NO. 147: THE JUDGMENTS OF THE LORD

No. 147

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

“When thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.” (Isa. 26:9) Companion to this text in the New Testament is the statement of St. Paul: “He has established a day in which he is about to judge the habitable in righteousness, by a man whom He has appointed, having furnished a proof to all by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:31, Dia.); and the words of Jesus: “An hour comes in which all those in the tombs will hear His voice, and will come forth; those having done good things, to a resurrection of life; and those having done evil things, to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28,29—Dia.) All of these texts are in the future tense; all of them refer substantially to the same time – to some distant future day at the time they were spoken. The word ‘Judgment’ in John 5:29 is from the Greek Krisis, improperly translated ‘damnation’ in the King James version; therefore, we use the Diaglott rendering, which correct­ly translates the word as ‘Judgment.’ In the courts of our land, judgment is properly defined as a determination conformable to law and justice; and we believe this could be an acceptable definition for the word in the text we now consider.

SUNDRY INTERIM JUDGMENTS

Christendom generally anticipates a great and awesome Judgment Day, most people holding to the thought that such will be a 24-hour day; but all will cer­tainly readily admit that 24 hours would be miserably inadequate for the inhabitants of the world to “learn righteousness,” because they must first ‘unlearn’ the unright­eousness and the erroneous teachings which they have been imbibing now for more than six thousand years. But St. Peter gives us a clear answer to the length of the Judg­ment Day when he declares, “The heavens (present ecclesiastical institutions) and the earth (the present social order) are reserved unto fire (certain destructive agencies) against the DAY OF JUDGMENT.... but be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.” (2 Pet. 3:7,8)

Following this premise, we find there has already been one Judgment Day of one thousand years, the same having been applied to Father Adam: “Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (that is, “dying thou shalt die”). (Gen. 2:17) “And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.” (Gen. 5:5) Thus, if we consider Adam’s Day as one thous­and years, there is complete harmony in the threatened sentence, “In the day thou eatest thereof.” Before Adam’s day had run its course, he was in the tomb, fully dead; nor have any of his children (with perhaps one exception) ever lived out a thousand-year day – Methuselah, the longest-lived of all, having lived only 969 years. (Gen. 5:27)

But any judgment properly defined must also be preceded by a trial; and such a trial would logically involve a law. And so it was with Adam: “Thou shalt not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for in the day thou eatest there­of thou shalt surely die.” Here is no involved, ponderous or nebulous detail: The restraining threat of punishment for failure in the trial is so brief and clear that a twelve-year-old child would easily comprehend it. We are now in the seventh seven-thousand-year day of the cosmogonic process, the first thousand of which was a judgment day for Adam, and the last thousand years of which will be a judgment involving the Second Adam, the Lord from Heaven, Who will judge the world in righteousness, which righteousness will be learned by Adam’s descendants when “the judgments of the lord are in the earth.” It should be remembered, how­ever, that the results of these two judgment days will be diametrically opposite: The first one brought Adam and his children into the tomb; the second day will bring them out of the tomb, delivering them from the power of death. “I will redeem them from death; I will ransom them from the power of the grave: 0 death, I will be thy plagues; 0 grave, I will be thy destruction.” (Hos. 13:14)

But in the interim between the first and the second thousand-year judgment days other sundry and incidental judgments have been operating, sometimes involv­ing individuals, groups of individuals, and on occasion entire nations. One such instance is the nation of Israel, to whom “the oracles of God had been committed” (Rom. 3:2), but from which they profited so little that they eventually crucified “the Lord of Glory.” And, when they shouted, “His blood be upon us, and upon our children,” the Lord took them at their word: In the year 70 A.D. the Roman army under Titus invaded Palestine, besieged Jerusalem; and, when they had finished their effort in true Roman fashion, a circle of crosses encompassed Jerusalem, with a dead Jew hanging from every one of them.  God had indeed ‘judged’ them by their own words: “His blood be upon us.”

SOME GOSPEL-AGE JUDGMENTS

Writing for Gospel-Age purposes, St. Paul treats further of certain judg­ments: “Some men’s sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment (before the great thousand-year Judgment Day by “that man whom He hath ordained”); and some they follow after.” (1 Tim. 5:24) It is commonly stated that “Crime does not pay,” but the Bible has a different view of it: “Now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.” (Mal. 3:15) We need mention only a few: Nero, the many wicked popes, some of the Russian Czars, etc. Many of these God allowed to go their way of evil: they had made no promises or vows unto Him; He exacted nothing from them unless it became expedient for His own plans and purposes, especially on behalf of His cov­enant people. Thus, the mouths of the lions were stopped against Daniel the prophet (Dan. 6:4-28), and the furnace fires were harmless against the three Hebrew youths cast therein at Nebuchadnezzar’s command. (Dan. 3:8-30) St. Paul also says, “I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion.” (2 Tim. 4:17)

But some men’s sins during this Gospel Day have been open beforehand: It is that class that has agreed, covenanted, to do God’s will, but who have failed to do so – through inability or carelessness. To such St. Paul writes: “My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of Him: For whom the Lord loveth, He chasteneth.” (Heb. 12:5,6) And Rev. 3:19 declares: “As many as I love I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent” (of those evils that require correction)—Rev. 3:19. Here, then, is a class whose sins are open beforehand (before the great Judgment Day that has been “appointed” for the great mass of the human race).  They are further classified as “the called” of this present time – who have responded to the Gospel call not because of force applied to them, but through love of good principles. “I delight to do thy  will,  0  my  God, thy law is within my heart.” (Psa. 40:8)

THE EPIPHANY JUDGEMENT DAY

Of those who answered the “call” during this Gospel Age, our Lord stated, “Many are called, but few are chosen.” (Matt. 22;14) The many called, but not chosen, are described in detail in Rev. 7:9-17. Having promised to forsake the ways of evil, they failed to do it, and were subjected to “great tribulation” to rid then of their defilements. Such people have been with us all during the Age; but it is not until the end of the Age that they clearly become apparent as a class – a “great multitude” who have lost portions of the Truth which once sanc­tified them (some more, some less), and who now sit in “darkness and in the shadow of death.” (Psa. 107:10) And because they have lost the Truth, they would be clearly apparent to those who still retain “the spirit of understanding.”

One outstanding example of the leaders of such people is the Executive Trus­tee of the Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement, who repeatedly reveals his true character by his “double mind, unstable in all his ways.” (Jas. 1:8) On Sept. 3, 1966, this Trustee introduced a notion to his Convention assembled in Philadelphia in which he asked that J. W. Krewson and John J. Hoefle be disfellowshiped – in support of something which he himself had previously done some years ago. And that resolution was “unanimously” (?) passed. Note now his own teaching on such proce­dure on page 13 of the Jan-Feb. 1963 Present Truth:

“Question: Is it scriptural for present-day ecclesias, or for individuals from different ecclesias, to convene to legislate in religious matters for the brethren as a whole?

“Answer: NO, despite that fact that in Big and Little Babylon this is quite frequently done .... Nowhere in the New Testament do we find the churches legislating for one another, or unitedly legislating in religious matters for the church through a corporation, board. committee or individual. To do this is pure Roman Catholicism.  Christ through the Apostles did all the necessary legislating for the general Church.” (Emphasis by the Trustee himself)

This matter is much elaborated on pages 13, 14 and 15 of the 1963 Present Truth; and the Trustee set forth this teaching in his effort to refute J. W. Krewson for wanting then to do exactly what the Executive Trustee has now him­self done against J. W. Krewson – the very same person whom he attempted to silence in 1963. Truly, “a double-minded man is unstable In all his ways”; and had not this Executive Trustee openly admitted that he was of the “great Multitude” of way­ward brethren before 1950 (at which time he became Executive Trustee of the LHMM), the Lord’s “Judgment” would now be clearly manifested to all of us who have retained the Truth and its spirit that he is verily double-minded – a member of the Great Mul­titude. Nor should we be accused of “judging” in this matter, because the Execu­tive Trustee has clearly demonstrated by his “fruits” what manner of person he is; we now merely observe the judgment that the Lord has revealed against him.

And, when he says that the resolution on Sept. 3, 1966 was passed “unani­mously,” we have the word of more than one that attended that meeting that they did not vote for it. Therefore, his statement is a negative truth at best. But of those who did vote for it, we can only say to them now that they have be­come partaker of his sins – in clear violation of St. Paul’s counsel to Timothy (1 Tim. 5:22): “Be not partaker in others’ sins; keep thyself pure.” And we feel that we ourselves would be “a partaker of his sins” should we fail to expose his “double mind” in his infamous performance. Let us not forget also that the Executive Trustee was elected such “for business reasons” only, and not as Pastor and Teacher (although he has arrogated to himself this title, as he attempts to “sit in Moses’ seat”) – attempting to place himself on a par with the Apostles and Bro.  Russell.

In corroboration of this, note his own words as recorded in the Nov. 1955 PT, P. 87, col. 1, pars. 1 & 2:

“Bro.  Russell controlled the Society fully until the day of his death, even as Bro.  Johnson similarly controlled the L.H.M.M. until the day of his death, and even as we (R.G. Jolly) so control it now.... Thus, we see that, except for being unincorporated, the L.H.M.M. stands in relation to the Lord’s work for His Epiphany-enlightened people in exactly the same relation as the W.T.B. & T. Society stood to the Lord’s work for the Truth people in Bro. Russell’s day.” (We believe it would be much more accurately stated that the “LHMM now stands in exactly the same relation as the W.T.B. & T. Society stands in its relation to the Truth people under its present management. The Society, too, ‘legislates’ for individuals and classes in violation of the Lord’s Arrange­ments—JJH)

Anent the foregoing, could we possibly find a closer “twin” to the popest claim of “Successor to St. Peter”? Just think of it – A self-admitted Levite, who acknowledges that he is no longer even in the Body of Christ, much less a Star Member, claiming to be “IN EXACTLY THE SAME RELATION .... TO THE LORD’S WORK FOR THE TRUTH PEOPLE” as was THAT SERVANT and the EPIPHANY MESSENGER! “Great swelling words,” do you say? – Have we ever heard worse from The Man of Sin? No one could eject Brother Russell or Brother Johnson from their positions, be­cause their Movements belonged to them; they were accountable ONLY to the Lord. Thus, no one could occupy a similar position unless he also established his own Movement. Whatever may be the Trustee’s limitations, there is certainly no limit to his gall! It is little wonder that all his efforts toward Levites in other Truth groups have resulted in dismal failure. A Levite – manifested as such in 1938, and forced out of the Holy (almost thirty years ago) – comes readily enough under the condemnation of St. Paul: “From such turn away.”

It would seem to us a very elemental deduction that, if the Trustee be not guilty of the sins of teaching and practice of which we charge him, he would gladly welcome any investigation to prove us wrong – just as an innocent politi­cian also welcomes full investigation of his accounts if there is nothing wrong with them – which would exonerate him and place him in a much more favorable light. But of the guilty ones, the almost universal shriek is: “Frame-up; don’t pay any attention whatever to what my accusers say about me.” Here in the United States ­and in the “free” world generally – good well-intentioned worldlings are emphati­cally advising the citizens to read both sides, make up your own mind. But not so from the DICTATORS of any country or any religion. Their reports to their people are dripping dishonesty, framed in deceit. They cannot possibly stand the search­light of impartial investigation. And for shame that the Trustee of the LHMM must stoop to the same tactics!

The question has been well put: Since he was elected by a general assembly, could he not also be deposed by a general assembly? Our answer to that is, No ­for the simple reason that when any one – such as John J. Hoefle – attempts to expose his sins of teaching and practice, or disagrees with his teaching and prac­tice, he immediately proceeds to have them disfellowshiped. He does not even allow such to attend his business meetings; only his Yes-men are welcome. He has re­peatedly stated that we are not even welcome at his religious services at his Con­ventions – despite the fact that we are always quiet and orderly, and that we have contributed perhaps a hundred times more in the way of finances to build the Move­ment than he himself ever has. Yes, this Epiphany period is the special Judgment­ Day of the Great Multitude – it is their “Little Season” of this Gospel Age, just as will also be true of the world in general after 2874 – when the sheep will be separated from the goats.  Had the Executive Trustee persisted in those revolution­isms under Brother Johnson (against which we have been protesting for now some twelve years) he would have been dismissed from the Pilgrim service – just as he was dismissed from the Pilgrim service during 1938 for infinitely less offense. As things stand now, the Trustee is “The Channel” – in even worse manner than was true of the Watch Tower some forty years ago. Then, at least, a group made that claim; Now it is a one-man performance.

And of such power-graspers Brother Johnson wrote in E-4:222: “Whenever religious errorists and frauds cannot meet the exposures of their false doctrines or evil practices by argument, Satan fills their mouths with false and malicious slanders against their exposers.” But in all this we rest calmly and securely in the assurance that this Epiphany period is for the very purpose of manifesting persons, principles and things; and it will accomplish this to a completion because “He is faithful that promised.”

In further evidence of this we quote from E-14:350: “God declares that the time is coming when He will punish all the measurably unfaithful consecrated – ­the crown-losers – (such as the Executive Trustee and those who are partakers of his sins—JJH) with the unconsecrated. Then, “An exhortation will go out to invade the teaching, spirit and service of the Great Company in the Truth as guilty of double rebellion, once in the nominal church, then in the Truth.” (E-14:472)

And, if such is to be the order of this Epiphany Judgment Day, then it is not only our privilege, but it is our duty to declare it – just as it was the privilege and the duty of Truth people to declare Cod’s judgment against Great Babylon in the Parousia Day. As Jesus stated, “The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.” (John 12:48) Nor do we ourselves judge any man by what we publish: It is the WORD that does the judging; it is the WORD that reveals to us what the judgment is. “This is the time of the Lord’s vengeance; He will render unto Babylon (great and small) a recompense.... for her judgment reacheth unto Heaven... The Lord hath brought forth our righteousness; come, and let us declare in Zion the work of the Lord our God.” (Jer. 51:6,9,10)

The principle involved in the foregoing would also apply to Youthful Worthies who succumb to the same erroneous teachings and practices as involve their “lep­rous” leaders. They also must cleanse themselves of present-day defilements if they retain their Class standing, because they, too, are having an Epiphany Judg­ment Day, which will determine their eventual Kingdom standing. While they are not now on trial for life, they are certainly on trial for their Class standing; and there seems little doubt that among them also many will fail – just as has been true with new creatures all during the Gospel Age: “Many are called, but few are chosen” – the “many” lost their place in the Very Elect. But there is no secondary Elect among the Youthful Worthies – they either will gain a permanent place in that Class during this Epiphany Judgment Day, or they revert to the Resti­tution standing common to the general mass of humanity. Here is something from E-4:442 (Bottom):

“Before the Youthful Worthies will be worthy of association with the Ancient Worthies they will have to obtain a good report for faith and obedience, and to the extent that their cleaving to the Levitical divisions implies sympathy with Levitical ways, to that extent they will have to cleanse themselves, if they would be the Millennial associates of the Ancient Worthies. And this the ulti­mately faithful among them will do.”

