.

Furthermore, this question is just another example of R. G. Jolly's ''Azazelian cunning" (See E:10‑646, top). On p. 672 Brother Johnson clearly states "Youthful Worthies, not yet consecrated are to be won after Babylon is destroyed." Has Baby­lon yet been destroyed? If not, is R. G. Jolly still try­ing to win Youthful Worthies, or is he denying this teaching by the Epiphany Messenger? And with this cunning is commingled that admixture of nonsense that is to be found so often in so many of his statements. In the present instance he is relying upon the short memories of so many of his readers, and relying upon their apparent incapacity to analyze the fundamental premise he is presenting. Had he said eleven years ago (while Brother Johnson was still with us) that "nothing in E:10‑672 militates against the teaching" that there would be Consecrated Epiphany Campers after 1954, the folly of his observation would then have been apparent to even the very immature among Epiphany Truth people. Why do we say this? It's because Brother Johnson never heard of Consecrated Camp­ers‑­has specifically taught just the contrary. Clearly and emphatically had he told us that, so long as the Epiphany Tabernacle was in existence, the place of justifica­tion and consecration would be found in the Court, and the Camp would contain the unconsecrated in the finished picture. Having made himself so clear in the matter, it would have been self‑evident surplus to add on p. 672 – or anywhere else in his writings – that there would not be any Consecrated in the Camp. It would have been self‑evident nonsense to refute a statement that did not then exist; and Brother Johnson was not given to nonsense – just the reverse of R. G. Jolly, from whom we have always the nonsense– just never any end to it!

Both Star Members taught Consecration in the Tabernacle Court. When any one steps figuratively one inch inside the Gate, he is in a tentatively justified condi­tion, just as he is fully without it one inch outside that Gate. But that is not nearly the end of it: One must progress toward the door of the Tabernacle as he advances toward Consecration; and Brother Russell clearly teaches it would be im­possible for any to make an intelligent consecration without first washing at the antitypical Laver. Therefore, since there is no Laver in the Camp, an acceptable consecration would be impossible in the Camp. Nor is there one hint anywhere in direct Scripture, type, picture or prophecy that there would be such a Class as Campers Consecrated in the end of this Age. That is purely and exclusively an invention of the Jolly‑Krewson twosome. No, the Parousia Messenger and the Epiphany Messen­ger could not see consecration without washing at the Laver; but R. G. Jolly has no trouble at all in seeing that. Why is that? Because he is in the hands of Azazel, and, as Brother Johnson says, when they are completely abandoned to Azazel they can't think clearly on the Truth. Nor has R. G. Jolly himself faithfully used that laver daily. Had he done so he would have retained his crown.

In this connection, we should never forget that all during the Age it was the crown‑losers who lusted for large numbers, even though the Spirit of the Truth was negligible in so many. To have the worldly (the "mixed multitude" – See Ex. 12:38) counted among the Fully Faithful has ever been det­rimental to both classes. And it has bien false promises and false hopes that have ever been the hon­eyed hoax that has attracted the "mixed multitude," and who have always continued as "Egyptians" at heart. This is pointedly noticeable in the Epiphany converts of Jehovah's Witnesses, and the promise that has won them. "Just join us," they say, 'And you'll live right through Armageddon, and never die." R. G. Jolly has hinted a similar reward for Campers Consecrated; but our continued sharp and stinging exposures have placed a measure of restraint upon him. As it is, he is saying very little to them about "a narrow way," because he is acutely aware that his "reward" for them is all out of keeping with the trying "covenant by sacrifice" that the Fully Faithful now experience. The "safety in numbers," which has ever been the goal of Big and Little Babylon, was never men­tioned by the last Star Members. Rather, they stressed the narrow way, which could be maintained unto a completion only by those who faithfully imbibed the Truth and the Spirit of the Truth.