THE “CHANNEL”

One of the most pertinent texts supporting this Epiphany Judgment Day is 2 Tim. 4:1 (Dia.): “I adjure thee before that God and Christ Jesus who is about to judge the living.... by His appearing” (His Epiphaneia). The “living” in this text would be all such humans as have “passed from death unto  life,” and those wayward spirit beings who have never been under the death sentence. Thus, dur­ing the Parousia Day it was not possible to discriminate between the crown-­retainers and the crown-losers so long as the latter remained in the Truth Move­ment, because the judgment of the Lord had not then been manifested; but the inference is plain enough that such recognition would come during the Epiphany Judgment Day. Otherwise, St. Paul’s statement would be without meaning to us now.  And, just as the final standing of the crown-losers – as a Class and as individuals will be finally determined now, so also will be true of the Youthful Worthies as a Class and as individuals. And one of the major pitfalls that now involves the latter is this “Channel” doctrine. Here is something on it from E-6:118:

“There are certain results flowing from this doctrine of the channel that should be considered in order properly to estimate what the doctrine involves. While it does not involve the thought of the channel’s infallibility, It does involve the thought that its adherents exercise a meekness toward it that should predispose them to receive its teachings with considerable trustfulness, that they be not suspicious of its teachings, but be inclined toward them; that they do not take toward them a critical but a believing attitude. In practice this theory manifestly results in a mental attitude like the credulity of the average Catholic. It does not put one sufficiently on one’s guard against the many admittedly erroneous teachings that have flown through this channel. Hence Society adherents have been finding themselves rejecting not a few things that, shortly before, they insisted were ‘meat In due season.’ This theory, therefore, in practice works against the principle of proving all things and holding fast that which is good (1 Thes. 5:17). This effect of the channel doctrine can make and has made its adherents subject to deceptions, and is, therefore, dangerous to their spiritual safety. Another result of this theory of the channel is that its adherents look upon its direction of affairs as of the Lord... This, of course, has the effect of making its thorough adherents unquestioningly fall into line with its policies and activities...

“Another effect of this theory is giving the channel the same official powers in the eyes of its adherents as our dear Pastor had (just as the Executive Trustee of the LHMM also attempts to establish for himself – as inheritor of Brother John­son’s business position—JJH).... Again this doctrine brings with it the thought that it is impious to criticize the policies and management of the Society. Even those who exercise the right of sober criticism are regarded as ‘murmurers’ (“chronic fault-finders;” according to R. G. Jolly—JJH).... Hence, criticism of the channel is considered as coming from an evil source, just as papists think of those who criticize the papacy. (And just as the Executive Trustee often declares regard­ing JJH) This effect of the doctrine can easily be and has been used to the dis­advantage of Truth and Righteousness.... Another of its effects on them is to make them refuse to read religious literature that does not come through the Society (The Executive Trustee has repeatedly warned against reading the writings of JJH as being “of the Devil” – a truly papal shenanigan if there ever was one—JJH).... A doctrine producing such effects as the foregoing cannot be true, but ought to be suspected as coming from an evil source (as coming from Azazel in whose hands such teachers are—JJH)....

“In practice this doctrine has made the bulk of the Society adherents as sub­ject to it as the adherents of the papacy are to it. The same line of argument is used in each case – ‘to be out of harmony with the channel is to be out of harmony with the Lord’.... Thus they fear properly to weigh its teachings and practices.... These considerations make them subject to a business corporation with a spirit of servile fear unbecoming to Priests of God. (The Executive Trustee was also voted only as a business manager, yet to describe JJH as a “chronic fault-finder” merely for using his own published figures in his Annual Reports reveals – his sorry inadequacies—JJH).”

THE “TRADEMARK” OF ALL ERRORISTS

The foregoing quotations are from Vol. E-6 from pages 118 through 164, and we suggest to all that it will be most profitable to read the entire analysis by Brother Johnson. So far as we can recall, we do not know of a single instance where either Brother Russell or Brother Johnson ever commanded their adherents not to read publications other than their own. Did Brother Russell advise his readers not to read the slander about him from the Brooklyn Eagle and elsewhere? “Now the Lord is that Spirit: And where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” (2 Cor. 3:17) The Constitution of the United States is founded upon this principle, the whole Parousia Movement was founded upon this principle, and the Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement was also founded upon this principle – this foundation principle. Therefore, when the Executive Trustee openly and emphati­cally sets this principle aside, he is once more placing himself open to the judg­ments of this Epiphany Day as he violates the “trust” conferred upon him. And those who encourage him in his evil course will also incur the judgments of this Epiphany Day foretold of such. This day is indeed “making manifest the counsels of hearts, and bringing to light the hidden things of darkness” (1 Cor. 4:5) ­those character flaws that for a time were concealed from us, now made manifest by their revolutionisms against the Truth and its Arrangements.

It is a fitting appraisal of all errorists that they have a decided tendency to do violence to the Truth, and to malign, slander and disfellowship those whose Truth presentations they cannot meet.  This has been most definitely true of the Roman Church, the same being the worst system of error of all Ages. Burn the ‘heretics,’ and burn their literature, has been their battle cry for more than 1500 years. The latter part of this became also the shibboleth of J. F. Ruther­ford against the Present Truth papers, except that he had the lawyer’s cunning to improve somewhat upon it. When his truckling yes-men advised him they were burning Brother Johnson’s papers, he was shrewd enough to realize that they might thus have to open them first – just glance at some of it, that the glance might be fed by curiosity to read just a little to see what it was like. And that would be bad! So he and his partisan pilgrims advised all such not to open the maga­zines at all – just write on it “REFUSED” and return to sender. That would have the double effect of securely holding his adherents and of perhaps discouraging Brother Johnson.

And the present Trustee of the LHMM follows the identical footsteps of JFR: Don’t by any means read the writings of the ‘sifters’! You wouldn’t shake hands with the Devil, would you? Of course, in all of this, if his sleeping par­tisans would think Just a little bit, they might ask themselves why their leader should be so adamant against examination of his sayings and writings if they are indeed the Truth – If they do indeed stand “in exactly the same relation to the Lord’s work for the Truth people” as did the writings and sermons of THAT SERVANT. Let us not forget that the real Truth servants did not counsel their readers to avoid the writings of the errorists. They exhorted them to “grow in grace and Knowledge” of the Truth, that they might be able to stand in this “evil day,” as their adversaries would flee from them. Brother Johnson knew that we ourselves continued to read the Watch Tower for a number of years after we had openly and definitely allied ourselves with him; yet he never once even suggested that we discontinue reading it – although he know full well that we had to pay the subscrip­tion price in order to receive it. Nor have we ever advised our readers not to read the Present Truth – or the writings of J. W. Krewson (who also has been very determined that his partisans refuse our writings, even as was his “cousin” Jolly); rather we have often advised privately and in writing that those who have the time, strength and inclination to place our papers side by side with theirs, read them carefully – to be fully persuaded in their own minds. And this method has been a blessing to some who have done so from a “good and honest heart.”

Of course, all of this found a very fitting type in Israel about three thous­and years ago, as recorded in 1 Kgs. 12:25-33, in which Jeroboam built two golden calves – one in Bethel and one in Dan. “Behold thy gods, 0 Israel,” said he. Now it would no longer be necessary for them to make their usual pilgrimages to Jerusa­lem, where was located the Temple of the Lord containing the Golden Ark and the Tables of the Law. He would make life much easier for them. No longer would they need to make the wearisome pilgrimages to Jerusalem; no longer would  they need to do any thinking – Jeroboam would take care of all that for them. “And this thing became a sin.” (v. 30) In fact, it became such a sin that there are at least seventeen accusations against various kings in Israel in the following four hun­dred years that they “walked in the ways of Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, which made Israel to sin.”

Such an important recording in the Old Testament writings must also certainly have a Gospel-Age antitype; and so it does. Those two golden calves type Cleri­calism and Sectarianism, the shibboleth of both being: Don’t read anything that exposes us; let us do your thinking for you, as you sleep quietly on. But the words of St. Paul have a most appropriate application in this Epiphany season: “Knowing the season, that it is already the hour for us to wake up from sleep.... The night is far advanced, and the day has approached; we should, therefore, lay aside the works of darkness (error, and the counsel and ways of errorists), and should put on the armor of light.” (Rom. 13:11,12—Dia.)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION  OF  GENERAL  INTEREST

QUESTION: – On page 89 of his May-June paper Bro. Krewson offers the opinion that the violent features of Armageddon may begin in October 1975 accord­ing to his figures on the hour of Rev. 17:12. What is your opinion of his prediction?

ANSWER: – We firmly adhere to the teaching of both Brothers Russell and Johnson on time prophecies – that no prophecy can be clearly understood until it has been fulfilled, or is in course of fulfillment. Any one who accepts that instruction will not be too positive about his own prediction of future events, or too critical of the forecasts of other – unless, of course, such forecasts are com­pletely out of harmony with Scripture, Reason and Fact. As most of our readers know, we offered a tentative prediction on the “hour” of Rev. 17:12 in our paper No. 133; and we know that time itself will be the unerring and indisputable judge of all attempts to interpret prophecy. However, we believe we can definitely rely upon the statement of Brother Johnson that Armageddon will have its inception in Italy, and may not reach the United States until a year or two later. Thus, we may “watch and be sober,” but not otherwise specially concern ourselves until we see its start in Italy. And, when that occurs, we expect to be among the first to declare It.

There is, however, another interesting item or happenstance on the Krewson tentative prediction; namely, the Jehovah’s Witnesses came out early this Spring offering a similar tentative Armageddon prediction for 1975 – based upon some special figures of their own. As most of us know, this organization, in true papistical fashion, has been most adamant for the past fifty years that they are “THE Channel”; and J. W. Krewson has now been claiming that same distinction for himself in like positive manner for the past twelve years. Thus, we now have before us TWO “Channels” converging upon the same Armageddon date – the year 1975 – their only difference being the method of calculation. Here, then, is one more proof of the proverb: Great minds run in the same “Channel.” Of course, we cannot know whether J. W. Krewson had knowledge of the Witnesses’  prediction before presenting his date – but it should be very apparent to all that, should the 1975 Armageddon prediction be correct, the Witnesses would mightily overshadow J. W. Krewson – having, as they do about one million devotees, with a large worldwide circulation of their magazines to Krewson’s little handful in comparison.

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Gentlemen: A friend recently gave me a copy of your Herald Special Edition No. 7 – October 31, 1517–October 31, 1967 – The Great Reformer. As a member of the oldest Lutheran congregation in the Western Hemisphere, I found it more than ordinarily interesting to read. Could it be possible for you to send me 5 additional copies, and will you accept the small enclosure to partially repay the cost of same? Thanking you in advance for your considera­tion, I am

Sincerely yours ------- (NEW YORK)

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

Dear Sirs: I enjoyed your interesting views on the papacy and Luther. I have successfully knocked the crown off the pope’s head in my manual on Protestant-Catholic marriage. I quote three recent Roman Catholic Seminary Professors – now Protestant clergymen.

Sincerely yours ------- Pastor Lutheran Church (MICHIGAN)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace  and  peace  be  your  continued  portion!

                   Thanks for No. 145 as a Special Edition No. 7. Send me 300. In closing, Christian love to you and the other dear ones with you.

Sincerely your brother ------- (MICHIGAN)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace be multiplied!

Your good letters received – also the April and May articles, and the No. 7 tract. Thank you very much! Your Special Edition No. 7, Brother Hoefle, is very good, and we have read it several times. We think it will be pleasing to the Lord if we serve the Protestant churches.... We shall not repeat here what you have said in your article, but be assured we are in full sympathy with your thoughts and suggestions. Would you please send us 500 of the No. 7 – The Great Reformer.....

We were sorry to hear of the death of Sister Hoefle’s brother-in-law.

Do express to her dear sister our deepest sympathy in her loss. (See Announce­ment below) Sister and I are quite well, I am glad to report. May we again express our deep appreciation to you, Brother and Sister Hoefle, in your con­stant efforts to serve the dear brethren – and we can assure you that we are glad to be identified with you – truly God’s people! And may the God of all Grace bless as only He can bless, and strengthen you all in your great service at Mount Dora.

Sister joins me in sending you and Sister Hoefle warmest Christian love ­and, as you have constantly said in your letters to us, you are often in our thought and prayers as we approach the throne of Heavenly Grace.

Yours in the one Hope of our calling, your brother and sister ------- (NEW JERSEY)

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

Brother Raleigh D. Campbell of North Carolina died suddenly and unexpectedly Sunday, June 4 and was buried Tuesday, June 6. He gladly and readily accepted the Truth when he first heard it as a young man. We conducted the service, which was well attended. He was able in death to present the Truth to some of his relatives and friends who wouldn’t listen to him in life. After the service at least one of his relatives expressed warm praise of it; and an unusually large number of autos and friends went to the cemetery. He had many friends and loved ones, as was attested by the large gathering there; to pay their last respects.

NO. 146: KING SAUL - TYPE AND ANTITYPE

No. 146

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

In Vol. E-14, middle of page 5, we are told that “Saul types the crown-­lost leaders from early in the third century to Armageddon.” And in E-13:181 it is stated that “Samuel types the Little Flock as a whole, especially in its more prominent members, and more especially in the star-members and their special helpers during the interim.” In 1 Sam. 10:1 it is recorded that “Sam­uel took a vial of oil, and poured it upon his head.... because the Lord hath anointed thee (Saul) to be captain over His inheritance.” Sober reflection impresses us with the strange procedure – the greater (Samuel) anointing the lesser (Saul) to be leader over God’s faithful Israel, even while the Judge and Prophet Samuel dwelt among them. This situation can only be reconciled by the knowledge that God was here making a type of the Gospel Age, a most impressive type which unmistakably reveals the course events would follow after the Apostles would be no more. In the comments which follow we are offering much from Brother Johnson as set forth In E-13 and E-14.

Typical Saul was a “choice young man, and goodly.... not among the children of Israel a goodlier person than he: from his shoulders and upward he was higher than any of the people.” (1 Sam. 9:2) In all this he portrayed the admirable qualities of the Gospel-Age crown-lost leaders, many of whom were greater intel­lects than the star members who had “laid hands upon them.” And at the outset many of them waged valiant warfare victoriously against the antitypical Philis­tines (sectarians). Also, just as the typical Saul presented a compelling mag­netism for Israel, so the antitypes did likewise. Among them were to be found the greatest intellects (“higher than any of the people”), the greatest moralists, zealous for human uplift and social reform, although blinded to the real purpose of the “call” to “take out from among the Gentiles a people for His name,” who would during the Kingdom reign have the power and authority to accomplish to the full what has been impossible of accomplishment during the reign of evil. Also, most of them showed a commendable humility at the outset – just as did the typical Saul (“When thou was little in thine own eyes I made thee king over Israel”); but they also followed his wayward course of power-grasping and disobedience, setting aside the instructions of the Lord as given through antitypical Samuel (the star-members) they ignored the clear exhortation, “to obey is better than sacrifice.”

And the wayward course of these “children of disobedience” (Col. 3:6) always brought them into open conflict with the Star Members that were living at the time – “there was strife between the herdsmen of Abraham’s cattle and the herdsmen of Lot’s cattle;” (Gen. 13:7) Thus they obtained the present advantage (“the plain of Jordan .... well watered everywhere”), and became the mouthpieces to nom­inal spiritual Israel in most instances until the Harvest – although be it noted that in not a single instance did any of those crown-lost leaders become the Pastor and Teacher to the Fully Faithful, this being an office which the Lord alone could bestow. And in the picture presented in Numbers 7 by the offerings of the princes, in not a single instance did any of them offer a “cup” (symbolic of doctrines), the Lord there making clear to those who “have an ear to hear” that those crown-lost leaders (on up to Armageddon) would never occupy the seat of chief favor in His Household of Faith. In fact, every one of the Gospel-Age princes (crown-lost leaders) perverted the truths given them by the fully faith­ful antitypical Samuel (“asses – Teachings – were lost”).

The foregoing far-reaching truths did not become clear until the Epiphany Messenger made them clear; and this was undoubtedly for a purpose also. Had these truths been understood throughout the Age, the “blinded Samson” would then not have been blind; he would not have “ground wheat in the mill” for the anti­typical Philistines. Even in the case of That Servant who was “made ruler over all His goods” the same course of centuries past was trodden once more – he “anointed” crown-losers to carry on the Harvest work in the person of J. F. Ruther­ford and Company. But those crown-losers walked exactly in the footsteps of their kinsmen – they skillfully refuted the errors of the PBI on the chronology (defeated the Philistines), etc., while perverting the stewardship doctrine of Restitution that had been committed to their trust by the Parousia Messenger. And the Epiphany Messenger did likewise in anointing antitypical Saul, although we must make allowance for him, because he believed only crown-losers would remain after his demise, so he chose the logical person by asking the 1948 Detroit Convention to approve his choice of R. G. Jolly. Some may now be inclined to fault that action; but we should bear in mind that some of his adherents were very insistent that proper provision be made in case of his death (once more the children of Israel crying unto the Lord, “Give us a king”); and R. G. Jolly at that time was certainly “higher than any of the people” who might be selected to carry on after antitypical Samuel’s death. So we ourselves offer no criticism of the Epiphany Messenger in the action taken at Detroit.

But the “anointing” of this member of antitypical Saul resulted precisely in keeping with all the “anointings” of the past. He did valiantly in refuting the issue of the High Calling still open; and his booklet exposing Jehovah’s Witnesses is a capable work – he defeated the Philistines. Yet in those very victories he, too, was going astray with the stewardship doctrine entrusted to him – The Epiphany in its relation to the Epiphany Elect – by declaring no more saints among the Epi­phany Elect, and by other drastic and inexcusable perversions. For, just as Samuel continued in Israel after Saul’s anointing, so antitypical Samuel has continued in Israel after he anointed the last member of antitypical Saul – although the surviving members of the Samuel Class do not contain among them a star member. As Brother Johnson has expressed it in E-13:190 (8), “full qualifications for the pertinent leadership were given by antitypical Samuel to antitypical Saul,” so he also did in the case of R. G. Jolly – by letters and personal instruction before his death. In these endeavors he surely had the best interests of all Israel at heart to the day of his death, nor can he be blamed for the deflections that have appeared since 1950, even though it is now crystal clear to us that he gave us an exact blueprint of the actions of the centuries past that occurred in every sect in Christendom by the crown-lost leaders.

In this matter the supposedly enlightened adherents of the LHMM are the more to be blamed, and the words of Samuel to Israel apply with irresistible force to them: “I brought up Israel out of Egypt (from Satan’s evil order of affairs), and delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of all kingdoms, and of them that oppressed you (the evils of sin, error, selfishness and worldliness); And ye have this day rejected your God, who Himself saved you out of all your adversi­ties and your tribulations.” (1 Sam. 10:18,19) An excellent companion text is to be found in Psa. 77:20 – “Thou leddest thy people like a flock by the hand of Moses (the Lord) and Aaron (the Church).” We have the inspired warning in 1 Pet. 4:17: “The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God” – the righteous (the fully faithful), the ungodly (the second-deathers), the sinner (the Great Company), each according to that which he has sown. And when we see those we once respected and loved now being “carried about by every wind of doctrine” we need no further testimony that they have left tragic flaws, erosions and rents in their past en­deavors to “put on the whole armor of God.” This has affected different ones in various and sundry manner. Some have withdrawn to themselves in spiritual anarchy, making their own decisions, establishing their own arrangements for the study, practice, and spread of the “good word of God,” and flaunting the direct inspired command, “Forsake not the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is” (Heb. 10:25) – a counterpart of Judges 17:6 – “In those days there was no king (star member) of Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”

The Executive Trustee of the LHMM has also perverted another feature of the stewardship doctrine pertaining to the Epiphany Elect when he renounced the Epiphany Messenger’s teaching in E-10:672, that new Youthful Worthies would be won even after Armageddon. He now claims that work is all in the past – for­saking the truth that both Star Members taught regarding this Class (“flatly denying our dear Pastor’s thought that those who consecrating and proving faithful in the interval between the close of the General Call in 1881 and the Inauguration of the earthly phase of the Kingdom and finding no crowns available for themselves, will become associated in reward and service with the Ancient Worthies in the Kingdom”—E-4:337); he has substituted his spiritual hybrids (Campers Consecrated), which in turn has forced him to forsake the truth on Tentative Justification. Bear in mind that it was only after he began his perversions that he began to suffer his defeats – just as was true of King Saul. The typical “child of disobedience” went from one mistake to another worse one after he began his decline, culminating finally in his own death ­and the ignominious defeat of the entire nation of Israel. His experiences should be a solemn warning to all God’s people to “make straight paths for their feet.” Here was a man come from the smallest family in the smallest tribe of Israel (Benjamin), who rose to the highest office in Israel; then because of disobedience (“to obey is better than sacrifice”—l Sam. 15:22) he plummeted to an abject humiliation far below what he had been when he was a simple herdsman caring for his father’s cattle and sheep. It seems he learned just nothing from his mistakes, because “the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul.”(1 Sam. 16:14) It has been well stated that experience is a dear teacher, but a fool will learn by no other. But, when a man will not learn even by adverse experiences, he is then impoverished beyond description. Be it remembered that it was the Gospel-Age Saul that built up Great Babylon, which in turn “made all the earth drunken” (Jer. 51:7); so that at this day “the earth is reeling to and fro like a drunkard” (Isa. 24:20) as a direct result of the bunglings of the “children of disobedience.” And, when the “drunkard” finally plunges over the precipice of destruction in Armageddon, then will antitypical Saul perish also (as such, though not necessarily as human beings, or even as New Creatures). This fate will be the direct result of their own sowing.

And, true to his kinsmen of the past, the Executive Trustee of the LHMM now follows meticulously in their steps, he also having learned just nothing from the past failures and mistakes of antitypical Saul. It was when he began to pervert the Truth on Tentative Justification that his defeats also began – the abject failure of his $5 correspondence course – the humiliation of those conglomerate conventions about which he was so loud and profuse for a time, but which are not even mentioned anymore – his defeats one after another in his various controversies on the Truth – his Flying Saucer tract, which by now has just about been relegated to the archives of Limbo – his bungling mistakes in the Present Truth, etc. (“Bungling is the usual and natural activity of the Great Company,” says Brother Johnson.) And his defeats will continue becoming more severe, until he drinks the cup of extreme humiliation and the defeat of that part of Israel under his leadership. Of this there shall be more comment “in due time.”

THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD DEPARTED FROM SAUL

In 1 Sam. 16:14 it is recorded that “The Spirit of the Lord Departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord troubled him.” From this we should not conclude that the Holy spirit departed from the members of antitypical Saul. Had this occurred, they would all have gone into the second death. Rather, they all lost the spirit of understanding (See Matt. 25:3-9 and 25:30 Berean Comment), so that they not only could not see the advancing Truth, but actually lost im­portant parts of the Truth they once possessed. This is especially evident in this Epiphany period, where the leaders of all the groups in Little Babylon have cast aside large segments of the Truth that once sanctified them. Note particu­larly the confusion in the leader of the LHMM on Tentative Justification, Campers Consecrated, the Saints all gone before the real Time of Trouble has started, his Campers’ names prospectively (?) written in the Book of Life before their book is even opened, etc.

The foregoing conclusion is clearly verified in 1 San. 28:14: “When Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.” The antitypical “dreams” we would understand to mean special revelations of advancing Truth from the Lord; the “Urim” meaning the doctrinal teachings of the Bible, which become unclear to those who lose the spirit of understanding (no longer understanding Tentative Justification, Consecration between the Ages while sin still prevails, etc.); the antitypical “prophets” are especially enlightened teachers, such as Brother Russell, Brother Johnson and others, whose teachings no longer motivate them. Especially here do we em­phasize the teachings of both these Little Flock teachers on Abandonment to Azazel of all Great Company members, and their clear presentations on those con­secrators between the Ages who can no longer enter the High Calling.

AN EVIL SPIRIT TROUBLED HIM

The “evil spirit” that came over Saul is said to have been “from the Lord.” An evil spirit being is not here meant; rather, it means an evil disposition ­resulting in God withdrawing His special help from them. Thus, God did not directly induce such a spirit; but it came about by allowing the Saul members to follow their own foolish devices – just as we are to understand the meaning of 2 Thes. 2:9-11, “God will send them strong delusion.” God is not the author of confusion, nor is He the disseminator of error. Note Brother Russell’s com­ments on some features of this text: “Because they received not the love of the Truth – But trifled with it to their injury”; “Strong delusion – That which, from certain standpoints, has the appearance of Truth” (such as Justification outside the righteousness of Christ, etc.) A self-confessed “trifling with the Truth” is to be found in R. G. Jolly’s letter published in the November 15, 1910 Watch Tower, a little of which we now quote:

“I sought to make pictures and draw types from nearly every chapter in the Bible (just as he has attempted to with the half Tribe of Manasseh on the west side of Jordan, etc.—JJH).... Instead of using it to supply my much-needed armor, I was enjoying it more as one would a picture book or ‘Grimm’s Fairy Tales’ .... Finally I came to the point where it became quite difficult for me to distinguish between truth and error.”

(Signed) R. G. Jolly

And the above still seems to be his sad condition!

THE MARK OF CAIN

“Cleanse thou me from secret faults. Keep back thy servant also from pre­sumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me: then I shall be upright, and I shall be innocent from the great transgression.” (Psa. 19:12,13) It is the usual procedure for one sin to beget other sins – for the offender to go from transgression to transgression – just as it is also true that one error begets other errors and one falsehood other falsehoods. This process is prompted by the necessity to alibi the wrongs or errors already committed; and David’s own experience is an outstanding Scriptural example of this. His moral offense with Bathsheba was a direct violation of the Seventh Commandment, which quickly led to violation of the Sixth Commandment in his murder of Uriah. thus, David could well speak from experience when he composed the 19th Psalm.

And so it has also been where the evil of envy is allowed to spawn and grow. “Joseph’s brethren envied him” (Gen. 37:11; Acts 7:9), which in turn prodded them to “conspire against him to slay him.” (v. 18) It was envy that caused Cain to murder his brother Abel; it was envy that prompted the ‘good’ religious people to crucify the lord of Glory. “Pilate knew that for envy they had deliv­ered Him.” (Matt. 27:18) And after King Saul’s offenses had led Samuel to inform him that the Kingdom of Israel would be taken from him, it was then that the spirit of envy urged him also to attempt the murder of David. And, while he was prevented from actual commission of the crime, he was yet fully guilty; so that in due course he paid for his evil intentions with his own life, just as though he had really murdered the Lord’s anointed.

Envy was undoubtedly the motivation of those princes and presidents in Babylon who conspired to have Daniel thrown into the lions’ den. King Darius had promoted this foreigner, this Jew, over all of them; and it was more than they could bear. However, he who digs a pit for another falls oftener therein himself; and so it was with those conspirators against Daniel. When morning came, and King Darius perceived that some sort of miracle had been performed to spare Daniel from the hungry lions, he then commanded that his conspirators, and all their families, be thrown to the lions; and all of them were consumed. “Wrath killeth the foolish man, and envy slayeth the silly one.” (Job 5:2) This picture had its fulfillment with those of our day who conspired to destroy Brother Russell; and it was re-enacted in a smaller way with those who tried to destroy Brother Johnson. On one occasion we asked him why the Society brethren had treated him so shamefully. His answer: IT WAS ENVY, Brother! Here was another despicable act of envy on the part of antitypical Saul right at our own doorstep!

A WORD FROM THAT SERVANT

Brother Russell has offered profuse comment on the typical Saul – his weak­nesses, his failures, his abandonment by the Lord, and his final abject failure. Two of these articles are to be found in Reprints 4206-4210, from which we offer very brief summations, although we believe all would do well to read carefully and consider the entire articles:

“Saul’s difficulty and tests may represent some of ours. (1) A selfish spirit... (2) A man-fearing spirit.... (3) Saul’s third difficulty was that he had too slack an appreciation of the Lord’s word; and this is the difficulty which specially besets nearly every one of the Lord’s followers who stray away into error of doctrine or of conduct.... The Scriptures clearly indicate a great trial and testing for the Church in the next few years. (Little did Brother Russell realize just how great that testing would be in 1917—JJH) It will determine with very many what Saul’s testing determined for him, whether or not God’s favor will continue, with its kingdom privileges and opportunities.... They will be answered as was Saul, ‘Obedience is better than sacrifice’; thou art rejected.”

It requires no great powers of discernment to perceive “too slack an appre­ciation of the Lord’s word” among the multitudes of Christendom. “Behold the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord.” (Amos 8:11) But this same situation is becoming increasingly so with many so-called Truth people. “Too slack an appreciation of the Lord’s word” starts at the top; and it is a sage observation that the disciple rarely rises above his Lord. Thus, the leaders in the various groups of Little Babylon who should be zealously stirring up a proper appreciation of the Lord’s word are unable to do so because of their own errors – errors which have become so appalling that it prevents then from giving a good defense of those truths which they still retain. That same situation prevailed in Big Babylon at the beginning of the century; and it provided many a spark for the controversialists of that time – until they realized that the Parousia David (That Servant) had a “Sharp two-edged sword” which they could neither gainsay nor resist. This led eventually to withdrawal from the battle on the part of the errorists – until today it matters very little what one believes so long as he creates no uproar about it.