As we have so often quoted from various of Brother Johnson's writings, we now offer some more from that very same 10th Volume upon which R. G. Jolly now attempts to lean:

"This Scripture (Ex. 19:21‑25) proves that, generally speaking, Jesus as God's Mouthpiece, and thus the exclusive Interpreter of the Word, would use in the end of this Age the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers as antitypi­cal Aaron ... to interpret to the brethren the Word as due, especially on new doctrines, prophecies and types. And any attempt of others to unravel these three things as new matters would be the prohibited gazing – specula­tion – of Ex. 19:21‑25, and would meet with a cutting off from their stand­ing, if not stopped."

Inasmuch as Campers Consecrated is a new doctrine – a weak, futile and erroneous attempt to of­fer a new interpretation of certain types – it is certainly "GAZING." Let the Jolly‑Krewson twosome persist in their Revolutionism; in view of the repeated and detailed warnings we have issued, their blood is certainly upon their own heads. To offer a new doctrine or type would in itself be serious enough; but it becomes doubly serious when such attempt also flagrantly vitiates the clear interpre­tations of both Star Members on the Parousia and Epiphany Tabernacles. Brother Johnson has clearly taught that on anything that upsets, or negates, the Tabernacle setting, the Lord's people should be very skeptical of it – i.e., if they believe and continue in these Truths. J. F. Rutherford disposed of Tabernacle Shadows altogether, and it certainly looks like the Jolly‑Krewson twosome are leaning in the same direction. To demoralize the orderly and sober interpretations on the Tabernacle by the last Star Members is in some respects even worse than denying in toto what they have presented.

As a further warning, we now offer some more from E:10‑XXV: "We are sure that during the Parousia and Epiphany, particularly during the latter, among Truth people, typing has been the most abused of all seven lines of Bible thought. Satan, knowing that by typing he could introduce error perhaps more effectively than by other means, has made this his favorite way of spreading error among the nominal and real people of God."

In his letter of Nov. 15, 1910, R. G. Jolly admitted his incapacity to interpret types (it probably caused him to lose his crown then); but it seems his costly and colossal failures in the past have taught him just nothing– he still plunges head­long into further "gazing"! And this same R. G. Jolly continues loudly and repeat­edly to shout "The Errorist" at one who is exposing his nebular visions! This is in keeping with what he continued to "repeat, repeat, and repeat" to Brother Johnson when he was telling him that he (Bro. Johnson) was wrong to oppose his erroneous course. (See E:10‑588; also E:10‑545 where J. F. Rutherford taught his followers to 'avoid' Brother Johnson's teachings, and 'avoid' him also. We don't do that to R. G. Joily, nor to his teachings, because we feel sure the more the Lord's faith­ful people look into his erroneous teachings the better enabled they will be to dis­cern between "truth and error." Let R. G. Jolly continue to 'avoid' naming the "errorist" and follow in the footsteps of J. F. Rutherford. As for us, we prefer to follow in the open and direct course of the Epiphany Messenger, so that our readers may be sure of whom and whereof we speak.)

THE EPIPHANY‑APOKALYPSE PERIOD

Then on p. 90, col. 2, R. G. Jolly attempts to offer a "parallel" between the lapping of the Parousia‑Epiphany, and the Epiphany‑Basileia. He says that since 1954 new consecrators can no longer have their standing in the Court, but must be in the Camp– a "parallel" to no new consecrators in the Holy after 1914. By October 1916 there was no longer any Parousia Tabernacle at all. Is he now telling us there is no longer an Epiphany Tabernacle at all since 1956? For his "parallel" to make any sense at all, that's the only logical conclusion to draw from his contention. As we have said pre­viously, miscalculations of time features by the last two Star Members do not in any sense disrupt God's arrangements for His people. Either we are in the Epiphany Tabernacle, or we are not. Back in the 1914‑16 lapping, the place of Justification remained the same. But in R. G. Jolly's 1954‑56 "Parallel" it is not the same; but that doesn't make any difference to him (R. G. Jolly). He's as able to ''make" types and parallels today as he was in 1910, it seems! Perhaps more so, as he doesn't have the restraining hand of a Star Member over him.