And that same “lack of appreciation of the Lord’s word” is rapidly infil­trating the sects of Little Babylon. Let us dwell in peace, they say; the arguments are inconsequential anyway. Their appreciation of the Lord’s word is indeed becoming quite slack! Nor do they do very much about feeding the sheep. As Brother Johnson so aptly observed, these crown-lost leaders do much better in their efforts toward the worldlings. Brother Russell and Brother Johnson left us plenty of material to enlighten and fortify us in this Epiphany period when these Crown-lost leaders are so prominently manifested. “Therefore, by their fruits you will discover them.” (Matt. 7:20—Dia.) The crown-lost leaders largely ignore these truths as they seek gain for their own quarters.

As stated above, Saul’s blunders and transgressions became worse with each deflection, although the prophet of God was there to reprove and correct him each tine. His was a vivid example of the admonition, “He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.” (Prov. 29:1) His first gross deflection is recorded in 1 Sam. 13, where Saul himself offered sac­rifice in direct violation of what he knew full well was the Lord’s established ar­rangement. “Because they (the Great Company) contemned the counsel (arrangements) of the Most High”—Psa. 107:11. Immediately the Fully Faithful servant of the Lord was there to reprove him: “And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly”­ 1 Sam. 13:13. And because of this he was told, “Thy kingdom shall not continue.... because thou hast not kept that which the Lord commanded thee.” And other acts of disobedience soon manifested other flaws in his character, and revealed three out­standing sins common among men. He had been told to destroy utterly the Amalekites and their herds, but his cupidity was stronger than the clear command of the Lord. He did indeed completely destroy the Amalekites (excepting only Agag the King), but the sight of their fat cattle easily overcame Saul, so “Saul and the people spared the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and of the lambs, and all that was good ... but everything that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.” (1 Sam. 15:9)

And once again the Fully Faithful Samuel was there to confront him; and once again Saul made display of the flaws in his character, the sins of hypocrisy and lying: “Blessed be thou of the Lord. I have performed the commandment of the Lord.” Reproved by Samuel’s stern countenance and sharp questions, Saul then attempted to take refuge in another sin as old as the human race: “The people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the Lord thy God,” repeating this falsehood in verse 21, but finally forced to admit, “I have sinned.” And, Just as “Samuel came no more to see Saul” (v. 35), so the Lord God came no more to see Father Adam, after his impudent accusation following the transgression in Eden: “The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me” (Gen. 3:12). As Adam was bold and impudent enough to accuse the Lord Himself for his deflection, so Saul was ready enough to blame “the people” for his sins. All of which is warning enough for him that “hath an ear to hear.”

Century after century during the Gospel Age, as antitypical Saul was “anointed” by antitypical Samuel, the great majority of the Saul class was goaded by unholy ambition to violate the teachings and arrangements of the Lord as presented through the Samuel class. Thus, they overshadowed the Fully Faithful and produced the “golden cup” which “made all the earth drunken: therefore, the nations are (now in 1967) mad”! And, in exact imitation of their kinsmen of the past, the Epi­phany Saul submerged the Fully Faithful, and presented a “cup” of rank intoxica­tion. All of us who were in “the good fight” some forty years ago remember only too vividly the treatment accorded the Epiphany Messenger by J. F. Rutherford Company – how they submerged the Samuel class by “bowing the knee to Baal” in unprincipled power-grasping, as they presented to the general public their “Millions Now Living” mirage, their 1925 fiasco, etc., which failing fully in every detail they then seized upon the old Papal anathema of the Dark Ages: No salvation outside of our organization – the same being their shibboleth even at this day.

And in similar fashion the crown-lost leader of the LHMM mimicked his Epiphany kinsmen that he and his are now the “Fully Faithful,” the “salt,” the “light,” the “good and faithful servant” class, etc.– that those claiming to be the Fully Faith­ful are second-deathers, the same being the identical verdict circulated by the Society some forty years ago against Brother Johnson and his adherents. So once again we observe antitypical Saul “anointed” by Samuel in crystal clear exhibition of the true picture given “for our admonition and learning” (1 Cor. 10:11) some three thousand years ago. The truth of this type will certainly impress all who have even a smattering of Epiphany Truth!

“Fear the Lord, and serve Him in truth with all your heart; for consider what a great thing He hath done for you. But if ye shall still do wickedly, ye shall be consumed, both ye and your kind.” (1 Sam. 12:24) This prophetic warning saw exact fulfillment at the death of Saul and his three sons, as Israel also was “consumed” in defeat by the Philistines. Thus, we close with Brother Johnson’s conclusion In E-13:251 – “Let us learn the lessons chiefly inculcated by Samuel and Saul, i.e., that by God’s grace we stand, as we abide faithful, taught us by antitypical Samuel’s life, and that, despite God’s grace, we fall, as we prove unfaithful, taught us by antitypical Saul’s life.”

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

Acting upon some suggestions that have come to us, we have produced our July paper No. 145 as a Special Edition No. 7 – to be used this year as an impetus, or supplement, before and during our Special Effort in Antitypical Gideon’s Second Battle. It seems to us a very unusual coincidence that Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the church door of Wittenberg on October 31, and that Brother Russell died October 31 – also, Brother Johnson, who was buried on October 27, wrote of himself as the little Martin Luther of this Epiphany period. (See E-10:428) It is noteworthy that these brethren are three Star Mem­bers, and two of them “Principal Men” (Micah 5:5).

We believe these tracts will be favorably received by many Protestants. They may be served at Protestant church doors – also from house to house in definite Protestant neighborhoods. We realize that “opportunities of service” will be varied with our brethren – according to their time, strength and means. We welcome the cooperation of our faithful brethren as opportunity permits. The tracts are free, postage prepaid – and we can supply whatever quantity you may desire, our limitation being that you order in keeping with what you antici­pate distributing. We serve and honor the Lord as we “bear witness” to the Truths He gave us through His honored Messengers. The Lord bless thee, and keep thee.

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Mr. Hoefle:

It was my pleasure recently to come by your paper Number 145. It is one of the most interesting Bible studies I have ever come across. I would be very much interested in receiving whatever previous papers that would be available, as I believe that they would be very helpful in my own Bible studies. I am associated with -------. as an assistant to ------- and in our church fellowship I am a teacher of an adult class.

The gift enclosed is intended to defray costs Involved for whatever papers may be available, or to be used as you see fit in your ministry. Thanks so much for your kind attention.

Sincerely yours in Christ, ------- (NEW JERSEY)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Your letter of April 29 and Reprints of Nos. 121 and 88 are received; also the one entitled “Concerning Controversy.” I recognize that “contending for the faith once delivered unto the saints” may be called controversy by some who no longer hold to some of the Truths which make up that faith. However, we have the Apostle Jude’s admonition to do so (verse 3) – so that is sufficient for me. The Watch Tower Society has definitely departed from that faith in teaching that Adam was not redeemed – that natural Israel will have no restoration (They now teach their organization is the source of the blessing for the world instead of Natural Israel, as is taught in the Scriptures—JJH) – and the Great Multitude is an earthly class. They are presumptuous in claiming to be the One Channel Jehovah is using in the earth today – outside of (their organization) there is no salvation! – also in judging and condemning their brethren who dare to disagree with them. They have rejected the word of the Lord and the wisdom of that Word. (Jer. 8:9)

Some of the Jehovah’s Witnesses recognize these things also and are not in harmony with them – but seem to think the Lord is using them in their “wonderful work” of wit­nessing to the world today. They are not preaching the true Gospel of the Kingdom, as they claim – nor are they honoring the name of Jehovah. Rather Jesus’ words to the Jewish leaders of His day seem to describe very well their work today. (Matt. 23:15) Jesus also foretold that many would call attention to their wonderful works at His return, and that he would not recognize (approve) them. (Matt. 7:22)....

How blessed are we to be favored with a Knowledge of the Truth! Christian love to you and Sister Hoefle from both of us. In the glorious Kingdom Hope...

Brother ------- (INDIANA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and Peace be your continued portion!

Brother ------- thanks you for your letter. And I am glad to say he is very much improved..... Often has the Scripture come to my mind – In everything give thanks, for this is the will of God concerning you. The Lord has provided so much daily food (Manna and its Scriptures) which constantly gives comfort....The Epiphany Truth is just wonderful – built upon the Parousia Truth. And may God bless the memory of these faithful Star Members of The Laodicean Period.

Be sure, dear Brother Hoefle, that a visit from you both to us in England will be very welcome. In closing, love to you and Sister Hoefle and the other dear ones with you, with thanks for your thoughts and prayers.

Sincerely your sister, ------- (ENGLAND)

PS – Enclosed are names for your list.

NO. 145: JEZEBEL AT THE BEAUTY PARLOR

NO. 145

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

In 2 Kings 9:30-37 is related the final flamboyant exit of Jezebel, Queen ­mother in Israel (Israel being the ten tribes that revolted and separated from the other two tribes at the death of Solomon), widow of the reprehensible King Ahab, with the King James version stating it this way:

“When Jehu was come to Jezreel, Jezebel heard of it; and she painted her face, and tired her head, and looked out at a window.”

This same Scripture Is translated by Doctor Rotherham as follows:

“When Jehu entered Jezreel and Jezebel heard of It she set her eyes in Stibium and ornamented her head, and looked forth through the lattice.” According to the Septuagint footnote, “She painted her eyebrows and eyelids with kohl, a compound of antimony used by women in the East then and now to add to the beauty of their eyes. Jezebel’s intention is, like Cleopatra’s, to die a queen.”

Before analyzing the above, it is first in order to state that Jezebel was the daughter of Ethbaal, priest-king of Tyre and Sidon. Being thus of heathen descent, Ahab had desecrated the Jewish religion by making her his wife; and, like all such renegades, he attempted to blame the Prophet Elijah for Israel’s difficulties:

“Art thou he that troubleth Israel? And Elijah answered, I have not troubled Israel; but thou, and thy father’s house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim.” (1 Kings 18:17,18)

True to history – before and since – the real culprit Ahab was ready enough to fault the true reformer Elijah for the results of his own wayward acts, his deflec­tion aggravated and enlarged in that he made provision for Jezebel to worship her native God in Samaria when she became his queen. This was a direct affront to the true God of Israel.

Jezebel had a strong, domineering character, was self-willed and forceful; a fanatical, devotee of Melqart (the Tyrian Baal). She maintained 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of the Goddess Asherah at the regal Jewish court, and as ‘star boarders’ at the King’s table. She insisted that her God have at least equal rights with Israel’s God Yaveh, which could not go unnoticed by the Prophet Elijah. In 1 Kgs. 18:17-40 there is related the grand showdown, in which Elijah, triumphant in the test of strength between the true and the false, proceeded to slay all the prophets of Baal. This humiliating defeat enraged the domineering Jezebel, instead of silencing her. She had been schooled and raised in an absolute monarchy, which had actuated her in the murder of Naboth when he refused to sell his vineyard to her husband. (I Kgs. 21:1-19) For this latter act it had been prophesied of her that “dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel,” (1 Kgs. 21:23) Let us keep In mind, however, that nothing whatever is said in the record about her ‘beauty­parloring’ her face and ornamenting her head until she had arrived at the time of death.

THE ANTITYPE

In previous papers we have shown how Elijah was a type of the Gospel-Age true Church in its efforts to reform the world from its course of evil. Therefore, the things that he did, and the people with whom he did them, must represent characters and events in this Gospel Age. In the second and third chapters of Revelation the Apostle John records certain forecasts for the seven stages, or epochs, of the Gospel-Age Church from the days of the Apostles until the Age would reach its complete end. The fourth of such messages is “to the Church in Thyatira... I (God) know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience.... Notwith­standing I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants.” (Rev. 2:18-20) Inasmuch as Jezebel, Queen of Israel, had been many centuries dead, it is clear enough that this statement by the Apostle John is in the nature of an allegory ­a picture of something that would occur in the Thyatira period of the Gospel Church that had close resemblance to the wicked acts of the Old Testament Jezebel. And, at the time this would apply, the name had become a byword among Christians for apostasy.

The word Thyatira means “the sweet perfume of a sacrifice”; and it refers to the period of the Gospel Church which had its beginning in 799 and came to its end in 1309. That it has clear reference to the apostate Roman Catholic Church we believe the following explanations will verify. It was in 799 that Charlemagne, Emperor of France, practically ceded his dominion over to the Pope, which established the beginning of The Holy Roman Empire – a reign of the Popes which lasted for a thousand years – until 1799, when Napoleon broke the papal power. The Catholic record terms this thousand years as the thousand-year reign of Christ that is prophesied in Rev, 20:1-9; but which is in reality the counterfeit of such reign. During that time it is stated that the Roman Church became “drunken with the blood of the saints” in those merciless persecutions and inquisitions, with history so distorted and per­verted that the period is known as “The Dark Ages” – a period so corrupt that not even clear authentic records are available concerning it. Here are just a few out­standing individual atrocities that may be directly charged to the Roman Church dur­ing that thousand years:

In 1126 Peter de Brys was burned at the stake by a raging mob;

In 1155 Arnold of Brescia was strangled;

In 1415 John Huss was burned at the stake, and his ashes scattered on the Rhine River. His prosecutor had made this summation of his charge against him: “By destroying this heretic, thou shalt obtain an undying name to all ensuing generations”;

In 1416 Jerome of Prague (close friend of John Huss) was also burned at the stake;

In 1498 Jerome Savonarola was hung on the gallows, then burned by a raging mob;

In 1556 Thomas Cranmer was burned at the stake at the command of “Bloody Mary,” then Queen of England, and a staunch defender of “the faith” (The Roman Church).

The foregoing is but a small fraction of the heinous atrocities committed dur­ing the “thousand-year (counterfeit) reign of Christ”; whereas, the true reign of Christ, when it finally is established, is to “wipe away all tears from their eyes.... no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain.” (Rev. 21:4) But the counterfeit Roman Church is described by the Apostle Paul as “That Wicked One, the Man of Sin, the Mystery of Iniquity, the Son of Perdition.” The Prophet Daniel styles It “The Abomination that maketh desolate” (Dan. 11:31, 12:11). The Apostle John terms it “The Antichrist” (1 John 2:18,19), a name mean­ing “Instead of” – that is, a counterfeit. Of such Daniel had prophetically written (Dan. 7:8,25): “There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name and His tabernacle... And he shall speak great words against the Most High.” Some of the high-sounding titles assumed by the various popes are: “Overseer of the Christian religion; Chief pastor and teacher; Christ by unction; Moses in authority; Heir of the Apostles ­Peter in power; Vicar of Christ; Infallible pope.” Ferraris, a Roman Catholic authority, writes, “The pope is of such dignity and highness that he is not simply a man but, as it were, God, and the vicar of God.’’