There is another point which applies here with indestructible force to annihilate his entire posi­tion, and it is this: Cod's "times and seasons" always accomplish what God designs they should ac­complish. Thus, when the "Parousia came to a full end by October 16, 1916" (see E:4‑20(13) – those features of the Harvest work that were to be finished by that date had been fully accomplished; and this same premise will apply to the Epiphany. In 2 Thes. 2:8 (Dia.) St. Paul writes that "the lawless one (the Man of Sin) the Lord Jesus will annihilate by the appearing (Epiphany – see Berean Com­ment) of His presence" (the large Parousia). The Man of Sin certainly was not "annihilated" by Octo­ber 1956, which proves clearly enough we cannot now be in an Apokalypse period (as claimed by one of the "cousins", J. W. Krewson); nor can we yet be in the Basileia period, as is now claimed by the other "cousin" – R. G. Jolly. That "son of destruction" (2 Thes. 2:3 – Dia.) is reserved for "destruction" in the period of destruction – namely, the Epiphany.

"The Epiphany is used to designate the period of the great tribulation, the Time of Trouble" says Brother Johnson in E:4‑21 (14). The destruction of "the lawless one" is in no sense a Basileia work; that must be accomplished in the Epiphany – ­before the Basileia begins to "judge the dead." In this same epistle where Paul foretells "the Man of Sin," he also predicts that those who "admitted not the love of the Truth (The Great Company and the Second Deathers) will be sent "an energy of delusion"; and "some of these delusions may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth," says Brother Russell. (See Berean Comment) Certainly, those in the Epiphany Movement have possessed "the most light of Present Truth"; and this Epiphany period (which ''makes manifest the counsels of heart") is indeed manifesting those who received not "the love of the Truth." Campers Consecrated‑­the Apokalypse as a period distinct from the Epiphany– and the Basileia as the per­iod of destruction for the Man of Sin – none of these items are to be found anywhere in the Present Truth teachings of Brother Russell or Brother Johnson. Therefore, those who champion these "strong delusions" are being manifested by the period de­signed for mani­festation and destruction – the Epiphany.

On p. 91, col. 1, he offers "Scriptural evidence respecting 1954," one of these being "Moses' twofold stay in the mountain." If our readers will refer to the Berean Comments for Ex. 34:29‑35, they will note Brother Russell correctly interprets the vail on Moses' face after the second forty days as "typifying the Ancient Worthies." Apparently, R. G. Jolly is not familiar with this teaching of That Servant, or he would not have offered his present nonsense on this item. Let him produce his 1954 "parallel" for that! His perversions of one teaching after another of the Star Mem­bers have indeed "become issues and tests upon God's (Epiphany‑enlightened) people"‑­as he states it; and his perver­sions are manifesting "who shall be able to stand" (Mal. 3:2) in this Epiphany trial time in "the things they have learned, and been assured of" at the feet of the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers.

In this connection, we cite Brother Johnson's interpretation of Numbers 7 on the offerings of the Gospel‑Age princes. Not a one of them presented a "Cup" in his offering– which is a clear and strong directive that no Crown‑loser would ever be favored by God with a new doctrine. And certainly if no Crown‑loser could do this, one now in Azazel's hands could not be so favored! This teaching also R. G. Jolly now perverts (Azazel means Perverter). And, when the Jews gathered enough Manna on the sixth day to last over the Sabbath, that also typed no new doctrines during the antitypical Sab­bath. R. G. Jolly now perverts that teaching also!