MARTIN LUTHER

All of the foregoing was in its heyday when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the church door at Wittenberg in 1517; and, while this would seem more than enough for any man to start a reformation, there were other more repulsive causes that primarily motivated him, chief of which was the sale of indulgences, which had sunk to an all-time low when Luther arrived. The sale of indulgences stated in simple language meant securing a license to commit sin – if the sinner had the price to pay. Not only was this done after the offense, but the proper amount of money would secure license for a future offense – almost any kind of offense, even in rare instances the license to commit murder. This outrageous practice extended over a period of a few hundred years; and, as is usually the way with evil, it became ever worse with the passing of time. And just as the baser violations of morals, white slavery and nar­cotics traffic attract the basest of men, so this sale of indulgences had done by Luther’s day. Foremost among these unprincipled traffickers in crime at that time was one John Tetzel, who traveled the length and breadth of Germany dealing out license to almost any kind of sin – if the price was right. Following is a part of what one Church Historian records about it:

“The reckless and shameless sale of indulgences often made the exercise of church discipline impossible, and the discreditable conduct of the mendicant monks destroyed all respect for the confessional.... The scholastic theory of indulgences was authoritatively proclaimed by Clement VI in A.D. 1343.... Sixtus in A.D. 1477, declared that it was allowable to take money for indulgences for the dead.... The institution of the jubilee gave a great impulse to the sale of indulgences.., In A.D. 1300 Boniface VIII. at the bidding of an old man, proclaimed a complete indulgence for one hundred years to all Christians who would do penance for fifteen days in the churches of the apostles at Rome, and by this means gathered from day to day 200,000 pilgrims within the walls of the Holy City. later popes made a jubilee every fiftieth year, then every thirty-third, and finally every twenty-fifth. Instead of personally appearing at Rome, it was enough to pay the cost of such a journey. The nepotism and extravagance of the popes had left an empty exchequer, which this sale of indulgences was intended to fill....

“In 1517 the aesthetic and luxurious pope X, avowedly for the building of St. Peter’s, really to fill his own empty coffers, had proclaimed a general indul­gence. Germany was divided between three indulgence commissions.... The most shame­less of the traffickers in indulgences employed by him was the Leipzig Dominican prior, John Tetzel. This man had been sentenced at Innsbruck to be drowned for adultery, but on the intercession of the Elector of Saxony had his sentence com­muted to prison for life. He now was taken from his prison to do this piece of work for Albert. With great success he went from place to place, and offered his wares for sale, proclaiming their virtues in the public market with unparalleled audacity. He went to Juterbock, in the vicinity of Wittenberg, where he attracted crowds of purchasers from all around. Luther discovered in the confessional the corrupting influence of such procedure, and on the afternoon of All Saints’ Day, October 31, 1517, he nailed on the door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg ninety­-five theses, explaining the meaning of the indulgence.... They comprehended the real germ of the Reformation movement.... With incredible rapidity the theses spread over all Germany, indeed over all Europe.... Tetzel publicly burnt the theses at Juterbock, and with the help of Wimpina posted up and circulated at Frankfort and other places counter-theses. The Wittenberg students purchased quantities of these theses, and in retaliation burnt them, but Luther did not approve of their conduct.”

Now follows a quotation from another writer on the same subject: “So far as we know, Luther did not draw from these premises any conclusion against any papal doc­trine until the fall of 1517, when the Dominican monk, Tetzel, began in the vicinity of Wittenberg to hawk indulgences for sins at so much per..... Later sins were var­iously catalogued at so much per, depending on the means of those seeking indulgences. Thus the people got and lived out the thought from the indulgence hawkers that they could sin at will, if they paid for the privilege by way of indulgences. Not infrequently they would purchase indulgences for sins that they were contem­plating in the future. Such an indulgence Tetzel sold to a nobleman, and he him­self proved to be the one against whom the nobleman intended to sin in revenge for a wrong that Tetzel had done him. With this intent the nobleman asked how much an Indulgence would cost granting him remission for a contemplated act of physical injury on, and robbery of, an enemy. Tetzel’s price struck the nobleman as too high, so he bargained Tetzel down in the price. Finally the lowered price was acceptable to the nobleman, and paying for, and receiving the indulgence that supposedly pardoned him from the guilt and punishment of his contemplated sin, he left Tetzel. Sometime later he waylaid Tetzel, beat him up famously and robbed him of the contents of his treasury chest. Tetzel appealed to the courts, but con­fronted with his indulgence and pointed out by the nobleman as being the enemy meant by him when he bought the indulgence, Tetzel could obtain no redress...

“No wonder that Tetzel’s shameless trafficking in indulgences shocked Luther through and through, and led him at once to question the merchandising of them. Later an through a logical deduction from the doctrine of faith justification, the whole idea of indulgences became repugnant to him, and he rejected them entirely, as contrary to God’s gratuitous forgiveness through Christ’s merit received by faith.”

TRUE HISTORY JUST TOO MUCH

During the reign of The Holy Roman Empire the Papacy repeatedly ‘made’ history – made it exactly as they wanted others to believe it; and for four hundred years after Luther’s death all sorts of vilification and calumny were ‘manufactured’ about him. It is a sound observation that he, and Thomas Cranmer, of England, were by papists the most hated of all “protesters,” the reason being that these two did the Papacy the most damage in their attacks against the erroneous rubble that they had produced by the ‘infallible’ successors to St. Peter. In spite of all this, however, the name MARTIN LUTHER continues to grow in stature and respect by the finest intellects of all Protestant sects; and today almost one-third of the Protestant world adheres to some form of Lutheranism. The truth about Luther has been much stronger than the falsehoods manufactured about him; and the Papacy – ever ready to play either side of a case that expedience might indicate, is now openly joining the applause for this great reformer who did indeed change the course of human history. And in this they are revealing themselves as the true antitype of infamous Jezebel, the wife of Ahab, King of Israel - they are resorting to ‘beauty-parlor’ tactics, painting their faces in true Jezebel fashion. And what conclusion may we draw from this? Why, it means that her annihilation is nigh at hand! Jehu had witnessed the death of Queen Jezebel as she had been tossed into the street from the upper window, and some hours later he issued the command: “Go, see now this cursed woman, and bury her: for she is a king’s daughter.” (2 Kgs. 9:34) But the report came back to him: “They found no more of her than the skull, and the feet, and the palms of her hands.” Here, then, we have a clear typical statement of what will remain of the Roman Church once “the reward of unrighteousness” is fully meted out to her: All that will remain of her is the memory of her corrupt teachings (skull, intellect) – and the memory of her evil deeds (the palms of her hands) – and the memory of her infamous character (the soles of her feet).

POPES “STUPID” THEN – POPES REFORMERS (?) NOW

A lurid Illustration of this ‘face-lifting’ technique, a master stroke of cosmetic skill (beauty-parlor ingenuity) is to be found in a recent issue of a very popular magazine, in which five full illustrated pages are devoted to the praise of Martin Luther. Here is a clever move to climb aboard the band wagon well in advance of the 450th Anniversary of Luther’s Wittenberg defiance to be celebrated this coming October 31. Here is a small quote from that article:

“Today, the vast majority of Catholic theologians concedes that Luther was a profound spiritual thinker who was driven into open revolt by the corruption of the Renaissance church and the intransigent stupidity of its popes. Jesuit John Courtney Murray, for example, calls Luther a religious genius – compassionate, rhetorical and full of insights. An American theologian teaching in Rome allows that Luther was right on Indulgences and on most theological points, and his teachings on justification are more palatable than Thomas Aquinas.”

Let us note specifically from the above that Catholic prelates today are willing to brand the popes of the 16th century as “stupid” in order to curry favor with the Protest­ants of today – especially with those Protestants who no longer believe in “protesting.” But it is well for us to keep in mind that nobody back there called the popes stupid; and we believe it is a proper appraisal that many of them were among the shrewdest and most calculating minds of their time. Luther himself was strong and brilliant – considered by many as one of the 25 greatest intellects of the entire human race – yet ‘stupidity’ of the pope was not his reason for his “protest.” In fact, at the outset Luther had no thought of causing a schism in the Church; he was merely trying to correct some of the evils then prevalent – ­he would reform the irreformable Jezebel! His major complaint was against the spiritually repulsive indulgences; and it is to his everlasting praise – and to the sagacity of the popes of his century – that the very thing he failed to accom­plish during his life was formally admitted to be wrong at a later Catholic conference – the sale of indulgences was officially tabooed.

However, the prohibition of indulgence sales was not a reform; it was merely an act of expediency, as is clearly shown by heinous crimes in the name of religion in other respects – one specific incident being the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre in France on August 24, 1572, only 26 years after Luther’s death in 1546. At that time the chiefs of the Huguenots were gathered together at Paris.... The castle bell tolled, the same being the signal for the destruction of all the Huguenots then in Paris. For four days the carnage was unweariedly carried on by the City Militia, the Swiss guards, and crowds of fanatical artisans. No Huguenot was spared, neither children, nor women, nor the aged. It is estimated that perhaps 100,000 Huguenots were mercilessly butchered at that time; the streets of Paris ran red with their blood. King Philip II of Spain (a good loyal Catholic), on hearing about it is said to have laughed for the first time in his life. Pope Gregory XIII had Rome illumi­nated, all the bells rung, the cannons fired, processions made. He instructed the French ambassador to inform his king that the performance was a hundred times more grateful to him than fifty victories over the Turks.

Perhaps the greatest mass murder in all history, the performance was cause for great rejoicing throughout the Catholic world. “In thy skirts is found the blood of the souls of the poor innocents” (Jer. 2:34) – “In her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints” (Rev. 18:24). With such a record of past performance staring them in the face – and undeniably true – it is merely elemental politics to want every one to forget it, to ignore the sins of the past as “stupid’ tactics, and to con­jure up some present virtue (real or manufactured) to detract attention from the wretched past. And for this purpose the magazine has this to say:

“A new Luther would almost certainly be as much of an unpredictable sur­prise to Christianity as the original was. There are Protestants as well as Catholics who believe that a modern reformer has already appeared in the per­son of Pope John XXIII. ‘If we think functionally of someone who opened up the Church to reform,’ contends Claremont’s Dean Trotter, ‘the closest to Martin Luther has been Pope John.’ Here is reprehensible Jezebel once again in the beauty parlor! The audacity of It! The long chain of popes, one after the other, who heaped impre­cations and excommunications upon Martin Luther were simply “stupid”; but the suc­cessors to those popes, the ones living today, are saintly reformers just as he was.

But “stupid” or not, the popes of Luther’s day all claimed Apostolic succession ­to sit in the chair of St. Peter in Rome – to be the Vicar of Christ on earth – to speak Infallibly on the Bible. Shall we just blithely forget all this? And have the present-day pope reformers (?) rejected those bombastic claims, even as they attempt to brush easily aside their monstrous crimes under the guise of “stupidity.” They just did not know any better, the dear boys! Shall we join in with them, and declare that Hitler also was just stupid, that his diabolical crimes should be for­gotten because he was just ignorant, an upstart paperhanger? Surely, any intelli­gent appraisals of such men would force us to conclude that they possessed superior Intelligence to concoct the crimes they did against “the poor Innocents” – against the “heretics” – just as we must also conclude that Satan himself is a wily superior intellect, regardless of the adverse opinion we entertain concerning him.

HUMAN THINKING STILL THE SAME

It is a sad commentary against the human race that each generation has had its despised ‘heretics,’ even as they laud the same kind of heretics of the past. Thus, the Jews were high in praise of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob at the time they were heap­ing abuse and torment upon the grand and noble Moses. Later generations spoke the name of Moses in awe, while they were stoning Zechariah to death in the Court of their Temple (2 Chr. 24:17-22). At the opening of the Christian era the Jews were lauding Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and other past martyrs, as they proceeded to crucify the Lord of Glory. Much the same may be charged against this present generation. They, too, are ready enough to sing Te Deums over the memory of past saints, even as they persecute the same kind of people today – and even as they embrace and attempt to place a halo over those who have “blood on their skirts.”

Nor was Jesus unaware of this condition. “He needed not that any should testify of man: for He knew what was in man.” (John 2:25) In Matt. 23:30,31 He said this to his listeners: “Ye say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.” And in Matt. 21:33-46 He presents the matter in fine and eloquent detail: “Hear another parable – There was a certain householder (God), which planted a vineyard (the Jewish nation, which in turn was typical of Christendom, especially here in the end of the Age), and hedged it about “,with the Divine Law, the inspired prophecies, the superb leadership of Moses and Aaron), and digged a winepress in it (representing the instruc­tion and worship of the true God), and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen (the scribes and Pharisees, who sat in Moses’ seat), and went into a far country; And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took His servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, He sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. But last of all He sent unto them His son (the Lord Jesus), saying, they will reverence My son. But when the husbandmen (the chief priest, rulers, etc.) saw the son, they said among themselves (privately, deceitfully and conspiratorially), This is the heir (the One claiming to be the Messiah); come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance (retain our power, our fat easy life, our high position in Israel). And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him (crucified him, because “he stirreth up the people”). When the Lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will He do unto those husbandmen? And they say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out His vineyard unto other husbandmen (Lo, we turn to the Gentiles).... And, when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard His parables, they perceived that He spake of them.”

It is well stated that Distance lends enchantment; distance also tends to miti­gate past crimes. Thus, it is so very easy to place upon a pedestal the faithful servants of the past – and perhaps also some that were not so faithful; just as it also is very easy to discount the same kind of faithful who now walk side by side with us. Thus, “A prophet is not without honor, save in his own house, and among his own relatives.” This was tragically true of Jesus; His brothers and sisters would have none of Him, so that even as He hung on the cross it was necessary to commit the care of His mother to that Disciple whom He loved – the Apostle John ­rather than to one of her own sons.

THE LITTLE JEZEBEL

In our paper No. 121 we presented certain similarities between the Roman Church and its “Little Twin,” the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The same comparisons may be drawn between the latter and Jezebel, as they are indeed her “Little sister.” And, as such, they, too, have been resorting to some “beauty parlor” tactics in recent months. They once more refer in favorable terms to Pastor Russell, although for some twenty years after his death they made great effort to efface him from the memory of their adher­ents. But now the Six Volumes of Studies in the Scriptures, which he wrote, are becoming popular; they are once more warmly saluting each other as “Brother” – as did Pastor Russell when he was here – instead of just plain Jim, Joe or Mike. “Only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.” (Isa. 4:1)

After the cleavage became complete between Luther and Rome – after the Diet of Worms in 1521 – Luther expanded his Indulgences attacks to include with them also his devastating attacks on the papal teaching of Justification by Works, as against the true Bible teaching of Justification by Faith for this “faith” Age. “By the deeds of the Law (works) there shall no flesh be justified in His sight... But now the right­eousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ.” (Rom. 3:20-22) Luther’s steward­ship doctrine was “Justification by faith”; and he used it with adroit skill, unfail­ing courage, and persuasive eloquence against the strong papal error of “Justification by works.” Words rolled from his tongue like oil from a spoon. In lesser manner than their Big Sister Jezebel, the Witnesses also advocate “Justification by works”; and it is very common to see their “dedicated” deluded devotees on the street corners of every city “working” their way into the Kingdom. They also would have us forget the monstrous sins of their past leaders against those who have upheld the truths taught by Pastor Russell, as they also change from year to year various of their teachings; yet ever pointing to themselves as “the Channel” from which to expect due truth – even as Jezebel also still claims to speak infallibly in the name of St. Peter.