On p. 91, col. 2, he makes a pseudo‑comparison between us now and J. F. Ruther­ford in 1920; but here again he is thinking in reverse– nothing new for him! Back in 1920 the Society adherents denied a class that the Parousia Messenger had taught; R. G. Jolly is now advocating a class that the Epiphany Messenger did not teach, but in fact clearly contradicted his (R. G. Jolly's) Campers Con­secrated by his teach­ing on p. 209 of Vol. 10 that the Epiphany Camp in the finished picture would contain the unconsecrated. And by presenting this glaring dissimilarity he hypocritically shouts once more he is upholding the "true teaching of the Epiphany star‑member"! Although the crown‑losers are not full hypocrites, many of them are forced to partial hypocrisy because of their sins of teaching and practise. Brother Russell has this to say about them in the August 1, 1910 Reprints 4655: "These are not hypocrites, however, but since the time of trouble is properly for hypocrites, they will have their portion with the hypocrites..... As a result (of the "time of trouble"‑JJH) they will be granted the palm branches and the place before the throne, to serve God in his Temple."

Furthermore, we are not denying Tentative Justification – as was done in 1920. We simply contend that such justification must be obtained in the same place (the Court), and in the same way so long as the Epiphany Tabernacle continues with us. This R. G. Jolly is now denying, so it is he that is paral­leling J. F. Rutherford, et al, at present, and NOT US! He is actually perverting the faithful teaching of both Star Members by his false doctrine ("strange fire") – Consecrated Epiphany Campers. And when Brother Johnson "swept aside" the no‑covenant argument re Youthful Worthies, he produced a number of clear Scriptures to prove his point. This R. G. Jolly has not been able to do for his Camp­ers Consecrated. Let him produce just one Scripture setting forth such a class! Joel 2:28 actually names the "Youthfuls" as such; so the Scripture was there for Brother Johnson to interpret and de­fend – a very clear Scripture; but R. G. Jolly has no such Scripture for his Campers Consecrated. The name, as well as the class, are purely the Jolly‑Krewson twosome invention. While J. W. Krewson has tacitly remained mostly silent all during this altercation, even he still apparently has enough spiritual discernment to realize that Tentative Justifi­cation in the Camp is a perversion of the Truth; so the two of them now contradict each other on this point. It would be most interesting to know whether this same dis­agreement existed at the time they were first brewing this unholy libation. Will they answer this question, or just give it the silent treatment– as they both have done with so many of our exposures of their errors. Their silence on those Pyramid cal­culations as "proof" that Brother Johnson would be here until 1956 (presented in the January 1947 Present Truth), to­gether with their calculations on the Pyramid to "prove" the last Saint was glorified in 1950, is an­other manifestation of their weakness. They are ever ready to produce "proofs" for their Scripturally unsupported presentations.

On p. 92, col. 1, there is the statement that "soon after the fall of 1914 Bro. Johnson began teach­ing...the door of entrance into the High Calling closed." At best, this statement is a very loose use of the truth. Why doesn't R. G. Jolly give the date when Brother Johnson began to preach "the High Calling closed"? Or doesn't he know it was not until well into 1918 – almost four years after the fact – that Brother Johnson first saw this Truth? His shoddy sleight‑of‑hand here is habitual technique with him – in keeping with his Question re p. 672 of Vol. 10, which we discussed on page 1 of this paper.

And now, ''Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ." "The Lord redeemeth the soul of his servants; and none of them that trust in him shall be desolate." (Psa. 35:28)..

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Our dear Brother Hoefle: – Grace, Mercy and Peace be your portion;

We would be grateful to have your complete papers, as mentioned in your Nov. 1960 article. Eagerly do we look forward to your monthly papers, and thank the Lord for your lucid explanations. We continue to pray the Lord to grant to you wisdom and understanding– His Holy Spirit to guide you into all Truth; that we, too, will be teachable, through the light of the Holy Spirit. His Word and Providences in our lives remind us of the Psalmist – "I will lift up mine eye unto the hills," etc. Psa. 121 and Hymn 12 – the latter verse applying to the Little Flock particularly.

As it is nearing Christmas and the New Year 1961, we wish you and Sister Hoefle, and all the dear ones with you, a happy holiday season and a good New Year ahead of you in the service of the Lord. 2 Thess. 2:16,17.