And we might call attention to the condition of some of the Epiphany-enlightened brethren since the demise of Brother Johnson. Their leaders, in effect, tell their sectarian adherents to close their eyes, open their mouths and swallow all they teach, without question or investigation – especially directing them not to read the refu­tations of their errors (their revolutionism against the Truth), the exposures of their sins of practice (revolutionism against the Arrangements) lest their eyes might become open to their “path of error” (See James 5:19,20 – also 2 Pet. 2:18).

“But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctifi­cation of the Spirit and belief of the Truth. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” (2 Thes. 2:13,15)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

(Additional copies of this paper free upon request.)

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in Jesus Name!

I have been studying carefully your writing together with the Present Truth for several years now – and I have come to the conclusion that you surely are “in the Truth”! The arguments you bring up against Bro. Jolly’s teaching are irrefutable. I am amazed and shocked at Bro. Jolly’s deceitful hand­ling of the Parousia & Epiphany writings in support of his own theories.

Enclosed Is $ .... to help you with the Truth work – also request for tracts... Dear Brother, I appreciate what you are doing and I daily pray and thank God for a man faithful and courageous whom He could use at a time when the Truth messages appear to be such a small and weak influence in the earth. I’m sending you a name of a Truth brother.... Perhaps you could mail him some pertinent material.

With best wishes and prayers for you and yours, Brother ------- (PENNSYLVANIA)

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

Our dear Brother and Beloved of the Lord: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you!

Your letter arrived yesterday, with its comforting words taken from Joshua 23.

Verse 11 is a good exhortation for us to continue to love the Lord our God and to keep our first love for the Truth..... Since the end of November I have been far from well.... In spite of this, two young neighbours who come over to see if they can do shopping for us, have accepted tracts and are very much interested. With my stick on the Divine Plan Chart mat, I managed to point out various features. They want to keep the tracts – What is the Soul, Where are the Dead, Resurrection of the Dead – and God’s Great Sabbath Day....

Your March paper is excellent and we do thank you for all your services, and we are rejoicing in the knowledge that the Lord will reward you. Brother ------- ­brought us the Present Truth for Nov-Dec. 1966, and we noted the Resolution of the LHMM – but “no weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper” (Isa. 54:17). We send our love to you all with Hymn 15.

Sincerely your brother ------- (ENGLAND)

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

Epiphany Bible Students Ass’n

Mount Dora, Florida

Enclosed is a request for pamphlets checked. Also a donation enclosed to cover cost of mailing. Thank you. Mrs. ------- (CONNECTICUT)

What is the Soul? Where are the Dead?

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

My dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in the Master’s Name!

We celebrated the Memorial of our dear Redeemer’s death the evening of the 23rd... In our prayers we invoked the lord’s blessing upon all the consecrated the world over and we trust that you and all the dear ones with you have received rich blessings. Sisters ------- and ------- both received your letters, and the way Sister ------- expressed her­self, it seems that it was a real tonic for her.

Thank you for referring me to the.... Present Truth.... After reading it, I can now see the sins of the Executive Trustee of the LHMM and his supporters as they openly manifest themselves in what proves to be another “Little” Roman Catholic Church procedure, in their bid to keep you out from attending their Conventions ­with such ‘legislation’ to prohibit you from having any present and future interest in the Movement! According to that Present Truth, R. G. Jolly was trying to ‘spit up in the air,’ but the spit has fallen back in his face.....

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

NO. 144: THE NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1966 PRESENT TRUTH

No. 144

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

On page 91 of the Nov-Dec. Present Truth is reproduced a Resolution passed by the Convention at Philadelphia on September 3, 1966, wherein it is stated, “John J. Hoefle has.... shown himself to be persistently in opposition to various teachings of the Scriptures as presented by Pastor Charles T. Russell and Pastor Paul S. L. Johnson.” The Resolution was presented to the Convention by R. G. Jolly; and we now emphasize that he himself has been repeatedly guilty of the very things he ascribes to John J. Hoefle. On numerous occasions have we given details in our various papers, but we single out just one such case here because R. G. Jolly himself has published his recommendation that this teaching be changed from the way it was originally published, claiming a mis-reading of the dictaphone disc as his excuse for the Mistake (?):

The item mentioned is to be found on page 124 of Vol. 17 (ten lines from bottom) - “Then cometh the end (the end of the Little Season).” R. G. Jolly has advised his readers to change this to – “Then cometh the end (the end is the Little Season).” It should be noted that with the change from “of” to “is” he now has the “end” occurring at 2874; whereas, if we accept the statement as published by Brother Johnson, the “end” will be forty or more years later than 2874. We cite this particular case because there can be no question here who is changing what Brother Johnson wrote: It is R. G. Jolly, and not John J. Hoefle.

It is our contention that the statement as published by Brother Johnson is the right thought; and that R. G. Jolly’s proposed change is the wrong thought. As our first proof of this we refer our readers to the November 15, 1949, Herald of The Epiphany, page 48, col. 2 – where the statement is exactly the same as con­tained in Vol, 17. Now, R. G. Jolly proof-read that Herald, as did also Brother Johnson; but neither of them took any exception to it then. Why? Because neither of then saw anything wrong with it then; and it is our position that Brother Johnson would even now find nothing wrong with it if he were here to speak for himself. It is our contention also that the reason R. G. Jolly now finds it wrong is that he must do so to support some of his other Perversions of the Truth (Azazel means Perverter).

It is usually an evidence of weakness if we are forced to contend that some­thing is the Truth because Brother Russell or Brother Johnson said so. We should be able to substantiate what they said by sound Scriptural reference – “a reason (from the Bible) for the hope that is in you.” Therefore, we now offer Scriptural proof that the statement in Vol. 17 and in the 1949 Herald is correct as originally published – and that it will be wrong if “corrected’ per R. G. Jolly. In 1 Cor. 15:20-26 a number of things are recited as the accomplishments of our Lord’s Millennial work; and “then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the Kingdom to God.... For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” (vs. 24-26)

The word ‘death’ in the above is from the Greek ‘thanatos’ – the same as contained in Rev. 20:13,14: “Death (thanatos) and Hell (Hades) delivered up the dead which were in them.... And death (thanatos) and Hell were cast into the lake of fire.” Hell (Hades) in these texts means oblivion, the death state – the grave. Therefore, it should be readily apparent that ‘‘death’’ in these two texts cannot also mean the grave. If it did, it would be equivalent of saying “The grave and the grave delivered up the dead which were in them – the grave and the grave were cast into the lake of fire.” Stated thusly, it is self-evident nonsense; and the Bible never presents nonsense in its statements. Those in Azazel’s clutches often and habitually talk all sorts of nonsense; but the Bible – Never! The word ‘death’ in these two texts means the Adamic-death process; that is, it is that working of physical, mental and moral erosion that has been finally putting human beings into the tomb (into Hades) over the past six thousand years. And this death-working process will not be fully eliminated – annihilated – until the removal of the last human being that has experienced its corruption (the unreformable). Nor will such humans be eliminated in their last members until the full end of the Little Season, because it is that dying process that eventually proves them to be incurably incorrigible.

It should be kept in mind that the “enemies” to be destroyed by the reign of The Christ are persons and things. Note specifically what Brother Johnson says about it:

“He shall have put down all rule and all authority and all power (every vestige of the governorship and of the pretended authority and the pretended might of Satan, all of this will be put down by the almighty hand of Christ, the Head, and the Church, the Body, using God’s power as that almighty power in their hand). For He must reign till He hath put all enemies under His feet (thus we see that not only persons are these enemies, but also things. The Adamic death in the sense of the dying process is this last great enemy; and, because of His faithfulness, Jesus became the One who will after the close of the Millennium finally destroy it.”

From the foregoing, it should be crystal clear that the Adamic-death process is the very last enemy to be destroyed. Therefore, Satan and the impenitent angels and incurably incorrigible men (persons) must enter eternal annihilation before the Adamic-death process (the last thing) will disappear. It would be impossible for it to be otherwise. Therefore if R. G. Jolly’s “end” is at the beginning of the Little Season, he is also then telling us by inference at least that Satan and wicked men must also be destroyed at the beginning of the Little Season. Is that his conten­tion? And if Brother Johnson would be in harmony with R. G. Jolly’s change from “of” to “is” (which he certainly was not), it would make all the other statements quoted above as meaningless. The Adamic-death process (thing) cannot disappear until the last human (person) corrupted by it has also disappeared; that is why the Adamic-death process must remain to the very last – the last enemy to be destroyed.

Another point to be remembered here is also that all those surviving the Little Season must enter it with perfect characters and with perfection of physical organism; whereas, the “goat” class that go into “everlasting destruction” with the Devil and his angels enter the Little Season with perfect physique only. Their imperfection of character (the mark of the Adamic-death process) is the real cause of their annihila­tion at the fulfilment of the antitypical Red Sea – when they are cast into the Lake of Fire with the Devil and his angels.

This explanation is confirmed when we consider that the Red Sea annihilating Pharaoh and his Egyptian hosts is the type of the Lake of Fire in Revelation – into “death (the Adaamic-death process) and Hell” are to be cast. That Red Sea episode has Pharaoh typing Satan, the chariots Satan’s evil organizations (things), the horses the evil teachings (also things), and the horsemen the evil angels and evil men (persons) who embrace and teach those evil teachings. And the final com­plete elimination of all such is pictured by the Red Sea overcoming Pharaoh and his hosts in one grand display of force by the Lord at the full and complete end of the Little Season. Therefore, those who follow out R. G. Jolly’s instructions to change page 124 of Vol. 17 will be guilty of just one more tampering with the Truth as given through the Star Members; and such are certain to reap “the reward of unrighteousness” which their,act deserves.

In connection with R. G. Jolly’s Resolution and other similar Levitical injustices, we quote from E-13:753 (Also see Isa, 66:5):

“God does not approve of oppressing any earthly captive (34), of taking away a man’s rights in matters pertinent to the lord (35) and of undoing a man in his cause (36).... They have been made as reprobates and outcasts (faithful teachers—­JJH) from among the people (45). False religionists have caused their mouthpieces to speak against God’s people, especially against the star-members.”

CONCERNING ISA. 41:19

In the March-April 1967 Present Truth, p. 24, col. 1, par. 3, R. G. Jolly says, “Isa. 41:19 has also a Millennial application, as the context shows (e.g., vs. l7,18).” Why does he not go back just a little further to vs. 15 and 16: “I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth (The sickle of Harvest Truth); thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff. Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them (the Time of Trouble – see Berean Comment).” Clearly enough, there is no “Millennial application” in these texts; and, if we consider closely the Rother­ham translation of v. 17 there won’t be any “Millennial application” there either:

“As for the oppressed and the needy seeking water when there is none (the poor of this world, rich in faith – here in the end of the Age, when there would be “A famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord”—Amos 8:11).”

Considering the entire context of verses 15 through 19, it is easily understood why neither Brother Russell nor Brother Johnson could see any Millennial application there. It takes a Levite to find that out – a levite trying to substantiate his “strange fire” (false doctrine) of Campers Consecrated – even if he has to invent something to do it. Note also Jer. 49:20: “Surely the least of the flock shall draw them out” (the same as the “oppressed and needy” of Isa. 41:17 – here in the end of this Age). Certainly the words of St. Paul are most timely here: “We have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the Word of God deceit­fully (the crown-lost leaders – typed by King Saul – have handled the Word of God deceitfully all during the Age); but by manifestation of The Truth commending our­selves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” (2 Cor. 4:2)

Furthermore, note especially that R. G. Jolly’s perversion forces him to group the Little Flock (the No. 1 “very” Elect) in with his “saved non-elect,” his “quasi­-elect,” and his “Consecrated Epiphany Campers” – one glorified class of spirit beings with three second, third, and fourth-class human beings. Is there any Scriptural precedent anywhere for such a conglomeration? Then he proceeds to place the Worthies and the Great Company in the “desert” in the Millennium! A desert is uninhabited, unproductive, without water (without the Truth). Is he now telling us that will be the condition of the Worthies and the Great Company during the glorious Kingdom reign? Certainly, all of us know Brother Johnson had good reason for ascribing such a con­dition to certain crown-losers here in the end of the Age; and that same good reason also restrained him from applying the same conditon to the faithful and cooperating Levites In the Kingdom reign. When crown-losers fall into Azazel’s hands (Azazel means Perverter) they talk all sorts of nonsense; and here is just one more Illustration of it.

His presentation on this, and similar subjects, is fit company for “fool’s gold,” the same being an iron or copper pyrite – bright yellow and shining like gold, but a worthless imitation. But it is a sufficiently good Imitation of gold that it often “fools” the unskilled and inexperienced prospector – to the merriment of others who know better. So the Millennial (?) interpretation of Isa. 41:19 will also probably mislead “the unstable and the unlearned,” although it is not likely to deceive those well-schooled in Present Truth.

It is with much regret that we find it necessary to criticize this Present Truth, because the great bulk of it contains the superb writings of the Star Members. The first article on page 18, “With Strong Cryings and Tears,” is by Brother Russell (See Reprints p. 3885), and a very uplifting and superior presentation. The article on page 25, “The Feast of Tabernacles,” is also by Brother Russell (See Reprints, p. 3508). And the large portion of the article on page 22, “Jehovah’s Set Feasts – Type and Antitype” is by Brother Johnson; and it is to R. G. Jolly’s shame that he would contaminate such writings by Injecting some of his errors into them. After reading more than six pages of this Present Truth we had begun to feel considerable relief that it would not need any correction, as we have other articles waiting to be pub­lished; but such a perversion of Isa. 41:19 cannot go unnoticed if we would be faith­ful to the Lord, the Truth, and the brethren.

Since King Saul is a type of the crown-lost leaders up to Armageddon, we believe the following excerpts from That Servant on the disobedience of King Saul would be most timely in connection with the foregoing:

LESSONS FROM SAUL’S FAILURES

The Philistines increased their army of occupation; and the Israelites – unarmed, except with agricultural implements, etc. – were terrorized by the warlike Philistines. Saul’s army of three thousand dwindled to six hundred – yet the word which reached him from the Prophet Samuel was, to wait seven days for his arrival, apparently with the intention that the people should thoroughly feel their impotence, and cry unto the Lord for succor. King Saul did as directed to the extent of waiting seven days; and with the expiration of the time, seeing how his army was dwindling and that Samuel had not returned, he on the seventh day undertook to be his own priest. He offered up sacrifices to God without authority.....

While passing, we do well to note why King Saul’s sacrifice of burnt offerings to the lord was condemned as a sin. This was because God had made a specific law to the effect that only the priests might offer sacrifices. Then comes the question, Why should God limit the offering of sacrifices to the priestly tribe? The answer is that that tribe typically represented the church – fully consecrated to God, and accepted by Him. These the Apostle styled the antitypes, not only of Israel’s kings, but also of Israel’s priests. St. Peter says of the church in general, and not of the clergy in particular, “Ye are a royal priesthood.” (Reprint p. 5638)

SAUL REJECTED BY THE LORD

“Behold, to obey is better than to sacrifice”—l Sam. 15:22. The words of the Golden Text of this Study are the Lord’s rebuke to King Saul by the Prophet Samuel, in connection with the announcement that Saul, by disobedience to the Heavenly King, had forfeited his privilege of representing God on the throne of Israel. The rend­ing of the kingdom from the hands of Saul meant more than his own displacement; it meant that his son and his successive heirs should not continue as the Lord’s repre­sentatives in the kingdom.

Apparently King Saul was not evilly intentioned, but lacked proper respect and reverence for the lord and His arrangements (as is specifically recorded of R. G. Jolly in E-10:646—JJH). This incident may be said to have been the beginning of Saul’s rejection by the Lord..... “Thou hast not kept the commandment of the lord;.... now thy kingdom shall not continue... (In the incident recorded in E-10 above cited, R. G. Jolly did not continue to occupy his place in the priesthood, but was from then on recognized as a crown-loser, which exposure he accepted and admitted—JJH)...... Let us hearken to the Word of God and keep close to it, not fearing the results, but having faith that He who keeps us never slumbers nor sleeps and is too wise to err, as well as competent to meet every emergency that could possibly come upon us as a result of our obedience.

THE SLAYING OF THE AMALEKITES - KING SAUL’S WILFUL DISOBEDIENCE

Saul’s error in this trial was his failure to carry out the command of the Lord explicitly. He slew all the Amalekites, old and young, except the king, whom he kept alive, possibly thinking to exhibit him in some kind of triumphal display. But as for the flocks and herds, he consented with his people to spare all that were desir­able. (“But they made the great mistake of cutting off the branches of the tree of sin and leaving its trunk unfelled and its roots unuprooted – Saul and the people spared Agag—See E-13, p. 243, bottom, and p. 244, top—JJH) (Reprint p. 5647)

It was at this juncture that the Prophet Samuel came to him and the colloquy of our lesson ensued. The general narrative – Samuel’s indignation and the Lord’s positive statement – clearly Indicates that King Saul had not misunderstood his instructions, but had with considerable deliberation violated them. Consequently we must understand his words addressed to the Prophet Samuel to have been to a great extent hypocritical. He first salutes the Prophet with blessings and assur­ances that he had performed the commandment of the lord successfully (Don’t we have examples of this Saul class – the crown-lost leaders – proclaiming they have “performed the commandment of the Lord successfully” – telling us they have always lived very close to the Lord and His Word?—JJH)

Immediately the Prophet replied, What meaneth, then, this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of thy oxen which I hear?” The Prophet under­stood at once that the work of destruction had not been complete — that King Saul and the Israelites were anxious to take a spoil. This was wholly contrary to Divine direction.....

Seeing that the Prophet was not likely to sympathize with his violation of the command, King Saul began hypocritically to represent that all the sheep and oxen captured from the enemy were to be sacrificed to the Lord; and incidentally this would have meant a great feast for the Israelites; for the flesh of the animals so sacrificed was eaten by them. The Prophet stopped the king in his explanation and told him of the lord’s words of the night preceding....

King Saul sought to defend his course, to put as good a face upon the matter as possible and to lay the responsibility for the saving of the spoil upon the hosts of Israel, who with himself were very desirous of offering sacrifices to the Lord. The Prophet’s answer is the pith of the Study and contains the Golden Text.... No one could offer an acceptable sacrifice to God unless he was obedient in his heart and unless the sacrifice represented that obedience....

It is also necessary to have the spirit of obedience. Whoever has that spirit will not only obey the Divine will, but will seek to know the Divine will more and more that he may obey it. It is of this class that the Scriptures declare, “Thy words were found, and I did eat them”; and again, in the words of our Redeemer, “I delight to do thy will, 0 my God; thy law is written in my heart.” (It is self­evident that these texts apply only to the Fully Faithful who are “examples of the believers” – and not to the Measurably Faithful – the crown-losers – who failed to be faithful examples—JJH) (Reprints 5647, bottom, and p. 5648, top)

RESPONSIBILITY OF THOSE LONG IN THE WAY

There are certain principles laid down in the Bible. We need to get a grasp on these principles and apply them in our daily lives. There is the principle of justice – a foundation principle. This principle must be recognized and practiced....

Those who have been for some time drinking from the fountain of truth, and feeding at the table of the Lord, where the food is pure, unadulterated, nourishing, should be fully established in the first principles of the doctrine of Christ...... We should be firmly rooted and grounded in Christ, so that noth­ing can move us. We should be able to discern clearly between truth and error on every important point. We should be so loyal to the Lord and His Word that we shall rejoice in the glorious privilege of proclaiming it at every suitable opportunity. We should know what we believe and why we believe it, and be courageous and uncompromising in declaring the truth which has so blessed our own hearts and lives. (Reprint, p. 5689, col. 2)

“Sanctity the Lord of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” (Isa. 8:13,20)

Sincerely your brother

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

It is with much appreciation that we acknowledge the reports from Classes and individuals of the Memorial service on March 23. We note with much satisfaction the zeal and sincerity for this annual event of those whose letters have come to us thus far.

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Your letter received, also your monthly letter on the Memorial.... Regarding the wording of the cablegram sent by Judge Rutherford concerning Brother Johnson’s visit to England in 1917, I looked it up in Harvest Siftings No. 1, published August 1, 1917. It read, “Johnson demented. Has no powers. Credentials issued to procure passport. Return him America. Sympathy.” You have read the issue, so know about the contents which contained a series of cablegrams from Brooklyn to England, and vice versa. It also gives the detailed accounts of Brother Johnson’s activities while in England and after returning to Brooklyn.

The account of Bro. Johnson’s calling himself the “steward” of the Penny, and likening himself and other brothers in England to characters in the Book of Nehemiah and Esther as type and antitype, was strange indeed; and it seemed to me that the contents of the cablegrams must have been authentic. Bro. Hemery of England mentions in one of the letters that Bro. Johnson had a nervous illness in 1910. I also have the answer to Harvest Siftings called “Light After Darkness,” which mainly seems to be Brothers A. N. Pierson, I. F. Hoskins, R. G. Hirsh, J. D. Wright and A. I. Ritchie vs. J. F. Rutherford and W. E. Van Amburgh, and does not deal with Bro. Johnson’s case. Very little, at least. I suppose nearly all those referred to above are now gone to their reward, and their cases are in the hands of the Judge of all the earth, who will assuredly do right. The judgment of the House of God is in progress, and nearing its end, surely. All divisions, confusion and strife – for whatever reason ­will then be over. Certainly a wonderful prospect.

Regarding the Memorial date, I notice there is no unity even on that. The Society announces the date as the evening of March 25.... The Dawn Bible Students observe it an Sunday eve., April 23... Of course, faith in and loyalty to the ransom sacrifice as our Passover Lamb is of paramount importance as we memorialize His sacri­fice for our sins and also for all mankind.

Yours in that glorious Kingdom hope .----- (INDIANA)

OUR ANSWER TO THE ABOVE LETTER

Dear Brother ------- Grace and peace!

You offer some comment about Brother Johnson that causes me to conclude that you may not have all the information about that 1917 trouble. It is true that he did think for a time that he would be the “steward” of the Penny Parable; but he had the humility to correct his own misunderstanding when the truth eventually came to him.

As for Harvest Siftings, Brother Johnson contended there  were almost a hundred falsehoods in it; and one of the then Society Directors characterized it as “A work of Satan.” While the cablegrams quoted therein may have been ‘authentic,’ as you suggest, certainly the omission of “Johnson insane usurper – incarcerate him” left out an essential part of one of them, don’t you think? Half truths are often more misleading than whole errors.

And when Jesse Hemery referred to the 1910 Illness in a disparaging way, that was just simply an adroit move to avoid the real truth about what had been done. As you probably know, Jesse Hemery left the Society around 1926; then began to publish his own interpretations which set aside large parts of the Truth given us through That Servant. But during the time he was doing that Brother Johnson was faithfully defending the Parousia Truth – and which he continued to do to the time of his death. Had it not been for him, and the fine instruction I received from him, I would not today have nearly the clear understanding of the Harvest Truth that I do have.

And you yourself apparently eventually withdrew from the Society because you could no longer approve of the stream of error that emanated from J. F. Rutherford. As you well know, It is a favorite trick of the Adversary to cast aspersions on the mentality of those who are presenting the clear truth. Of John the Baptist they said, “He hath a Devil,” (Matt. 11:18) And of Jesus they said, “He casteth out devils through Beelzebub.” (Luke 11:15) Since Brother Russell’s death, I think It is a fair appraisal that Brother Johnson received more abuse from his “brethren” than any other one person in the Truth Movement; yet he is the ONLY ONE of the leaders in the various groups who retained and defended the Harvest Parousia Truth. All of the others cast aside large parts of the Truth they had once accepted; and produced error in its place. Yet Brother Johnson was the only ‘crazy’ one among them! Now, my dear Brother, I ask you – Do you swallow that? As you say, ‘Judgment must begin at the House of God’; and you could also have added very appropriately, ‘Many are called, but few are chosen.’ And you might have added also that blessed are we if we can discern God’s judgment, and separate the Truth from the error. As you know, there are still plenty of preachers in Big Babylon who continue to slander Brother Russell because they could not withstand the Truth he taught.

It is my conviction, too, that Brother Johnson gave us the correct method for determining the right time at which to observe the Memorial, but I shall not go into detail on that. For now, my Christian love to the both of you, and my cordial good wishes that you any “know the Truth” which maketh free indeed.

Sincerely your brother, John J. Hoefle

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in our dear Redeemer’s name! I have been intend­ing to write to you for some time – first to tell you how much I enjoyed your January paper and then again the same for your February paper. I feel every day that we have the privilege of witnessing a general deterioration in Society – on all fronts. You stated it well in mentioning that a tree dies from the top down. Working with various religious denomina­tions I can certainly see large cracks in the walls of Babylon.

With Christian love and the assurance of prayers, Your brother in His service,

------- (ILLINOIS)

NO. 143: CONCERNING CONTROVERSY

No. 143

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

Today it is a proper appraisal to say that Protestantism is almost dead – the spirit of the Reformers, John Wessel, Martin Luther, John Wesley, Thomas Cranmer, (all confirmed Protesters) has almost vanished from the earth. In this grouping we may also include Brother Russell, because the “protest” that he began in 1874 and continued to 1916 has almost vanished from the sects in Little Babylon. While the Jehovah’s Witnesses do continue the attack upon established systems of religious error, they themselves have become such errorists that it is rank travesty to include them with those genuine reformers – protesters – who manifested “the patience and the faith of the saints.” (Rev. 13:10)

But, with the passing of the spirit of the real protesters there has now come a wide surge of Combinationism. Let us forget our differences, they say, and cooperate against the common enemy now attacking the Church; let us defeat the atheistic rabble now so apparent an every hand. And such a combining is just what we should expect. In the 34th Chapter of Isaiah the Prophet says this: “Yaveh hath wrath against all the nations, and indignation against all their host. He hath devoted them to destruction.... and the mountains shall melt away with their blood.... the Heavens (the present-day prominent religious sects) shall roll up as a scroll.” (See also Rev. 6:14) On every hand there is laud acclaim for this “rolling together” as “the unstable and the unlearned” blindly follow their blind leaders – to fall into the ditch. “Woe to them that are at ease in Zion” (Amos 6:1).

THE PRINCE OF PEACE MAKES WAR

In Rev. 19:11-21 there is a description of the action of this day in which we now live, clearly revealing God’s attitude toward the combining forces of this time. We quote parts of it from the Diaglott:

“I saw Heaven opened (the Plan of God made very clear), and behold a white horse (clear spotless doctrine – a “pure language,” Zeph. 3:9); and He who sat on him was called Faithful and True (just another name for the Prince of Peace, a name not used here in order not to conflict with the “war” to be waged), and in righteousness (not for greed, territory, revenge or other selfish interests, but according to the supreme Law of Justice) He judges and makes war.... And He was invested with a mantle dipped in blood (indicating the bloody nature of the present conflict); and His name is called, The Word (The Logos, the spokesman) of God.... And out of His mouth proceeds a sharp two-edged broadsword (to cut asunder error – secular and religious ­in whichever way it is wielded), so that with it He may smite the nations.... on His mantle and on His thigh a name written, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords (the promise to Jesus’ faithful followers is that they shall be Kings and Priests, and the omni­potent Jesus is to be the King over those Kings, and the Lord over those lords).”

Much of this Scripture is also revealed in Mal. 4:1, “Behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven,” with the accompanying promise that “the Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in His wings.” This great and dreadful day is to accom­plish two things: “He maketh sore, and bindeth up: He woundeth, and His hands make whole.” (Job 5:18) Clearly enough, it is only by considering both sides of the situation that we shall come to a proper appraisal of our own personal privi­leges and obligations if we would be “faithful to the lord, the Truth, and the Brethren.”

It is directly counseled by the Apostle Paul that we should “follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord” (Heb. 12:14; see also Rom. 14:19 and 2 Tim. 2:22); but the Apostle James limits the words of Paul by his statement in Jas. 3:17, “The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable,” And this principle had been emphasized by Jehu hundreds of years before in 2 Kgs. 9:22, “Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms (corrupt teachings and practices) of thy mother Jezebel (typical of the Roman Church – see Rev. 2:20) and her witchcrafts (especially deceptive false teachings) are so many?” But some – even some who have supposedly been schooled in Present Truth – ignore these outstanding and vital exceptions, stressing only peace, and quoting 1 Tim. 3:16 to justify their position, “Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness.” That this text has been badly corrupted by the translators is quite clear when we read it from Dr. Rotherham’s translation: “Confessedly great is the sacred secret of godliness – who was made manifest in the flesh.” This “sacred secret” is further mentioned by St. Paul in Eph. 5:32: “This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church.” It needs no argument that it has been a “great mystery” all during the Age that Christ is not one member, but many (Christ and the Church); it needs no argument that this has been indeed a “great mystery.”