Your brethren by His grace – – – – - England

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

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

It was a real pleasure to hear from you today, and I thank you for all the answered questions or thoughts. The tracts came in the best condition yet, and later my Advance Copy. So I feel that you have given much time to me.

As I read the letter I realized, dear Brother, that you are troubled on every side, (Bro. Gough's letter– JJH) I did not know you had such strong opposition in Jamaica. I hope that brother will be profited by your good reply.......

It is a privilege to defend his true teachings (Brother Russell's) by this renewal of Gideon's Second Battle. This is the comfort the people will need as this evil day grows more evil. May the dear Lord bless you both in your zeal amid so much affliction from those who were once brethren.

Thank you for explaining re the Volumes for loaning. I have some now on hand and assume that I can get more from you when needed,

Have read the December number once and expect to study it later. I will be glad to be of any as­sistance to Mrs .... that I can. Thank you for the opportunity.

With love in the Lord and continued prayers for your blessing and deep joys from Him, to you both and the kind friends who sent me their love....

Sister – – – – - Mass.

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

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

We continue to look forward to your monthly articles and pray the Lord's con­tinued blessing on your efforts to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (the last two Star Members in particular).

We note that R. G. Jolly published the same letter twice– first in his Sept­Oct. P.T., and again in his Nov‑Dec. P.T. If he had published this letter again several months later (as a repeat), that would be bad enough (but perhaps excusable), but to publish the same letter in two Present Truths (one right after the other) cer­tainly indicates that he is in bad need of letters to publish (against the sifters!). This Sister from New Jersey advises the Lord's people not to read the sifters' lit­erature. "They are playing with fire, and surely will get burnt" (if they do!), she says. This sounds very much like the same Sister (from New Jersey) who once was a "staunch supporter" of J. W. Krewson; he was her "Pastor and Teacher" then (upon the advice and leadership of Pilgrim Gavin). Now it seems her eyes are opened to see that R. G. Jolly is really the "Pastor and Teacher" (the Lord's Mouthpiece!). "Ever learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the Truth"! It would seem that such an unstable person should be happy just to keep silent; but they usually want to be heard– to advise others; and they always seem to re­ceive plenty of support and encouragement from "Pastors and Teachers" of the Jolly type! (being sure they are heard– just as Brother Motley and Brother Gough must be heard). R. G. Jolly is so ever ready to "repeat, repeat, and repeat" even in his publishing letters (if they are knocking the "sifters"). We heartily wish that he would "repeat" the Truths he once accepted and not try to run ahead of the Lord with his new (false) doctrines and his own ideas.

We here participated in the Special Effort (in Memory of the Two Messengers)‑­served several churches with Where are the Dead (Antitypical Gideon's Second Battle). We also had a blessed Me­morial service for Brother Russell and Brother Johnson, using Brother Johnson's funeral discourse and comments in Brother Russell's memory – ­and using your funeral discourse for Brother Johnson, in Brother Johnson's memory. We also had testimoies from all (there were 10 present). We don't know whether you want reports on these Special Efforts or not. If so, we will send you a more detailed re­port. (Note: We are always pleased to receive such reports – JJH)

May the Lord bless you as you continue your able refutations against the errors so prominently advocated by the two would‑be "Pastors and Teachers," and may you continue to bless His people with the Truth and its Spirit.

Your Brother by His Grace – – – – - N.C.

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

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

We take this opportunity in extending our warm and sincere Christian greetings and wishes for a prosperous New Year. May the dear Lord continue His blessings, keep and direct you both throughout your stay on earth.

As it pleased the Lord to direct you for the leading of His people, we pray that he will help you to be faithful as Joshua of old. We though little but a united company here, are striving to be faithful in serving the Lord and His cause. We have served quite a number of tracts......It is our desire to sow beside all waters, for we know not whether will prosper.

With this comes our prayers for you both and the dear ones with you.

Yours by His Grace, – – – – - ,Ecclesia – Jamaica