Furthermore, the contention “without controversy” is directly contradicted by such statements as “endure hardness as good soldiers” – “fight the good fight” etc.; and these statements are also supported by certain Scriptures that apply especially here in the end of the Age, e.g., Isa. 28:17: “The hail (hard cutting Truth) shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters (great floods of Truth) shall overflow the hiding place.” Also, Isa. 41:15,16: “Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing Instrument (the Harvest sickle of Present Truth – See Rev. 14:14 Berian Comment) having teeth: and thou shalt thresh the mountains (great strong kingdoms), and beat them small, and shall make the hills (democracies and lesser governments) as chaff.... and the whirlwind (the great Time of Trouble) shall scatter them.” The greatest “refuge of lies” of all time has been the Papacy, which has counterfeited almost every fundamental truth of the Bible – and especially so, and in very profuse manner, the truth concerning the glorious Kingdom reign of Christ and the Church.

It is a very easy matter to reach hasty, but erroneous, conclusion from read­ing just one Scripture; and such is true of those who conclude that “without con­troversy” means we should follow peace at any price. Old Testament precedent directly contradicts it, as can be seen from the prophets who “waxed valiant in fight.... were tortured.... were stoned, they were sawn asunder....slain with the sword.” (Hob. 11:34-38) All of these outrages occurred because the prophets ex­posed the evils of teaching and practice of their time – particularly, the evils of the religious leaders of their time. Note specifically 2 Chr. 24:19-21: ‘‘God sent prophets to them.... they testified against them.... the spirit of God came upon Zechariah.... Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the Lord?.... Because ye have forsaken the Lord, He hath also forsaken you. And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king.” Many who were one time in the forefront of the Harvest battle now seem to feel that the laurels gained in the past will suffice to bring them to the Heavenly Canaan; but the entire record decries such an attitude. Of Jeremiah, Isaiah, Zechariah, Jesus, the Apostles, and the multitude of Gospel-Age martyrs, the sublime report is that they died with their boots on – “faithful unto death.” Those people today who advocate the preaching only of winsome truths – giving no offense to any one – ­can scarcely be classified as “enduring hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ” ­nor will they eventually be in the same record book with those who have done so – ­the Fully Faithful, We consider It a truthful observation that none can be faith­ful to Present Truth without contending for that Truth.

WHO MAY ENDURE THE DAY OF HIS COMING?

“Behold Me! sending My Messenger.... But who may endure the day of His coming? And who is he that can stand when He appeareth (maketh manifest)? For He is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ alkali; Therefore He will sit as a refiner and purifier (polisher) of silver, And will purify (polish, develop) the sons of Levi (primarily the Little Flock and the Great Company), And shall smelt them as gold and as silver; So shall they belong to Yaveh, offering a gift in righteous­ness.” (Malachi 3:1-3, Rotherham) These texts are undoubtedly prophetic of Jesus’ second advent; and they itemize some of the things He would accomplish at that time. It is stated that He will be (1) like a refiner’s fire; (2) like fullers’ alkali; (3) sit as a refiner and purifier (polisher) of silver; (4) purify (thoroughly polish, develop) the sons of Levi, so they may (5) offer a gift In righteousness.

Our concern in this writing will be mainly with No. 3 above: A refiner and polisher of silver. It needs no argument that literal silver is not here meant. Quite clearly it means the Truth. All who are familiar with the facts know only too will that the Lord did refine the Truth since 1874, by separating from it the conglomeration of error that had attached to It during the interim from His first advent. And not only so, once the error was eliminated, a great polishing work was done with the then refined Truth, giving it a brilliance that made it a thing of real beauty to all who were “of the Truth.” This was true not only of relig­ious Truth, but also applied with great force to secular truth. The “unclean spirits” (teachings) of the Divine Right of Kings, Clergy, Aristocracy and Labor have been mercilessly exposed, so that today in the more enlightened countries very few still cling to the doctrine that “The King can do no wrong,’’ or that the preachers and priests can consign to eternal torment all who do not ‘‘hear’’ them. “Truth shall spring out of the earth (the organized social order); and righteous­ness (the Holy Spirit will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment—John 16:8) shall look down from Heaven.” (Psa. 85:11)

But just as human agents waged battle against secular error, so human agents were also used of the lord as He “looked down from Heaven.” These human beings were that group that wielded the sickle of Harvest Truth, chief of whom was Brother Russell, He not only put the “ink” into the “inkhorn” (Eze. 9:2) for all to use, but he himself was foremost of the antitypical “three hundred” who waged antitypical Gideon’s battle against the hosts of antitypical Midian (religious errorists) – Judges Chapter 7. Of course, there was much of turmoil and great controversy in all this, with the victory surely coming to those who held to the polished brilliant Truth on the state of the dead, etc. This victory had become so pronounced that toward the end of Brother Russell’s life one secular writer offered this quatrain:

There is a man in our town

Whose name I need not tell;

I’m sure you all must know him,

For he put the fires out of Hell!

As was the case with David, Brother Russell was very much a man of war ­always in the forefront of some battle somewhere. One brother once said to him, Brother Russell, you are the most loved man on earth. To which Brother Russell replied, Yes, and the most hated! But we believe it is a fair appraisal to con­clude that those who knew him well, would certainly classify him as a genteel man a man who would much prefer peace to war. It has indeed been a great Gospel-Age paradox that the “sons of peace” – led by the Son of Peace – have been in almost continuous battle; and many of such have done so contrary to their inherited dis­positions. Many of them would have followed a more peaceful path had they been allowed to do the choosing; yet they had forced themselves to be ‘‘good soldiers’’ as duty had appeared to them.

Theirs not to question Why;

Theirs but to do and die!

And for many of them – and especially so as respects Brother Russell – we believe the words of the great Shakespeare are most apt:

His life was gentle, and the elements so mixed in him

That Nature might stand up and say to all the world,

THIS WAS A MAN!

To do any task well, there must first of all be the knowledge to do; then the will to do; then the tools wherewith to do; then the capacity to do; and finally the providential circumstances to do (the physical, mental and financial strength). This is very well summed up by St. Paul In 2 Tim. 3:15,16, Dia.: “From a child thou hast known those Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise for Salvation, through that faith which is in Jesus Christ. All Scripture, divinely Inspired, is indeed profitable for teaching (doctrine – what we should believe), for refuting (error – that which we should not believe), for correction (that which we should not do), for that discipline which is in righteousness (that which we should do); so that the Man of God may be complete, thoroughly fitted for every good work,” Usually it is by controversy that the clear untainted truth is established; and this has been especially true here in the end of the Age. Thus, the prophecy of Malachi forcefully applies: “He (Jesus) shall sit as a refiner and a polisher, developer, of the Truth.” And those who clamor for peace without first having purity, those who have faulted Brother Russell and others for engaging in controversy, such have in effect been finding fault with our Lord Himself; because this controversy ­this polishing, this developing – of the Truth is specifically one of the outstand­ing activities of His Second Advent. It is this “polishing” of the Truth that has directly resulted in ‘‘polishing, developing” the Sons of Levi. And the reason the Sons of Levi must be so developed is that “they may make an offering in righteous­ness” unto the Lord. Until all such have come into Present Truth – to appropriate the Truth from the table the lord has provided for His people at this time – no activity on their part can be acceptable to the Lord – regardless of any outward appearance of prosperity they may have. Jesus said one of His primary purposes at His first Advent was: “To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the Truth.” (John 18:37) And, just as the Truth at that time “brought life and immortality to light,” so in His second Advent “the hail (hard cutting Truth) shall sweep away the refuge of lies.”

SOME CORROBORATING CITATIONS

Following is something on this subject from Brother Russell: “Having put on the whole armor of God, and boldly withstood error by a clear and fearless presenta­tion and defense of the Truth during this evil day, when giant errors stalk about, the saints are exhorted, ‘Having done all, to stand,’ clad in the full armor, with the sword of the Spirit ever ready for defense, and with watchfulness and persever­ance and prayer for all saints.” (Vol. 3, p. 212) ‘‘And suffering with Christ, we have seen, is not the ordinary suffering common to all in the fallen state, but only such sufferings as are the results, more or less directly, of the following of Christ’s example, in advocating unpopular truths and exposing popular errors.” (Vol. 3, p. 209) In the face of such clear statements by Brother Russell, it seems ridiculous in the extreme for any to decry controversy, and yet claim they are fully faithful to the Harvest Truth and That Servant’s teachings. Indeed, he was fully alerted to the fact that one of our Lord’s outstanding second-advent works would be the “polishing, developing” of the Truth; and those who do not understand this are just that much out of Present Truth.

And more from Brother Russell In Vol. 2, pp. 236,237: “As there (in the Jewish Harvest) The Truth set the father against the son, the daughter against the mother, and the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, so again, a man’s foes are often they of his own household. This cannot be avoided. They who love peace more than the Truth will be tested, and they who love truth supremely will be accepted and as the overcomers, as in the Jewish Harvest.... As we should expect, we find it here: the blindest are the leaders of the blind, who, like their types, Know not the time of their visitation.” (Luke 19:14)

Now follows something from Reprints 5546,5547: “Today, as in Jesus’ time, many are influenced by the false teachings of those to whom they have been accus­tomed to look as their spiritual shepherds. If then the world should come to be in sympathy with us as a people, and should speak well of us, and we should become popular, we should come under the condemnation expressed in the Master’s words, ‘Woe unto you when all men speak well of you; for so did their fathers unto the false prophets’.... There are all manner of evil forces and Influences surrounding us (especially from those leaders who are in Azazel’s clutches – abandoned to Azazel—­See E-15:525–JJH). These evil influences are of Satan and the fallen angels.... As we look back, we can see that all who have walked in the narrow way have received persecution. Whoever has been in accord with God has been out of accord with the course of this world. There were the Baptists, and then the Methodists, who in the early days had persecution because they had more light than others. The Presbyterians also for a time, because they had had greater light than others, received persecution (from their former brethren, particularly, as was in the case of our Lord and others—JJH). And we must expect the same today. Persecution will come to those who have the courage of their convictions. The lord tells us that the anointing that we have received of Him is for the very purpose that we may show forth His praises.”

All of the foregoing is quite in harmony with St. Paul’s words in Rom. 12:2: “Be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed (changed in nature, disposi­tion, and the like) by the renewing of your mind (with Present Truth), that ye may prove what is good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God,” Clearly enough, the great Apostle was a “non-conformist” – “beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad” (Acts 26:24). As Mark Twain has so ably stated, “If we find ourselves on the side of the majority, it’s time to reform.” But in all of this it is well that we retain “the spirit of a sound mind” and, that we consider well the Apostle’s words to his beloved Philippians 2:3 (Dia.): “Do nothing from party-spirit (sectarianism), or vainglory.... not each one regarding his own Interests, but each one also those of others,” This same point was impressed upon the Jews immediately after they were delivered from Egyptian bondage: “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil (in sectarian blindness, or do-nothing complacency).”—Ex. 23:2..

To be a “good soldier” one must have courage and combativeness – not a good runner, but a good fighter. And, while “the weapons of our warfare are not carnal,” many of God’s people throughout the Age have willingly answered the call to battle with “the sword of the spirit, which is the Word of God.” (Eph. 6:17, Dia.) The Adver­sary, ever seeking whom he may devour – and being a shrewd appraiser of human frailty was quick to discern that many would face lions in the Roman arena, rather than for­sake “the good fight.” Consequently, he aroused their combativeness against each other, with both sides on occasion being in error; yet contending so strenuously for their error that they destroyed each other. This mistake we should studiously and determinedly avoid, giving heed to the prophet’s words, “In quietness and in confidence shall be your strength.” (Isa. 30:15) We should ever bear in mind it is not characteristic of the Lord’s true people to wish destruction upon the gainsayers (Luke 9:53-55); but to recover them if possible from their ‘‘path of error.’’ (Jas. 5:20, Dia.)

Early in the 20th Century a few prominent preachers were alerted to the peace-at-any-price disposition already then appearing in some. Said one of them: “When Christianity disposes wholly with controversy it will be like a sleeping man ­harmless and helpless; it will be a sad spectacle.... Controversy was the life of Paul’s works – polite controversy, brotherly controversy; but strong in exposing Error and building up the Truth. The Epistles were full of controversy. Moreover, many of Christ’s sayings were strictly controversial.” It is plainly evident that many who attend services in the sects of Little Babylon, and claiming to be “in the Truth” do no more about it than attend meetings – they have a nice place to “go to church.”

In conclusion, we would offer one more quotation from Brother Russell, found in Vol. 2, pp.358,359:

“In 2 Thess. 2:8-12, the Apostle Paul declares concerning Antichrist: ‘Whom the Lord Jesus will consume with the spirit of His mouth, and annihilate with the bright shining (ephaneia) of His presence (Parousia).’ The light of truth is to penetrate every subject. By exposing rights and wrongs it will lead into the great struggle between these principles, and between the human exponents of each, causing the time of trouble and wrath. In this struggle, wrong and evil shall fall, and right and truth shall triumph. Among other evils now to be finally and utterly destroyed is Antichrist, with which nearly every evil, or theory and practice, is more or less directly connected. And it will be this bright-shining (Epiphaneia), this sunlight from the Lord’s presence, which will produce the day of trouble, because of and in which Antichrist, with every other evil system, will be destroyed. ‘Whose presence is with (accompanied by or during) an energetic operation of Satan (Satanic energy and action) with all power, and signs, and lying delusions, and with every iniquitous deception for those perishing; because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be preserved. And for this reason God will send to them a deluding power, that they might believe the error (which is pro­nouncedly true in those who have had Parousia Truth and now contend for “peace and tranquillity” instead of contending for the Truth – a manifest Truth that they received it NOT in the love of it—JJH): so that all not believing the truth, but taking pleasure in iniquity, may be judged’ unworthy to share the Millennial Kingdom as joint-heirs with Christ (such as the Great Company and those who go completely into perdition—JJH).

“We understand these words to imply that in the time of the Lord’s presence (since 1874), through this Antichrist system (one of the principal of Satan’s agencies for deceiving and controlling the world), as well as through all his other agencies (including those who are in Azazel’s clutches—JJH), the devil will make a most desperate resistance to the new order of things about to be established. He will take advantage of every little circumstance, and all the inherited weaknesses and selfishness of the human family, to enlist their hearts and hands and pens in this final struggle against liberty and the full elucidation of the truth. Prejudices will be enkindled where, if the truth were clearly seen, none would exist; and passionate zeal will be evoked, and partisan unions formed, which will deceive and mislead many (beginning at the House of the Lord – among the Truth groups.—JJH). And this will be so, not because God has not made the truth clear enough to guide all the fully consecrated, but because those who will be deceived were not sufficiently in earnest in seeking out and using the truth provided as meat in due season. And thus it will be manifested that the class misled received not the truth in the love of it, but rather through custom, formality or fear” (revealed in this Epiphany as all who stand when He maketh manifest”—JJH).”

To which the words of St. Paul may be added: “Praying at every season... on my behalf, that eloquence may be given me... to make known the secret of the Glad Tidings, that I may speak boldly concerning it... Peace to the brethren, and love with faith, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. The favor be with all who sin­cerely love our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Eph. 6:18-23, Dia.)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim