NO. 264: THE JUDGMENTS OF THE LORD

No. 264

“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 the 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 would 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 totally 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 tells us: “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 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 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 – those who have re­sponded to the Gospel call, not because of force applied to them, but through love of God and good principles. “I delight to do thy will, 0 my God, thy law is within my heart.” (Psa. 40:8)

THE EPIPHANY JUDGMENT 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 them 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 that he is one of this class by his “double mind – unstable in all his ways.” (Jas. 1:8) On Sept. 3, 1966, he introduced a motion to his Convention assembled in Philadelphia in which he asked that J. W. Krewson and John J. Hoefle be disfellowshiped, in support of his own disfellowship­ment of them in previous years. And that resolution was “unanimously” (?) passed. Note now his own teaching on such procedure on p. 13 of the Jan.-Feb. 1963 PT:

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

“Answer: NO, despite the 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.” (All empha­sis by the Trustee himself.)

This matter is much elaborated on pp. 13,14 and 15 of the 1963 PT; and the Trustee set forth this teaching in his effort to refute JWK for wanting then to do exactly what the Trustee has now (in 1966) himself done against JWK – the very same person he (RGJ) attempted to silence in 1963. And had not RGJ 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 – a crown-loser. Nor should we be accused of “Judging” in this matter, because the Executive Trustee has clearly demonstrated by his “fruits” his Class; and we now merely observe the judgment that the Lord has revealed against him. “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the di­viding asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” (Heb. 4:12) Also, “By their FRUITS you will discover them.” (Matt. 7:16, Dia.)

And, when he says that the resolution on Sept. 3, 1966 was passed “unanimously” we have the word of more than one who 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 partakers 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 in others’ sins” should we fail to expose his “Double Mind” in his infamous performance. Let us not forget also that RGJ was elected Executive Trustee “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 Brother Russell.

In corroboration of this, note his own words as recorded in the Nov. 1955 Present Truth, p. 87, col. 1, pars. 1, 2: “Bro. Russell controlled the Society fully until the day of his death, and even as we (RGJ) 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.” (No one has stood in relation to the Lord’s people that That Servant did, despite the boastful claims of RGJ and JWK – not even the Epiphany Messenger, the last Star Member – who never claimed equality with Brother Russell’s ministry “in relation to the Lord’s work”—JJH)

We believe it would be much more accurate to state that the “LHMM now stands in relatively the same relation as the W.T.B. & T. Society now stands in its relation to the Lord’s people under its present management.” The Society (the Jehovah’s Witnesses), too, ‘legislates’ for individuals and classes in violation of the Lord’s Arrangements.

Anent the foregoing, could we find a closer “twin” to the popes’ claim of “Suc­cessor to St. Peter”? RGJ, a self–admitted Levite, who acknowledges that he is no longer 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, who was made ruler over His household (Matt. 24:45), and the EPIPHANY MESSENGER! “Great swelling, words, ‘do you say’? 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. However, no one could be a successor to That Servant in his ministry to the brethren – nor did Brother Johnson claim to minister to the brethren in the same capac­ity. Aside from RGJ, JWK and the leaders of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, we know of no other leaders in the Truth Movements making such boastful claims – “great swelling words.”

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 – an investigation that would exonerate him and place him in a much more favorable light. But of the guilty ones, the 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 will advise the citizens to read both sides, and make up their own minds. But not so from the DICTATORS of any country or of any religion. Their reports to their people are dripping dishonesty, framed in deceit. They cannot possibly stand the search-light of impartial investigation. For shame that any of the Lord’s people must stoop to the same tactics!

The question has been well put: Since RGJ 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. Even though we have contributed much more than he ever has to the pub­lishing of the Epiphany books, he charges us the same amount of any outsider – not even allowing us colporteurs’ rates. Yes, this Epiphany period is the special Judgment Day of the Great Multitude – it is their “Little Season” – just as will also be true of the world in general after 2874, when the sheep will be separated from the goats.

Had RGJ persisted in those revolutionisms under Brother Johnson (against which we have been protesting), 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” – even in some respects that was true of the Watch Tower some sixty years ago. Then, at least, a group made that claim; now it is a one-man performance.

And of such power–graspers we quote from 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.” And further from E–14:350: “God declares that the time is coming when He will punish all the measurably unfaithful consecrated – the crown–losers – with the unconsecrated. 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)

But in all this we rest calmly and securely in the assurance that this Epiphany 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.” 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 God’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 reached 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 faith and obedience; and there seems little doubt that among them also many will fail – just as has been true with the 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 human beings as have “passed from death unto life,” and those wayward spirit beings who have never been under the Adamic death sentence. Thus, during the Parousia Day it was not possible to discriminate between the crown-retainers and the crown-losers 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. However, the Youthful Worthies will overcome Clericalism and Sectarianism. (See E–5:226–229)

Here is something 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 channels 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 – inheritor of Brother Johnson’s business position – boasts and attempts to estab­lish himself in the eyes of his adherents with the “same official powers as our dear Pas­tor”—That Servant! – 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 faultfinders,” accord­ing to RGJ – 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 us––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 (RGJ has repeatedly warned against reading the writings of JJH as being “of the Devil” – truly papal shenanigan—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 “TRADEMARK” OF ALL ERRORISTS

The foregoing quotations are from Volume 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 em­phatically and openly 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 “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 writing of the ‘sifters’! You wouldn’t shake hands with the Devil, would you?

Brother Johnson didn’t follow such a policy. He 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 the Towers – although he knew 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); 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.” However, RGJ can’t do 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 Pastors and Teachers did not counsel their readers to avoid the writings of the errorists. They exhorted them to “grow in grace and in knowledge” of the Truth, that they might be able to stand in this “evil day” as their adversaries would flee from them.

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 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 (which the faithful Youthful Worthies overcome), 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.)

“But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you. For not he that commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth.” (2 Cor. 10:13, 18)

Sincerely your brother, John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

==========================

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in Christ!

Many thanks for continuing to send me your paper with much helpful information. Some considerable time back – maybe two or three years ago – you sent me one going into considerable detail regarding Nisan 14, and that it does not always coincide with ­the full moon and how the error came about, the idea of Good Friday, etc. If you have any spare copies of that number, would you please let me have one or two of them? I seem to have displaced my own. I have other back copies, but not that one. The ques­tion has arisen again in our group re Nisan 14 – some claiming it should be April 3 after 6 p.m. We are a small group dating back to 1918 and are known as The M.C.F.B.

I met Brother Russell only once as a youth in Liverpool in 1913. I am now in my eightieth year, He played the greater part in my life and under his banner. I served 116 days Wormwood prison as a conscientious objector and was from 1914-1918 and 12 mos. in Dartmoor Prison (guided by Volume teaching). Today we are a perfectly free group.

Sending our Christian love... Heb. 6:10; 10:35 and 1 Cor. 15:58. Bro. ------- (ENGLAND)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in our Master’s Name!

It is a little hard for me to write, for I am so shaky on my hand – but I want you to know that I think of you often and I love your papers. I was 92 years old last fall, so you see I am getting up in years. I have a heart condition, so I have to take it very easy.

I am enclosing $-- to help in a small way to spread the Truth. God bless you and keep you. Your brother by His Grace ------- (ILLINOIS)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

For the last two years I have been keeping your articles and indexing them for future reference. I regret that some of these papers have gotten away from me. Maybe you could again supply me with the missing ones. They are #241,242,247 and 248. Enclosed is a small gift for your kindness. Thanks for your labor of love.

Your brother in Christ ------- (PENNSYLVANIA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace!

God has brought us on the way even to the opening of another year. Tongue or pen can but faintly express gratitude for His providence and grace. From signs about us we do realize we are near in the good of eternal reward, and this year requires more zeal and determination to walk.

I presume it was a difficult time for you over the past year in refuting the errors as they appear from the various sects and elsewhere – but as ambassadors for Christ (2 Cor. 5:20) He has promised to give strength to His people and bless them with peace. (Psa. 29:11)

We are ever grateful to you for the help we receive from the monthly articles. May the Lord continue His blessings – remain and abide with you all. (Ex. 33:14; Heb. 10:23)

Yours by His  Grace ------- (JAMAICA)

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

Our dear Brother Hoefle; Grace and peace, be multiplied!

This is to let you know that we are still rejoicing in the Truth..... the Truth God gave through the last two Star Members. We also are glad for you, dear Brother, as a Defense wall against the errors that prevail to destroy the Truths of these books. Be of good courage and be strong. The Lord bless and keep you. Fond Christian love for you and the other dear ones with you.

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

NO. 263: CONCERNING CONTROVERSY

No. 263

Today it is a proper appraisal to say that Protestanism is almost dead – the spirit of the Reformers, John Wessel, Martin Luther, John Wesley, et al (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 Truth movements. 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 on 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 Rev. 6:14) On every hand there is loud acclaim for this “rolling together” as “the unstable and the un­learned” blindly follow their blind leaders – to fall into the ditch. (See Matt. 15:14) “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:

“I saw Heaven opened (the Plan of God made very clear), and behold a white horse (clear spotless doctrine – a “pure language”¾Zeph. 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).” (Diaglott)

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 – the Head and the Body); it needs no argument that this has been indeed a “great mystery.” (See 1 Tim. 3:16 in Diaglott)

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 Berean 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.” (Heb. 11:34–38) All of their time – particularly these outrages occurred because the prophets exposed the evils of teaching and practice – 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. “Earnestly contend for the faith (the Truth) which was once delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3)

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.” (Mal. 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 (the Truth); (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 well 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––Jn. 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” (Ezek. 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 am 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 make reply;

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 has 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.” Note the Be­rean Comment on John 18:37: “It was this ‘good confession before Pontius Pilate’ that cost our Lord His life.”

SOME CORROBORATING CITATIONS

The following is something on this subject from Brother Russell: “Having put on the whole armour 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 armour, 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 he tested, and they who love truth supremely will be accepted 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. 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 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, as was 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.”

In 2 Tim. 3:12 we are told, “All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” The only way such persecution may come is by “a good confession” of the Truth. Regardless of how much Truth we may know, if we do not sound forth the “trumpet,” nobody will bother us.

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 disposition, and the like) by the renewing of your mind (with Present Truth), that ye may prove what is that 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 9:35-55); but to recover them if possible from their “path of error.” (Jas. 5:20, Dia.)

2 Tim. 2:25,26 (Dia.) offers excellent complement to the foregoing: “In meekness correcting the opposers; perhaps God may give them a change of mind in order to a knowl­edge of the Truth; and that they may be recovered from the snare of the enemy.” Those of us who were not ‘born in the Truth’ know by experience that at one time we had no ear for it; but God eventually gave us “a change of mind... to a knowledge of the Truth.” Thus, there may be some today who occupy our identical position before receiving this “Change of mind”; so time and instruction may eventually cause them to receive it. This thought should always be in our mind as we appraise those who do not hear us now; they may hear us next year if we give them courteous and generous treatment.

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 various sects, and claiming to be “in the Truth” do no more about it than attend meetings. They have a nice place to “go to church.”

We now offer one more quotation from Brother Russell, found in Parousia Volume 2, pp. 358,359: “In 2 Thes. 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 (Epiphaneia) 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 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 of 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.

“We understand these words to imply that in the time of the Lord’s presence (since 1874), through this Antichrist system (one of the principals 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.” (The revealing is in this Epiphany. The Berean Comment on 2 Thes. 2:11 – “Great delusions are just before us, and some of these may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth.” – 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

===========================

QUESTIONS OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: Are Consecrated Epiphany Campers represented in any way in Noah’s Ark?

ANSWER: No! And it would be essential for them to be shown in the Ark in some clear manner if they are a genuine class, because that Ark is a “Type of Christ and the power in Him which will replenish and reorganize society.” (See Gen. 6:19 – Berean Comment) In other words, the Ark portrays the embodiment of God’s Plan. (Nor does Noah’s Ark portray the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Jonadabs, or any of their earthly “Organiza­tion” that will allegedly survive Armageddon.)

In elaborating this statement Brother Johnson gives us this in E–5:62 (59): “It will be noticed that there were four human pairs who went into the Ark, as well as at least one pair of every clean and unclean kind of animals. We know that there are four elective classes who in this life obtain a good report through faith in the Abrahamic Covenant: (1) the Christ, (2) the Ancient Worthies, (3) the Great Company, and (4) the Youthful Wor­thies. Noah undoubtedly types out Lord, who is the Heir of righteousness which comes to us by faith (Heb. 11:7) These classes we understand to be typed in their respective order by Noah and his wife, Shem and his wife, Japheth and his wife and Ham and his wife, the males apart from Noah representing all the leaders of their respective classes, and the females the rest of these classes. We understand the animals in the Ark to represent the non-elect who will ultimately be saved. We understand the clean animals to represent the Jews, as typically clean, who will be saved, and the Tentatively Justified as tenta­tively clean, who will be saved. The unclean animals we understand represent those of the present unclean world who will be saved; while those who perished in the Flood we understand to represent from one viewpoint those who have perished under the Adamic curse, and from another standpoint, the movements and systems of Satan’s Empire and the Second Death Class. Just as in the type the clean and the unclean animals occupied altogether different positions in the ark from those of Noah and his family, so in the antitype, the Jews and the Tentatively Justified on the one hand, and the prospectively saved of the rest of mankind on the other hand, are quite differently related to the Abrahamic Covenant from antitypical Noah and his family. These animals were placed in the Ark to type that anticipatorily their antitypes would be included in the Abrahamic Covenant.”

From the foregoing, it is clear enough that the clean animals typed the quasi-elect – those “truly repentant and believing, but not consecrated, Jews and Gentiles.” (See E–10:209) They are those who have “adhered to righteousness” and who accept Christ as their Savior – anticipatorily in the Jewish Age, and actually so during the Gospel Age. Note we have underscored the words “adhered to righteousness,” because this feature of the quasi-elect is definitely portrayed in the clean animals by all of them having the split or divided hoof, such hoofs typifying that their conduct has been acceptable to God and to man – they have practiced righteousness – have made “straight paths for their feet” – adhered to the Mosaic law to the extent of their ability (even perhaps more so than the ‘measurably faithful’ Great Company Class, and the ‘measurably faithful’ of the Youthful Worthies – although “adherence to righteousness” does not admit the quasi-elect as one of the fully elect classes).   Thus, it is apparent that the quasi-elect are clearly shown in the Ark; and it is equally apparent that the same Ark is completely silent about a consecrated segment of this class at any time during the Gospel Age in the embodiment of God’s Plan. Clearly enough, a consecrated division of the quasi-­elect is an Azazelian perversion by uncleansed Levite leaders – whether they be desig­nated Epiphany Campers Consecrated, Quasi–elect Consecrated or Jonadabs. It is an arbi­trary addition to “that which is written,” and without Scriptural foundation in the Ark, which reveals the “whole counsel of God” in its generalized features – emphasizing the same six classes as are found in Joel 2:28,29, but no more.

When RGJ tells us that his Campers Consecrated are so much like the Youthful Wor­thies that he can hardly tell the difference, we would present the logical question re­specting the type: Did Noah and family have any difficulty whatever in noting the dif­ference between themselves and the clean animals in the Ark?

==========================

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace!

Many thanks for yours of Jan. 20, and for both circulars since then, which are very much appreciated – particularly the latter on The Pastor and Teacher. Brother ------- asked that we mention his appreciation, too, of the very fine article...

It is indeed a time of famine and pestilence, floods and droughts, but in this part of the country we do seem to miss many of the extremes that others have had to face. We often say that the concentration of industries in this region has an effect on the cli­matic conditions. Be that as it may, we know that this upsetting time is all part of the ending of this “present evil world.” .........

Now I Will close with our prayers for your continued good health enabling you to continue to serve the Lord and the brethren with “meat in due season.” Brother ------- joins in sending Christian love to you and all your co-laborers.

Yours by His grace ------- (ENGLAND)

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

Dear Sirs:

I recently had someone hand me “The Herald of the Epiphany” dated May 1, 1976, and was curious to know more about who you are and your ministry. Also, do you publish sim­ilar publications each month? Who is the editor, and who does the writing? I appre­ciate your reply to this request.    Sincerely in Christ, ------- (SOUTH CAROLINA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

I hope things are going well and the work is progressing. I find your literature quite helpful and stimulating in contrast to some of the very boring Bible Student lit­erature. You deal more directly with the issues instead of skirting around them as some do. I think you will find that many appreciate your openness, although sometimes we tend to avoid areas that probably should be discussed.

I noted that you knew Fred Franz when he lived in Dayton. There is a lot of rumor about him, all the way from that he is a brilliant scholar and yet a very humble man.... I would appreciate and find very helpful your perceptions. True, some people feel things like this are unimportant, but millions of people base their beliefs on Franz’s teachings, and an evaluation of those teachings should, to some degree, consider an evaluation of the man who espouses the teachings. Also, quite a number of the younger Bible Students are interested in learning as much as they can about the early history of the Bible Student movement. This, of course, would especially include something about Brothers Russell and Johnson. Again, the charges are common that both of these brothers were arrogant, haughty, uninformed, etc......... I especially find Bro. Johnson’s writ­ings on creationism helpful. His insight in this matter shows his balance, versatility and studiousness...... As I have read all of the literature you have sent, any other issues you are able to send I would he extremely grateful for. I am anxious to hear from you.

Your brother, Dr. ------- (OHIO)
...........................................................................

Dear Mr. Hoefle:

Many thanks for your letter of the 16th, and for the enclosed tracts. I found both of much interest. To begin with, would you please send me copies of tracts Nos. 1,2,4,5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 121, 130. And if I may, I would like to subscribe to your paper. I would like to know how your group came about. This has to do with how I heard about you. Mr. ------- of Los Angeles Baptist College was the person who told me about you. We have been in correspondence about the different movements arising out of Pastor Russell’s work. He mentioned you as one of those movements. So, any information on how you came about would be great.

As for me, I am of Orientalist-Jewish extraction, and a Jew by belief. Hope to hear from you soon.

Best wishes. ------- (CALIFORNIA)

NO. 262: DOUBTS AND MISGIVINGS OF GOD'S PEOPLE

No. 262

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

As we ponder the actions and attitudes of Bible records, we may readily come to the conclusion that some of the best and most prominent of Jews and Christians have had their faith sorely tried at times – even to the extent that they found it diffi­cult to believe the direct plain statement of God Himself.

MOSES – THE EMANCIPATOR

As instance Moses, when he was told, “Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt.” (Ex. 3:10) “And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt?” (Ex. 3:11) Pass­ing by the remainder of Chapter Three, we come now to Ex. 4:1: “Behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.” This translation is misleading in its first clause – “they will not be­lieve me.” Moses in this instance is typical of our Lord’s return in 1874 to deliver spiritual Israel and to establish the Kingdom; and the conversation between God and Moses is typical of the Second Advent preparations. Therefore, we cannot believe that Jesus would tell God that the people will not believe; rather, the correct translation should be, “They may not believe me.”

It is written of Moses that he was “the meekest (most leadable, most teachable) man in all the earth” (Num. 12:3), so we should not assume that he would make bold contradiction when God spoke to him. However, we cannot but make reasonable allow­ance for Moses here. For the first forty years of his life he had lived in the King’s palace in Egypt – at that time a formidable military power among the nations; whereas, the Israelites had no military equipment whatever. Thus, Moses would readily consider his mission impossible of performance. Humanly speaking, this certainly was a reason­able conclusion on his part, because the Jews were then slaves – subdued and unwarlike. This was a far cry from the time that Joseph was prime minister in Egypt – at which time Jacob and his entire household were received into the royal friendship and hospi­tality of Pharaoh. But at the time of Moses’ mission there had arisen a “‘Pharaoh who knew not Joseph.” (Ex. 1:8)

And God, wishing to increase his courage and his confidence, then proceeded to give Moses the three miraculous signs of the rod turned into serpent, then back to rod again; of Moses’ hand become leprous, then restored to its former health; and third, the water of the river would be turned into blood. (Ex. 4:1-9) But Moses continued, “I am not eloquent... slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.” (v. 10) However, upon God’s insistence, he went to Egypt as he had been instructed. And in due course he brought Israel out of Egypt “with high hand,” and across the Red Sea and away from the pursuing Egyptian army; then fully convinced that God could and would perform whatever He promised.

It is stated of Moses that he was probably the grandest character that ever lived; and his experience aforegoing should convince all of us that God will never tell any of us to do anything that we cannot do. Yet God’s experience with Moses had to be repeated several times in subsequent years. Jeremiah answered substantially as did Moses, “I can­not speak, for I am a child.” (Jer. 1:6) And in this he was typical of Brother Russell in the early harvest. He also concluded that he did not have the capacity to proclaim the Harvest message, but he, too, eventually learned that he did have the talents required for the job, and he certainly accomplished his mission in a most excellent manner.

A great failing of some of God’s most laudable servants is that they often expected the wrong thing at the right time, or the right thing at the wrong time. Also, on oc­casion they failed to comprehend the right thing at the right time when it was presented to them. This was pronouncedly true of the Jews at the First Advent. “He came to His own, and his own received him not.” (John 1:11) “They knew not the time of their visita­tion.” (Luke 19:44) He was indeed the “light of life”; but “the light shineth in dark­ness, and the darkness comprehended it not.” (John 1:5) But of those that did receive Him, their understanding of what was going on was very vague and confused until they were enlightened by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

Pertinent to the above is the experience of the two disciples on their way to Em­maus, as recorded in Luke 24:13–31. When the risen Lord joined them on the way there, the conversation speedily turned to the death of Jesus three days before; and one of them said, “We had trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel.” (v.21) But now they were much confused. Their timing was right in that Jesus was the Messiah, but they were completely wrong in what they expected at that time; and this improper expectation had placed a great strain on their faith when Jesus failed to do what they had expected Him to do then. On the way to Emmaus Jesus had said unto them, “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all the prophets have spoken. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? Even after they were convinced that Jesus had been raised a spirit being, they were still much confused, as note their question to Him just before He finally left them to go to Heaven: “Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6)

JOHN THE BAPTIST

By way of introduction, Jesus had said of John, “Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist.” (Matt. 11:11) It will be recalled that John was only six months older than Jesus, which means he was probably engaged in his ministry at Jordan for six months before Jesus came to be immersed by him. However, as boys and young men they had grown up together, probably had discussed their various destinies, because we may take it for granted (although the Bible does not specifically say so) that their mothers had told them the words that the respective an­gels had told them (Luke 1:11–64); and it seems this had thoroughly convinced John that Jesus was the promised Messiah. Therefore, he immediately exclaimed, as Jesus was ap­proaching him, “Behold the lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world. This is he of whom I said, After me comes a man which is in advance of me: for he is my su­perior.” (John 1:29-30, Dia.)

Thus, when John was preaching repentance to the Jews, it would seem he stressed that the Messiah was soon to appear; and that would undoubtedly prod the Jews to ex­piate any known violations of the Law, because the nation from the least to the great­est was thoroughly imbued with the thought that the Messiah would some day appear. Yet, as firmly as John was convinced at Jordan, having seen the spirit “descending from heaven like a Dove, and it abode upon him” (v. 32), he later began seriously to doubt his own statement regarding Jesus, because he sent “two of his disciples to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?” (Luke 7:19) At that time John was sitting in prison awaiting execution by Herod; but he, along with the Jews in general, were expecting the restoration of the Kingdom to Israel when the Mes­siah would appear. In line with this, we now quote a major portion of an article to be found in Reprints 2620 (April 15, 1900):

“While Jesus was performing many miracles, making numerous disciples, and meet­ing with comparatively little opposition, things were going very differently with his cousin, John the Baptizer. Yet this was only in accordance with what John himself had prophesied, saying ‘He must increase, but I must decrease.’ John was in prison about 120 miles from where Jesus was laboring so successfully. To be shut up in a dark dungeon of the kind usual at that time, and to have our Lord proceeding with his work, and raising no voice of protest on his behalf, and exercising none of his mighty power for his deliverance, probably seemed very strange to John – especially in view of his expectations respecting the work of the Messiah – that he would be a great earth­ly general and king, in harmony with the general Jewish expectations.

“We see how readily John might have permitted doubts and fears to enter his mind... He might have lost all faith in God’s providential dealings in the past, and all heart and hope for the present and future... This is indicated in his sending two of his disciples to Jesus, to make the inquiry, and also in the character of the inquiry. He does not say, Is this whole matter a farce, and are we deluded? but on the contrary his question was a sound one, and expresses the conviction that thus far the Lord has been leading, and that the only doubt in the prophet’s mind was whether or not, as he was the forerunner of Jesus, Jesus in turn, greater than he, might be the forerunner of some one else still greater and yet to come. And strictly speaking, this was exactly the case, for Jesus in the flesh was indeed the forerunner and preparer of the way be­fore the still greater glorified Christ of the Second Advent, who will accomplish the great and wonderful things foretold by all the holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3:21-23)

“Our Lord, it will be noticed, did not answer John’s question directly – he did not say there was not another coming and still greater work than that which he was per­forming, but he did give John to understand distinctly that the work he was doing was the very work which had been foretold in the prophets, and the proper thing to be done at that time. While John’s messengers were with Jesus a number of miracles were performed in their sight, and Jesus sent them back to John with instructions that they bear witness to him of the work of the Lord progressing in his hands, and to say to John that while the opportunities to stumble at Jesus, his work and his words, were many, and while many would stumble at these, as the prophet had declared (Isa. 8:14), yet a special blessing would rest upon all who would not stumble, but whose faith in the Lord would continue despite various disappointments of expectation respecting his work and their fulfillment’s – through misapprehension of the lengths and breadths and the heights and depths of the Divine Plan, which, as the heavens are higher than the earth, were higher than human conception could have foreseen. For instance, what Jew could have thought for a moment of the still higher than Jewish expectations of the kingdom ­of the spiritual kingdom class to be selected first before the establishment of the earthly kingdom...

 “All of the Lord’s faithful servants need to remember the same lessons which were thus forcefully impressed upon John: they need to remember that when sometimes matters turn out very differently with themselves than what they had expected, when they receive injuries, reproaches and oppression, as the rewards of faithfulness to duty and to truth, it does not mean that God has forgotten them, nor that they were misled in their prev­ious service to the Lord; nor does it mean that the Lord has changed his plan; nor that he is careless or indifferent respecting their condition. True, their first thought should be whether or not present unfavorable conditions are in the nature of chastise­ments or the results of any misdoing on their part, or failures to serve the Lord in his own way, but if they find their course to be harmonious with the Divine will and word they should at once rest their faith upon the Lord, and conclude that God knows better than they how to manage his own work.

Then while thankful to be used in that work for a time – perhaps for the good of others, or perhaps for their own training in the school of experience, and in the learning of lessons of patience and of faith..... The question arises, Was John imprisoned on account of officiousness – on account of trying to mind Herod’s business? Or was he imprisoned because of his faithfulness in discharge of that duty? Was it right or was it wrong for him to reprove the King, and to say to him that it was not lawful for him to take as his wife his brother Philip’s wife? There is no question that Herod was in the wrong, and that John’s expression on the subject was a correct one, and that Herod was living in adultery, but the question is, Was this any of John’s business? Did he need to meddle with the King’s affairs, and thus get himself into trouble? And if it was John’s duty to reprove Herod on this subject, was it not the duty of our Lord Jesus to have done the same, and in addition to have uttered a protest against the imprisonment of John, and in general to have raised a great hubbub over the injustice being done by the wicked ruler? And if John was right in this mat­ter, was our Lord Jesus wrong in not following the same course? Or if Jesus was right in not following John’s course in reproving Herod, does it prove that John erred in giv­ing the reproof?

“We answer that our Lord’s conduct is certainly to be considered as above reproach, since in him was no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth’; but this does not prove guile and sin on John’s part in following a different course. We are to remem­ber that in many respects John and his ministry differed widely from our Lord and his ministry. For instance, the uncouth skin-girdle which John wore was very different from the seamless robe which the Lord wore; and the Scriptures call attention to the fact that John lived a very abstemious life, ‘neither eating nor drinking’ ordinary food, but practicing a continual fasting or self-denial as respects these comforts, while our Lord Jesus came ‘both eating and drinking,’ attended wedding feasts and banquets made in his honor. The lesson is that these grand characters each fulfilled his own mission, according to the Divine arrangement, but that they had different missions. John’s mis­sion was pre-eminently that of a reprover and a reformer, and we are to understand that as a prophet he was supernaturally guided in respect to the various features of the course which he took. Our Lord’s mission, on the contrary, was a different one; he was gathering to himself those whom John’s ministry served to arouse to righteousness and to zeal to know and do the Lord’s will.”

We may have warm sympathy with John for his doubts that Jesus was the Messiah, be­cause John – in common with the entire Jewish nation – was expecting a great leader who would relieve them from the Roman yoke, yet there was nothing in Jesus’ ministry to indicate such action: He even ordered them to pay tribute to Caesar. (Matt. 22:15–21) “He hath no form nor comeliness... no beauty that we should desire him.” (Isa. 53:2)

“THIS MOSES” – ANOTHER TYPE

“When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount (where God was giving him the ten commandments on the two tables of stone), the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go be­fore us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what has become of him.” (Ex. 32:1) The setting in this Chapter of Exodus types the happenings of the Gospel Age shortly after the Apostles passed out of the pic­ture. It had its antitypical beginning in the third epoch of the Gospel-Age Church ­in the Pergamos period (Rev. 2:12), which spanned the years between 313 and 799 AD, at the beginning of which the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great embraced Christianity.

It is well to inject here a little of the history of this Emperor. His acceptance of Christianity is closely associated with his rise to power. After his victory over Licinius in 324, he wrote that he had come from the farthest shores of Britain as God’s chosen instrument for the suppression of impiety... aided by the divine power of God, he had come from the shores of the ocean to bring peace and prosperity to all lands.

He also fought the battle of the Milvian Bridge in the name of the Christian God, having received instructions in a dream to paint the Christian monogram on his troops’ shields. Eusebius tells of a vision by Constantine, in which the Christian sign ap­peared in the sky with the legend, “In this sign conquer.” These stories may be some­what fabricated and politically motivated, although this meant very little in a time when Greek or Roman expected that political success followed from religious piety. Thus, it should not be thought unusual that Constantine would seek divine help for his claim for power, and divine justification for his success in gaining his goals. However, the historian places much more stress upon Constantine’s subsequent development of his new “Christian” religious alliance to quite an extreme personal commitment to the Christian faith.

By 313 he had already donated to the Bishop of Rome the imperial property of the Lateran, where a new cathedral, the Basilica Constantiniana, soon rose. It was in these early years of his reign that he began issuing laws conveying upon the church and its clergy fiscal and legal privileges and immunities from civic burdens. He commented that the Christian clergy should not be distracted by secular offices from their relig­ious duties – “for when they are free to render supreme service to the Divinity, it is evident that they confer great benefit upon the affairs of state.” From the foregoing it is easy to understand why the church from 313 to 719 is styled the Pergamos period, because the word Pergamos means “earthly elevation”; and it was during this period that great temporal strides were made with the help of various Roman emperors. It was in 539 that Justinian also made great concessions to the church, thus in that year, be­ginning the 1260 years of papal exaltation and eventual political supremacy.

It was in May 325 that Constantine personally opened the Council of Nice with an address to that assembly. At that Council there was great debate over the Trinity; but the subject was really over the Emperor’s head, so he described it as a subject that was fostered only by excessive leisure and academic contention – that the point at issue was trivial. The Council was held just twenty years after Constantine came to power; and he was finally persuaded by the general assembly to banish Arius and two of his supporters from the Roman Empire, at which time the three of them went to North Africa and developed a thriving Christian colony there. Those three had contended that there is but “one God.” As we study the 32d Chapter of Exodus it is easy to under­stand the similarity of what occurred there to what happened in the antitype – in the Pergamos period from 313 to 799.

The strong hope and belief of the Apostolic Age was that our Lord would soon re­turn to claim His bride and establish the Kingdom for which He had taught them to pray, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth.” This belief found much encouragement at the Sea of Tiberias, as recorded in the 21st Chapter of John’s Gospel. There Jesus was prodding Peter over the three times he had denied Jesus on the night before He died. In that conversation Jesus told him that he would come to a violent end, upon which Peter pointed to “that disciple that Jesus loved” (the Apostle John) and asked the ques­tion, “Lord, what shall this man do?” This finds a much clearer translation in the Diaglott: “Lord, what of this man?” To which Jesus answered, “If I wish him to abide till I come, what is it to thee?” and verse 23 continues: “This report, therefore, went out among the brethren, that that disciple would not die; but Jesus did not say to him, ‘that he shall not die’; but if I wish him to abide till I come, what is it to thee.”

Jesus had charged the disciples with the duty of hoping and watching for His re­turn, but He had not told them how long that would be. If He had told them that it would be almost two thousand years before He came again, no doubt many of them would have quit. The Jewish Harvest had long been completed; and He had not returned. The second epoch – the Smyrna period of nearly 250 years had also come and gone, but He had not returned. Thus, it was easy to come to the conclusion that He intended to remain in Heaven – not come back to earth at all. Very early in the Pergamos period, the doubts and misgivings of many throughout Christendom now become accepted as fact, so the people appealed to the hierarchy and the priests to provide them with some powerful substitutes for what they had expected in the Kingdom (Up, make us gods), to prepare ways for them to go (go before us), saying that, while Jesus had brought them out of bondage to sin and error in Satan’s empire (brought us up out of the land of Egypt), yet they were at a loss to account for His whereabouts, condition and non-return (“we know not what is become of him”).

The hierarchy and the priests (antitypical Aaron—v. 2) told the people to do what the priests knew was a violation of their Divine understanding of the Lord’s Word, for it implied surrender of the Truth and its perversion into error, held by their churches, movements, powers and qualities, and to bring these understandings into the control of the hierarchy and the priests. Thus the priests took those proper under­standings into their charge and changed them into error. The hierarchy, at that time claiming apostolic succession, arrogated to themselves the custodianship of doctrine and practice; and in their arrogance perverted both; then elaborated them in great detail and subtlety by their keen minds.

From the year 100 (right after the death of the Apostle John) to 325 AD was a period of the rise of sectarianism and fundamental error, including union of the Church with the Roman Empire.  When Constantine accepted Christianity, he brought with him many of the abominable practices of pagan Rome. Following are the main errors of doc­trine and practice that constituted the antitypical golden calf (vs. 4-6): (1) The Church consisting of all professed Christians visibly organized under the hierarchy, must convert the world and reign over it 1000 years before Christ’s return (post-Millen­nialism). Augmenting this thought, the abomination eventually came to the full when Charlemagne (probably born in 742; died 814) forced most of the Christian world in Eu­rope to combine into one superstate, after which – in 799 – he invited the Church to dominate in civil as well as religious affairs, thus beginning the Holy Roman Empire. This arrangement continued for 1000 years to 1799, completing the supposed 1000-year reign of Christ, which history has now proven to have been a counterfeit reign; and it accomplished just the reverse of what the real 1000-year reign will accomplish when it comes fully into power.

Other errors that arose during or shortly after that time were the Trinity; Christ the God-man; The Spirit a person; worship of Mary and the saints as mediators, and of their relics and images; purgatory; The mass for the sins of the living and dead, and for release from Purgatory; celibacy of the priests; monasticism; a gorgeous ritual; asceticism; excessive penances; secularization of the Church and professed Christians; persecution of dissenters; Church made a civil power; forced conversion, etc. After establishing each of their errors the priests declared it to be a part of the creed of true Christians, as distinct from the alleged errors – actually truths ­that they displaced. Thus they displaced God’s true Plan and set up another – a coun­terfeit plan. They also began to agitate for a special mode of religious exercise ­which they claimed to be for the Lord: they embellished the religious service with singing and entertainment by special talented persons. (This same procedure accounts for much of the success of “successful” evangelists even in our time.) Speedily forgot­ten are the words of Jesus, “The kingdom of heaven cometh not with outward show.” (Luke 17:20, Dia.)

They made and kept vows according to their new religious creed and practices. They also entered into a thorough union of state and church, which had its beginning shortly after Constantine publicly espoused Christianity, and began to overthrow in war the heathen party in 313 AD. It was at Nice in 325 that the Apostles’ Creed was formulated, the same being repeated in many churches every Sunday even to this day. The evils of doctrine and practice that appeared during the Pergamos period – from 313 to 799 – were gradually enlarged and solidified during the epochs that followed. The Truth and its arrangements as first taught by Jesus and the Apostles were gradually very much changed or completely lost.

THE CRUSADES

The Holy Roman Empire may be said to have its official beginning in 799, but in subsequent years (during the Thyatira and Sardis periods), it increased greatly in prominence and power so that the true followers of Christianity were almost completely submerged. Their number was comparatively very small and often impoverished; they were forced to seek refuge in the catacombs to avoid detection and great persecution. In anticipation of this situation, the Apostle John wrote concerning the fifth epoch of the Church: “Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy.” The general Christian mo­rale at that time was at a very low ebb; the large majority displayed very little of the sublime characteristics that had been taught by Jesus and the Apostles; and this condi­tion is graphically typified in Ex. 32:25: “Moses saw that the people were naked (de­void of Christian qualities); for Aaron (typical of the priesthood) had made them naked to their shame.”

Much of the same condition exists today, with quite a few claiming to be “in the truth,” but they are not “of the truth.” (John 18:37) We are living in that “evil day” (Eph. 6:13), when “Perilous times shall come” upon the Household of Faith. People are very much confused over the different religious views being taught in our day; and they are more likely to accept any hocus-pocus rather than accept the Truth. “They will not endure sound doctrine... they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” They are “Ever learning, and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.” (2 Tim. 4:3,4; 3:7) But those who are “of the truth” will hear His voice. (18:37) Our Lord asked: “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith (Truth) on the earth?” (Luke 18:8) – inti­mating it would be scarce.

However, during the time of the Thyatira and Sardis periods of the Church great progress was made in military might and power to persecute all dissenters. It was dur­ing this time that the nominal Church – for it was Christian in name only – decided to institute a crusade to wrest the Holy Land from the terrible Turk. It could be said there were seven crusades in all, the first of which was known as the People’s Crusade, and began with papal support in 1095. It ended in complete failure, as did all the fol­lowing ones. The second began in 1146; also defeated.

The City of Jerusalem was completely subdued in 1187; and Richard the Lion-hearted of England tried to recapture it, but failed to do so. About this time the church mem­bers were urged to take the “Crusade Vow,” which would obligate them to join expeditions to the Holy Land. However, if the one making the vow later had a change of heart, or could not go for some special reason, he could hire some one to go in his place, the price for such substitution depending upon the ability of the person to pay. This was somewhat akin to the sale of indulgences which was prevalent in Luther’s time.

Then there were a couple of children’s crusades, the first of which was led by a boy named Stephen, who claimed Jesus had appeared to him in a vision. He was told the Holy Land would more readily be recaptured by love rather than by military might. He gathered around him about 30,000 children; but they fell prey to disreputable merchants, who shipped them to the slave markets in North Africa. Then in Germany a ten-year-old boy named Nicholas gathered about 20,000 boys; but they also were sold to the slave mar­kets of the East.

GENERALITIES

The various efforts to do what was thought to be God’s will, but were proven by time itself to have been nothing but “strong delusions” (2 Thes. 2:11), were prompted largely by the doubts and misgivings of so-called Christians, who thought the Lord was not moving fast enough. Such situations occurred repeatedly – after the work of most of the reformers. The first of these occurred after the Apostles passed away. They gave the Church complete instruction, and had it completely organized for the work it should do (See Eph. 4:11-13); but one of the proofs of human depravity is the rise of corruption after a season of good development in most human movements.

Not only was this true after the Apostles had died, but it was also true of just about every reform movement of the entire Gospel Age. The Lutheran Church today bears little resemblance to the one Luther started; the same may be said of John Wesley, of William Miller, and especially so here in the end of the Age, when new groups sprang up like mushrooms. Every system of error has some good in it; otherwise no one would believe it. This is even true of the Mormon religion, which is probably the most ex­treme of all the fanatical sects. Of all the Truth groups it is our firm belief there are many good Christians in all of them, with many doing excellent work in “preaching the Word.”  To his own Lord each man must stand or fall, so we do not attempt to pass judgment upon individuals in general. Thus we speak here of systems – and not of in­dividuals.

“Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore, get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding” (Prov. 4:7); and “In all thy ways acknowledge him and he shall di­rect thy paths.” (Prov. 3:6)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

=========================

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Sir:

My wife and I received your informative paper and enjoyed it very much. I espec­ially liked your Special Edition No. 121, “The Roman Church and its Little Twin.” I am an X–Jehovab’s Witness who is researching the Bible Student Movement – and would enjoy talking to some one in The Epiphany Bible Students Ass’n. Unfortunately we do not have your telephone number – only the P.O. Box address.

If it is possible to meet with anyone from your group on Friday the 29th I would love it. We will be staying in Orlando until Saturday. Our phone number here is 351-2688. Please call if you can.

In His love ------- (CALIFORNIA)

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

Dear Brother & Sister Hoefle: Grace and peace be multiplied!

Your good letter is before me, and as always very glad to hear from you. Yes, indeed our dear Brother Johnson is a blessing to us all! Those who knew him while he was in our midst will be so happy to see him in the Kingdom. It is truly something to look forward to. Deep thoughts were going through his mind when he looked at you, dear Brother Hoefle. When he said to you, Be faithful – you have truly been faithful, God knows. I am glad to know that you are all reasonably well, and I might say I also have been under the dentist’s care..... I am glad to report that my head cold is much better, for which I am thankful.

Well, my dear brethren, may our dear Heavenly Father continue to bless you all at the Bible House, and give you the strength to carry on His great work. All here send their best to you all. With warm brotherly love........

Brother ------- (NEW JERSEY)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in Jesus’ precious Name!

I apologize for not writing to you for so long – but you are always in mind. I received four packages from you quite safely – and I am quite busy distributing the literature. Everybody in my family is quite well and send regards to you and Sister Hoefle. Give my personal greetings to Sister Hoefle. I am always praying for you, that God will give you the Grace and Strength to carry on.

You brother in His service, ------- (ST.  VINCENT)

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

Dear Sir:

I have before me a copy of The Herald of the Epiphany paper. Was the Epiphany Bible Students Ass’n an offspring of the Jehovah’s Witness? or Seventh Day Adventists?

I do not understand where you stand on the Scriptures. Please send me Nos. 2, 6 and 121. Thank you!

Tremendously in Christ ------- (NEW JERSEY)

NO. 261: SOME THOUGHTS FOR THE MEMORIAL

No. 261

As previously announced, the proper time for observing the Memorial in 1977 is after six p.m. the evening of April 1. This conclusion is reached by knowing that the Vernal Equinox arrives at the 30th Meridian East (the one nearest Jerusalem) at 7:43 p.m. March 20; and the new moon nearest that time occurs at 8:33 p.m. March 19. Thus the first of Nisan is established at six p.m. of March 19. Counting then to the fourteenth, we arrive at six p.m. April 1; and any time that night after six p.m. is correct for observing the Memorial of our Lord’s death. We here at Mount Dora plan to observe the festival at 7:30 p.m., April 1; and we extend a cordial invitation to any of like mind as ourselves to join us on that occasion if they be in this neigh­borhood.

It will be noted aforegoing that we say “the first of Nisan” (which is the name of the Babylonian God of Spring), but that name was not known to the Jews when the Passover was instituted. The first month of their religious year (and the seventh of their business year) was Abib, which means ‘sprouting’ or ‘budding’ – very similar indeed to the meaning of Nisan. But Nisan is first mentioned in the Bible in Neh. 2:1 – just before release of the Jews from the 70-year Babylonian captivity.

Wherever it may be our privilege to be on that special night, let us keep in mind that it was exactly 3592 years since the Passover was kept that awesome night in Egypt in 1615 B.C.; and the ostentatious observance of the Passover by the Jews to this year is a very strong testimony that the Bible is the Word of Truth. According to human reckoning, 3592 years is a very long time; but it is only a little less than four days if we consider it from God’s standpoint. “A thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” (Psa. 90:4)

THE NEW MOON AND THE JEWS

It should be apparent from what we have written above that the moon does play a very important part in determining the date of “our Passover.” But this contention is true only as relates the beginning of the month Abib. Once Nisan (or Abib) is deter­mined, then the Bible tersely states that the Passover is to be held on the 14th day of Abib, regardless of the condition of the moon on that date. (Ex. 12:6) The moon is always substantially full at Nisan 14, although it sometimes requires a day or two for it to reach complete fullness. Therefore, the Jewish observance of Passover is often a day or two late, because they wait for the moon to become full for their “remembrance” of that great event.

It is in order here to keep in mind that the moon on this occasion represents the Jewish nation. In its coming to the full from the first of the month it well repre­sents the rise of the Jewish nation from obscurity in the days of Abraham to the pin­nacle of glory when Jesus came into their midst. “The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.” (Matt. 4:16) “A new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in Him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.” (1 Jn. 2:8) But, as soon as they had crucified “the Lord of Glory” the moon began to wane, and with it also went God’s favor from the Jews – until in the year 70 A.D. Roman Em­peror Titus captured Jerusalem and dispersed the Jews to the remote parts of the earth.

A House Desolate – Just before Jesus was crucified, He had made that fatal pro­nouncement upon the Jews: “Your house is left unto you desolate.” (Matt. 23:38) The “house” in this instance includes both the political and religious establishments, but especially so the religious arrangement. When Moses organized the religious ritual at Sinai, he, at the commandment of God, anointed and installed his Brother Aaron as High Priest. At Aaron’s death, his eldest son Eleazar succeeded him into that office; and this order was followed in part to the time that Jerusalem was destroyed – although it seems the Jews had departed in part at least from that set-up when Jesus came. How­ever, we are told in Heb. 5:4 that “No man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.” Strictly speaking, then, the Jews actually had only one High Priest, Aaron – and subsequent heads of that office were merely a succession of Aaron.

Inasmuch as Aaron was from the tribe of Levi, it follows that all his successors must also come from that tribe. But in the dispersion at the year 70 A.D. the “des­olation” was so devastating that the Tribe of Levi was completely lost at that time. Therefore, the Jews no longer can have a High Priest in the strict and all-embracing term of that word – because they know not which among them are from that tribe. Con­sequently, their Atonement Day and Passover are merely an exercise in futility, because they need a High Priest for a proper standing before God. However, it is commendable that they do the best they can to celebrate the Atonement Day and Passover each year.

A few days after the “desolate” sentence the Jews were shouting, “Crucify Him,” over Pilate’s objection. “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, say­ing, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. “Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.” (Matt. 27:24,25) And God took them at their word! In the seige of Jerusalem, according to Josephus, 1,337, 490 Jews were destroyed; and the prophecy of Jesus in Matt. 24:2 had a very literal fulfillment: “Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

It should be noted here that Titus was apparently a brilliant and God-fearing man. The Romans referred to him as “The darling of the human race.” Also, it is recorded of him that he was a close personal friend of Josephus. Titus did not want to sack Jeru­salem or destroy the magnificent temple, but the Jews would have no compromise with him, so he spoke to Josephus somewhat after this manner: You go over and plead with them; you are one of their countrymen, and they may listen to you where they will not listen to me. However, when Josephus made the effort it only aroused the ire of those inside the City one of them threw a rock that hit him on the head; and he was carried away as dead although he later revived, and tried to carry on as Titus had suggested.

However, the Jews would not be persuaded, and this left no alternative but to make a tremendous and violent assault, at which the Romans were expert at that time. Following is some of the quotation from Josephus: “The carriage of the materials was a difficult task, since all the trees, as I have already told you, that were about the city, within the distance of a hundred furlongs, had their branches cut off already, in order to make the former banks... Caesar gave orders that they should demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency... and so much of the wall enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison; as were the towers also spared in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind.”

Now follows some more from the same historian – some time after the foregoing had taken place: “While Titus was at Caesarea, he solemnized the birthday of his brother Domitian after a splendid manner, and inflicted a great deal of the punishment intended for the Jews in honor of him: for the number of those that were now slain in fighting with the beasts, and were burnt, and fought with one another, exceeded two thousand five hundred.”

Thus, their statement, “His blood be on us, and on our children,” was exacted in magnified fulfillment; and gives us a much deeper understanding of the prophecy, “Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her iniquity is pardoned; for she hath received of the Lord’s hand double (‘kephel,’ as of a thing folded in the middle ­‘I will recompense their iniquity and their sin double unto them’) for all her sins.” Inasmuch as the Jews had had God’s special favor for 1845 years, they would receive an equal period of time in reverse – “for all her sins.” Reading the record with an un­biased mind, we must come into agreement with the statement of 2 Peter 1:21: “Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.”

THE PASSOVER - TYPE AND ANTITYPE

It should be stressed that there was only one Passover; thus, only one type of “Christ our Passover.” The subsequent observations to this present year have simply been a “memorial” of that original one. “This day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance forever.” (Ex. 12:14) “And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Lord’s passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses.” (Ex. 12:26,27) “Thou shalt therefore keep this ordinance in his season from year to year.” (Ex. 13:10)

And just as there was only one typical Passover, so there is only one antitypical Passover – “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.” (1 Cor. 5:7) Jesus is the anti­type of the lamb slain in Egypt that night – “the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.” When He blessed the bread and the wine at that last supper, He said, “This do in remembrance (as a Memorial) of me.” The outstanding contrast between the Jewish Memorial and the one we keep is that the Jews still eat the lamb at their ser­vice; whereas, we use simply the bread and the wine. Nothing is said about wine that night in Egypt, but the Jews now use four cups of wine in their Memorial, the last one being taken “after supper”; and it was that cup that Jesus used to impress upon us the “remembrance” (memorial) of Him.

Be it noted that, while millions of Jews and Christians will in some formal cere­monies and in a perfunctory manner celebrate this great event of history, but few of either religion discern the real significance of the celebration. Could their minds be awakened thoroughly to its true significance, it would start a religious revival such as the world has never yet known. But, as the Apostle declares, “the god of this world” has blinded the minds of many, and even some whose eyes are partially opened he describes as being blind and cannot see afar off, or holden and unable to see the deep things of God in respect to these ceremonies, which have been celebrated in the world now for al­most thirty-six hundred years. However, it must be admitted even by the higher critics and agnostics in general that an event so prominently marked, so widely observed for so long a time, most have a foundation in fact. There must have been just such an occur­rence in Egypt 3592 years ago: the first-born of Egypt must have perished in that tenth plague, and the first-born of Israel must have been preserved free from it – all that observed the rule to remain “under the blood” – else this widespread celebration of the event would have been inexplicable.

Perhaps all of our readers know of most of the particulars connected with the institution: The Israelites held in a measure of serfdom by the Egyptians until, in Lord’s providence, the time came for their deliverance, how their masters sought sel­fishly to maintain their bondage, refusing to let them go forth to the land of Canaan. During the year the Lord sent nine different plagues – one after another – upon the Egyptians, relieving them one after another when their king craved mercy and made prom­ises which he afterwards broke. Finally Moses, the servant of the Lord, announced a great crowning disaster: The firstborn of every family in Egypt would die in that one night – in the home of the humblest peasant, as well as in the king’s palace, there should be mourning, as a result of which they would be glad finally to yield and let the Israelites go – yea, urge them to go, and in haste, lest the Lord should ultimately bring death upon the entire people, if their king continued to harden his heart and resist the Divine mandate.

The first three plagues were common to all in Egypt, including the district in which the Israelites resided; the next six plagues did not affect the district occu­pied by the Israelites; and the last, the tenth plague, was declared to be common to the entire land of Egypt, including the land of the Israelites, except as the latter should show faith and obedience by providing a sacrificial lamb, whose blood was to be sprinkled upon the sides and lintels of their doorways, and whose flesh was to be eaten in the same night, with bitter herbs and unleavened bread, the eaters standing staff in hand and girded ready for the journey – with full expectancy that the Lord would smite the first-born of the Egyptians with death, and make them readily willing to let the Israelites go, and with the faith that they would share in this calamity, were it not for the blood on their door-posts and lintels.

The Israelites were commanded to celebrate this as the first feature of the Jew­ish Law, and one of their greatest memorials as a nation. As a matter of fact, we find that in some degree the Passover is celebrated by Jews in all parts of the world ­even by those who claim to be agnostics and infidels. We might add here that the same tendency grips most of them for the Atonement-Day service also. We personally have known Jews who make no pretense of observing Jewish rituals, yet they would go to the orthodox synagogue on Atonement day – in sackcloth and ashes – with the explanation to us that, if that one day would make their father happy, they might as well do it, although we were forced to believe that the superstition was with them that “bad luck” might be their portion if they did not go along with the crowd. Inherently, they still have a measure of respect for it as an ancient custom.

But is it not strange that, with the bright minds which many of them possess, the Jews have never thought it worthwhile to inquire about the meaning of this celebration? Why was the lamb slain and eaten? Why was its blood sprinkled upon the door-posts and lintels? Because it was the commandment of the Lord, of course; but what reason, mo­tive, object or lesson was there behind it all? A reasonable God has reasonable com­mands; and in due time His faithful people should understand the significance of every requirement. Why are the Hebrews indifferent to this subject? Why does deep preju­dice hold their minds? We know, of course, that “blindness has happened in part to Is­rael” until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in – that they are now shortly to re­ceive the light and joy from a full understanding of this drama of the Ages. None like it has ever been imagined by the fiction writers; it is beyond the skill of any of them – which is another reason why we must conclude that it is a Divine operation and performance.

Although Christianity itself has the answer to the foregoing questions, yet few Christians have a clear understanding of them. This even applies to many of the Prot­estant ministers, who know about Paul’s mention of “Christ our Passover,” but do not seem capable of fitting type and antitype together. If the Jew can realize that his Sabbath of rest from the various vexations of life is a shadow of better things to come (Heb. 10:1), why does he not also conclude that the other features of the Law given through Moses are typical? Jesus Himself emphasized this point in very clear and understandable words: “Till heaven and earth shall pass away, one iota or one tip of a letter shall by no means pass from the law, till all be accomplished.” (Matt. 5:18, Dia.)

But “blindness in part” has befallen to Jew and Gentile alike (Rom. 11:25), as they fail fully to comprehend that the Passover lamb typified – represented – the “Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.” It needs no argument that the blood on the door-posts and lintel that fateful night in Egypt did protect the Jews that night from the fatal ravages of sin, and in the following day when they left Egypt (type of the world in sin) with a ‘high hand.” And just as the Jews were protected that night by their lamb, so have Christians throughout this Age been shielded from the fatal effects of sin by our Lamb “which taketh away the sin of the world.”

It requires no great imagination or profound learning to fit together the fore­going with St. Paul’s words in Heb. 12:23, where he speaks of Christians as the “Church of the firstborn”; and the words of the Apostle James (1:18): “We should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.” Self-evidently, this would imply after-borns and after­fruits. While the sprinkled blood obligated only the firstborn, yet all the other Jews were likewise delivered from Egypt in that performance; and that nation typified the entire human race that will eventually come into harmony with God during the Kingdom. “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” This is vividly shown in the miraculous protection received by every Jew in the passage over the Red Sea ­not one Jew was lost that day, although the entire Egyptian army was destroyed.

As stated above, St. Paul clearly and positively identifies the Passover lamb with our Lord Jesus: “Christ our Passover is slain for us; therefore, let us keep the feast.” (1 Cor. 5:7,8) And as the Jews were to keep their Passover once a year, so it is with the antitype – it is also to be celebrated once a year. It goes without saying that all who come into the Lord’s “house” need the blood of sprinkling, not upon our resi­dences, but upon the tables of our hearts. “The blood of Jesus Christ his son cleans­eth us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7) And, as the Jews ate literal unleavened bread with their lamb that night, so we also partake of our Lamb with the unleavened bread of “sin­cerity and truth.” (1 Cor. 5:8) Thus, we “put on Christ” as we grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus. As the Jews ate the lamb that night with “bitter herbs” (which whetted their appetites for more lamb), so the Christian partakes of his Lamb with symbolic bitter herbs – the punishing trials of life through the sins of our­selves and those of others.

Our Lord Jesus also personally identified Himself with the Jewish Passover lamb at the last Supper before He died. He gathered His disciples together in the upper room, saying “With desire have I desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer.” (Luke 22:15) As Jews, it was necessary that they should celebrate the Passover supper on that night – the saving of the typical first-born from the typical prince of this world. However, as soon as they had finished eating the lamb with all the pertinences, Jesus instituted a new Memorial upon the old foundation, saying, “As often as you do this do it in remembrance of Me.” (1 Cor. 11:24,25) And, while their Jewish neighbors, who did not accept “our Lamb,” would go on keeping the typical arrangement each year, as the faithful covenant-keeping Jews still do today. But that was the last typical Passover for the disciples; henceforth they would partake of the bread and wine “in newness of life” each year – with the eating of the actual lamb, etc., only a memory of the past with them.

Jesus was emphatic that the disciples should no longer keep the typical celebra­tion, as He took the bread and the wine and told them to use these “in remembrance of Me.” His blood would be shed the next morning; and the cup – the wine – would be a fitting reminder of what they had done that night. Of course, the apostles knew very well what their future Passovers would be: the bread and the wine once each year on the typical Passover date.

This practice was followed once every year as long as the Apostles remained alive, after which a great falling away occurred – as foretold by St. Paul in 2 Thes. 2:3: “That day shall not come, except there come a falling away first.” This “falling away” occurred during the Dark Ages – a time of such confusion that there is no reliable his­tory for much of it. However, the truth that Christ was the antitypical Passover Lamb persisted even then, though the celebration itself as given by Jesus that last night fell into disuse, the Mass taking its place. Although Protestants in general have repudiated the Mass, as being wholly contrary to what Jesus commanded, yet they are still somewhat influenced by it, as their practice shows.

Many Protestants will innocently ask (not grasping the connection between the Jew­ish Passover and “Christ our Passover”), Is not the Mass merely the Eucharist, the Lord’s Supper, under another name? We would answer that it is wholly different: The Lord’s Supper celebrates the death of Christ accomplished at Calvary, but the Mass rep­resents a new sacrifice for sins made every time it is performed. Our Roman Catholic friends believe that when the priest blesses the wafer it becomes the actual body of Christ in his hands, thus sacrificing Him afresh. High Mass is a particular sacrifice of Christ for a particular sin of a particular individual; whereas Low Mass is a sac­rifice of Christ for the general sins of a congregation.

Roman Catholics claim to believe in the merit of Christ’s sacrifice at Calvary, that it covered original sin and general sins that are past up to baptism; but they claim also that the subsequent daily sins, shortcomings, blemishes of every individual, require to he cleansed by fresh sacrifices of Christ from time to time. Thus, from their standpoint, as represented in the Mass, and as practiced by Roman Catholics and Greek Catholics and high Church Episcopalians, Christ is being sacrificed afresh all the world over every day. However, this is in direct contradiction to St. Paul’s words, “Christ dieth no more” (Rom. 6:9); He accomplished full sacrifice for sin in His death on the cross.

Once this matter is clearly understood, it requires no great imagination to rec­ognize that the repeated sacrifices represented in the Mass would have the general ef­fect of minimizing the value of the great sacrifice at Calvary as represented in the Passover and its Memorial Supper. Certainly those who come to regard the Mass as the cancellation of their sins could hardly be expected to look with deep concern and high appreciation as otherwise to the antitypical Passover – He that perished on the cross. Of course, the celebration of Good Friday continues to this day throughout Christendom, but the true celebration of the Lord’s Supper preceding it fell into disuse long ago, with its meaning almost completely lost.

Protestants generally have repudiated the Mass centuries ago, but they have sub­stituted the Lord’s Supper in its place. But, accustomed to the frequency of the Mass, they consider it but a matter of expediency how often the Lord’s Supper should be kept; hence, we find some celebrating it every four months, some every three months, some every month, and some every Sunday – usually in the morning; whereas the proper time is after six p.m. in the evening. Did they realize that Jesus is “Christ our Passover” – “the Lamb of God” – they would then give heed to Ex. 12:6: “The whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.” And it was in the evening of Nisan 14 – after Jesus and the Apostles had kept the Passover – that the Memorial (“re­membrance of Me”) was established by Jesus blessing the bread and the wine – “My body, My blood.”

Also, Christians generally have misconstrued the Lord’s words, “As oft as ye do this,” to mean, Do this as often as you please; whereas the words really signify, You, My disciples (all Jews are accustomed to keeping the Passover once each year), keep this antitypical Memorial – once each year on the same day and hour as you have done for the typical Memorial of the Passover in Egypt.

“By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.” (Heb. 13:15)

Sincerely your brother

John J. Hoefle, pilgrim

=========================

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – Was Joseph, the stepfather of Jesus, an Ancient Worthy?

ANSWER: - So far as we know, this question never came up under Brothers Russell or Johnson; otherwise we would quote their opinion rather than our answer. We have the same attitude toward both Messengers that Brother Johnson had toward Bro. Russell: If the Scriptures didn’t give him an unmistakable answer to such questions, he always took Brother Russell’s opinion rather than his own.

While the Bible does not definitely say Joseph was an Ancient Worthy, it would seem from the general setting, and the things said about Joseph, that he was one of them. Some might think that he would have been mentioned in the 11th Chapter of He­brews if he were an Ancient Worthy, but there were other prominent Ancient Worthies not mentioned in that Chapter – John the Baptist, Isaiah, Hosea and “the prophets” (Heb. 11:32). So the fact that he was not mentioned in that Chapter would be no cri­terion. The Lord appeared unto Joseph in a dream with instructions concerning Mary; and Joseph followed very carefully what he was told to do. (Matt. 1:20,21) Undoubt­edly he was faithful in carrying out all the Lord told him to do.

So far as we know, there is nothing in the records to tell us whether Joseph was alive or dead when Jesus died, but the commentators infer that he was dead; otherwise Jesus would not have given the Apostle John the custody of His mother. Since Joseph was faithful in all the Lord told him to do, caring for Mary until Jesus was born, then caring for Jesus until He became the anointed One – Jesus Christ, Jesus would not have ignored His stepfather to give John the custody of His mother. The Jewish family arrangement was a very strong one; thus, Jesus would hardly have told Mary to leave her husband, and make her home with John.

Matthew 1:19 says Joseph was “a just man”; and this identical expression was given concerning Cornelius (Acts 10:22). Galations 3:11 and Rom. 1:17 tell us that the “just shall live by faith”; and it would seem that Joseph lived by faith. Accord­ing to Acts 24:15, which uses the same Greek word ‘dikaios’ translated “just,” then he would receive “a better resurrection” – the resurrection of “the just.” He had the supreme privilege of caring for the boy Jesus; and this in itself was a great honor. Joseph believed God, and Gal. 3:6 says “Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”

=========================

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Please send me the papers you have concerning Jehovah’s Witnesses. Thank  you!

Sincerely, ------- (ALABAMA)

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

Dear Sir:

I was real interested in reading one of your leaflets. I would appreciate one copy of each. Thank you for this service.

Sincerely, ------- (FLORIDA)

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

Dear Mr. Hoefle: Greetings to you!

Many thanks for the literature and your informative letter. both are highly appreciated. I am curious about your split with the LHMM in 1955. What were some of the errors that brought about your departure? Have you written anything on these mat­ters? Oh, please send me a copy of the funeral service of Professor Johnson...........

I am a Reform Jew, and yes, I observe full New Year’s services from Rosh Hashannah to Yom Kippur. God be with you!

Sincerely ------- (CALIFORNIA)

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

Dear Friends:

My sister gave you my name and you have been very kind in sending me some of your bulletins. The earliest one I received was #192. In some of the bulletins I notice references to Pastor Johnson as founder of the LHMM, and to Bro. Jolly and his Campers. These references lead me to believe that there has been a schism along the line since my parents studied with Pastor Johnson. Do any of your earlier bulletins explain the differences of opinion between your group and those of others? I have recently become more deeply interested in trying to understand God’s plan, and I be­lieve an understanding and knowledge of both sides of such differences can be helpful.

I will appreciate any information you can send me. I hope my small contribution will be of some help.

 Yours sincerely, ------- (PENNSYLVANIA)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

I have been associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses for a number of years – or from 1962 to 1975. Frankly, it got to the point where I would become very upset at things that were said at the meetings and things written in the Watchtower – especially when the virtues of Jehovah’s Witnesses were proclaimed. Their actions were far from the lofty ideals presented. In my humble opinion the hypocrisy of the Jehovah’s Witnesses constant religious politicking is clearly far removed from the high ideals among the Witnesses, and thousands are leaving (I was told 400,000 in the last 5 years).

Especially do the more intelligent and reasoning Witnesses have a difficult time, and they are leaving as the dogmatism and intolerance becomes more unbearable – espec­ially the more enlightened ones. I feel I have wasted a great deal of time in the Witnesses and regret that I left college. But I understand it is a very common expe­rience for a Witness, once he becomes involved with the Witnesses, to leave his col­lege studies and later on regret it – even if he does not leave the Witness movement. A good friend of mine, a non-Witness, said that in a few years I probably would leave the Witnesses, and she was right. But she did say I should try to learn from it, and I feel I have – although it is hard not to be bitter. As I still have a strong spir­itual need, and I have enjoyed, and found helpful, your publications. Please send me the current issues of your magazine. Thank you very much.

Most sincerely, ------- (OHIO)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle: Greetings in the Name of the Father and His Son Jesus!

In the article of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, I heartily agree 100%! I have two of them (husband & wife) that come to my place to visit, and I return their visits to their home. I call them the “Jay Walkers,” because of their artificial behavior of Christianity; and, as of now, I have practically stopped my visits to their home. I’ve tried time and time again, to show them the errors of their beliefs, but I can’t make them see the light. They are so bullheaded that it is a waste of time to discuss the Bible with them. I gave them the history of Brother Russell, Rutherford and Knorr, but it just will not sink in. The trouble is, when anyone becomes a “speaker,” That’s it! It seems that I cannot do the work of God that will break that “iron” that’s keeping their minds from seeing the Truth. That “evil” was the dominating factor that caused the Israelites to lose their “Identity” as a nation..........

Enclosed is $-- to help keep your work alive and going, and may God help you also in every way. Amen! Yours in the service of the Lord, Brother ------- (ILLINOIS)

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

Dear Gentlemen:

I am very interested in studying religions, within the context of the Christian belief. I have a friend that gave me your address and so I decided to write you and find out about your organi­zation. Would you please send me a list of your publica­tions, as well as the addresses of any local Churches.

I have a few questions that I hope you will be able to answer. What do you be­lieve about Pyramids in connection with Biblical prophecy? What is your estimation of the writings of Pastor Russell? Any help on the above material will be most appreciated. Sincerely ------- (California)

NO. 260: THE PASTOR AND TEACHER

No. 260

On pages 84‑91 of the Nov.‑Dec. 1976 Present Truth, there is an attack upon J.W. Krewson because of his claim to being the Pastor and Teacher of God’s people. R. G. Jolly ridicules and castigates JWK for seeing himself in the Scriptures; then becomes quite voluminous in making the same claims for himself. Also, he attempts to cast John J. Hoefle in the same caldron with JWK; thus it seems timely that we should also become involved in this difference.

It is hardly necessary to remind the great bulk of our readers that RGJ is a self‑admitted crown‑loser; so we do him no injustice when we refer to him as such and in this instance we fully agree with him. Nor will it be necessary to offer proof for a subject in which we both agree. At least we have a common starting point. And, while he admits to being a leader of a Great Company group, he also contends that he is the Pastor and Teacher of God’s Household because of his appointment to the office of Executive Trustee for the LHMM. There is no more substance for this claim than was the claim of Judge Rutherford, that he was the Pastor and Teacher because he became the President of the Society. He claimed great honors for himself, with the Society being the Channel for God’s people. For both claims there is no solid foundation. Both – JFR and RGJ – claimed something that emanated from the “bottomless pit” – error.(Rev.20:1) Nor could That Servant or the Epiphany Messenger “see” from the Scriptures who would be God’s mouthpiece after their demise. If they could and did, then the Lord’s people would have no trial of faith after their demise: they could be satisfied with the succeeding “pope” as all faithful Catholics would be. But the real test of any Pastor and Teacher is whether he is teaching the Truth, and the manner in which he teaches it: “By their fruits you will discover them.” (Matt. 7:20, Dia.) Nor is there any Gospel‑Age precedent for RGJ’s contention. Never at any time during the entire Gospel Age did God ever appoint a crown‑loser to be Pastor and Teacher. If RGJ disagrees, let him produce just one Scripture to prove it. All the Gospel‑Age princes (Numbers 7) crown‑losers – perverted the truth (stewardship doctrines) entrusted to their care.

The Levites (crown‑losers) have always been divided into two classes – the good and the bad Levites, the distinction being that the good Levites revolutionized against the Arrangements only, whereas, the bad Levites revolutionize against the Arrangements and against the Truth also. And, when we see this, we can then know the real standing of such people. “By their fruits you will discover them.” Note the following from E‑4:132 (13): It is revolutionism or its partisan support against the Truth and its arrangements, and only revolutionism or its partisan support against the Truth and its arrangements, that manifests crown‑losers as such. The great touchstone of manifesting Leviteship is revolutionism or its partisan support, and nothing else.” (Emphasis ours)

And let us emphasize here that the Levites have had some of the brightest minds among men during their time, or any other time. We instance John Calvin, who had one of the sharpest intellects of the Age; and, specifically, “St.” Augustine – considered by some capable men as having the greatest intellect of the fallen race since Adam although neither of them were the Pastor and Teacher of God’s household. We repeat, let RGJ produce just one Scripture to contest this statement. On the other hand, we believe we make a very conservative statement when we declare that these very men have taught the Little Flock, which RGJ disputes in his over‑all statement when he declares that the greater (Little Flock) should not be taught by the lesser. Couldn’t any capable and faithful Youthful Worthy “teach” this “higher class” (the Great Company) the Epiphany Truth – not only the Great Company in Big Babylon, but also the Great Company in the Truth groups who have not been instructed in Epiphany Truth? Thus according to him, the Youthful Worthies should not be teaching the Great Company; and the Great Company should not be teaching the Little Flock. Should this “higher class” teach the Youthful Worthies that the High Calling is still open? And should the Youthful Worthies accept their teaching?

We raise the question now: All during the Epiphany, did not RGJ himself teach the Little Flock in his services to the various Churches? Of course he did! And he did that with the Epiphany Messenger’s approval – at a time when the Epiphany Messenger knew RGJ was a crown‑loser; and even after RGJ was manifested a crown‑loser in 1938, he was permitted to give discourses at Conventions – and in some of these discourses he gave some good instructions for all Classes, including the Little Flock, the Great Company, the Youthful Worthies and the Tentatively Justified. “Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel.” (Gen. 49:4)

And this raises a second question: When RGJ gives speaking appointments to his Campers Consecrated, are they not in a position to teach not only their own Class but all the Classes ‘higher’ than they? And of those Youthful Worthies that RGJ accepts with open arms, do they not all teach the Great Company when he gives them opportunity at the various Conventions? Is it not true that RGJ would send them to instruct (teach) the Great Company in the various groups, and even in Big Babylon where opportunity presents itself? We assume that RGJ still accepts the teachings of the Epiphany Messenger regarding the Youthful Worthies who came into the Truth between 1881 to 1916 – that they were privileged to bring many of the saints out of Babylon. How could they do that without instructing (teaching) them? These faithful New Creatures in Babylon were left there for a purpose until their “due time” to hear the call, “Come out of her.” But as soon as they were taught (instructed) in “present truth” they immediately came “out of her.”

It is always proper for a Truth‑enlightened Youthful Worthy to teach the Truth to those in error – refute the error and instruct them in the Truth, if they will receive it – in harmony with St. Paul’s counsel in 2 Tim. 2:24‑26, Dia.: – “…that they may be recovered from the snare of the enemy (Azazel), who have been entrapped by him for his pleasure.” To teach such persons is not only the privilege, but the duty, of any Truth persons – whether a Youthful Worthy or not. This applies to any group teaching error including the LHMM. Surely any Truth‑enlightened Youthful Worthy who opposes the errors emanating from the LHMM would gladly assist and bless their brethren in every way possible in harmony with Luke 24:47 – “beginning at Jerusalem.”

THE STANDING OF THE FAITHFUL YOUTHFUL WORTHIES

As most of our readers know, we have never attempted to magnify ourselves by claiming to be the Pastor and Teacher, nor by being pictured in the Bible; we have never thought it necessary. Our teachings are our credentials: If we are teaching the Truth, that will be sufficient to attract God’s faithful people who read our papers. In fact, our presentations have been sufficient to attract the attention of quite a few of the best supporters of Brother Russell and Brother Johnson; and we are sure they ask no more of us than that – the Truth! In this connection, we apply E‑7:186 to RGJ: “It is singular to those only who, failing to realize that all the Great Company leaders, as graspers for power and lords over God’s heritage, have the same spirit, and, like their kindred‑spirited brethren, prominent in the nominal Church (Lot seated at Sodom’s gate, place of prominence, Gen. 19:1) all through the Gospel Age, when their power was threatened, have found fault with the faithful shepherds of God’s flock (Abraham’s shepherds found fault with by Lot’s shepherds, Gen. 13:5‑13), and persecuted them because of their interfering with their selfish plans and works against God’s Little Flock.”

OUR OWN CREDENTIALS

At no time since Brother Johnson’s death have we claimed any official standing before the Church other than that given to us by the Epiphany Messenger himself; but that authority is clearly set forth in our Pilgrim appointment, dated October 11, 1942 part of which we quote: “This authorization gives the said John J. Hoefle the right and privilege of preaching the Gospel and lecturing on the Bible in any country in the world.” And in the letter which came with the Pilgrim appointment there is the following: “You can be assured that in this service you will have the special opposition of the adversary and those who have his spirit (specifically Azazel’s Goat – the crown losers while they are in Azazel’s clutches – JJH), and thus will have severer trials. On the other hand, remember the Lord is on our side and will give you special help and blessings, if you use faithfully your privileges of service.” Although during Brother Johnson’s life we had no special trials in connection with our Pilgrim appointment, the trials began in 1950 after the Epiphany Messenger’s demise – and more particularly in 1954 and 1955 when it became crystal clear that it was our duty to refute the errors emanating from the crown‑lost leader of the LHMM in his “path of error.” (James 5:20) The last specific instance along this line is our complete refutation of RGJ on his contention about Cornelius. (See our paper 241 for details.)

As Brother Johnson has so ably stated, When these crown‑losers fall into the clutches of Azazel, they talk all sorts of nonsense; and RGJ’s present condition and contentions clearly confirm this. He questions our authority for teaching the Truth to the Household of Faith, which includes the Little Flock, the Great Company, the Youthful Worthies and the Tentatively Justified. Apparently he has forgotten that we taught all these classes by discourse at Conventions, with the pilgrim appointment and approval of the Epiphany Messenger when he was with us. our pilgrim appointment gave us authority to preach the Truth in any country in the world, so RGJ’s statements concerning our authority to do so are simply some more of his antitypical “witchcraft” (especially deceptive false teachings). We have never claimed any more than being a preacher of the Truth – for the benefit of any one who wants to hear it.

And, when we see him talking such nonsense, we have the strong assurance that he is still befuddled by Azazel; otherwise he wouldn’t be making such foolish statements thereby making his condition manifest to all who still abide in the Truth. Even though the Youthful Worthies had no special leader while Brother Johnson was with us, he having charge of the Great Company, the Youthful Worthies and the Tentatively Justified who were with him during his ministry, he distinctly tells us in E‑13:31: “By the time this fruitfulness (‘the Lord visited Hannah’) will become the antitype of the finished picture there will be born three clean general Great Company and two clean general Youthful Worthy groups (bare three sons and two daughters).”

When Brother Johnson was with us the enlightened Youthful Worthies were with him, and the others were with other groups. According to the above quotation, there will be two clean Youthful Worthy groups and three Great Company groups. The Great Company groups, of course, will have Great Company leaders, and the Youthful Worthy groups will have Youthful Worthy leaders. Just how can any clean group – be they Little Flock, Great Company or Youthful Worthies – engage in any general activity without a leader? RGJ is now revolutionizing against this Epiphany teaching.

However, RGJ’s first revolutionism against Epiphany Truth was the night of October 27, 1950 after the funeral service of Brother Johnson that afternoon. At that meeting he confessed he was bewildered and confused by the death of Brother Johnson – because it occurred in 1950 instead of 1956, the time Brother Johnson had believed his death would occur. But RGJ received a ‘flash’ at four o’clock one morning before the funeral which told him that when the Epiphany Messenger left the earth there were no more crown retainers on earth – that Brother Johnson was the last Little Flock member to be glorified. So he pronounced the edict that all New Creatures who survived Brother Johnson were crown‑losers! He continues to teach that the death of a man manifests crown‑losers, instead of revolutionism – a gross and persistent revolutionism against the Epiphany Messenger’s teaching that only Revolutionism is the gauge to determine whether New Creatures are crown‑losers. It is the Truth and its Arrangements that manifest New Creatures as crown‑losers – the Truth and only the Truth, or its Arrangements. Heb. 4:12 corroborates this teaching: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two‑edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner (manifester – see Berean Comments) of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” So Brother Johnson was not presenting this doctrine of revolutionism on a parallel that didn’t mature – or on types but on the direct Scripture from the Word of God, as interpreted by That Servant.

Another ‘manifester’ was at the Jacksonville, Florida, Convention in 1955. RGJ was specifically asked at that time, Did Brother Johnson ever withdraw brotherly fellowship from you? His answer was an emphatic No! That was indeed the Truth! As long as Brother Johnson was with us he never withdrew brotherly fellowship from RGJ; he always gave him brotherly help, although he did withdraw priestly fellowship from him. So it is very clear now that ‘brotherly’ fellowship as distinct from ‘priestly’ fellowship, was never withdrawn from RGJ during Brother Johnson’s lifetime. As all brethren in the LHMM know, ‘priestly’ fellowship was withdrawn from RGJ when he openly manifested himself as a crown‑loser in 1938 – and we know, too, that Brother Johnson continued to give him brotherly fellowship and help after that.

The last resort of the abandonment procedure, which all crown‑losers must receive before they can get their cleansing, is to have brotherly fellowship and favor withdrawn from them. RGJ was never disfellowshiped from the LHMM, so this was not done in Brother Johnson’s lifetime: this was only done when God removed the Epiphany Messenger from our midst October 22, 1950, at which time all brotherly fellowship and favor were withdrawn from him. Since that time he has been on his own: he no longer had the restraining hand of the Epiphany Messenger to hinder him from drawing pictures and making types to suit his fancy. He immediately ostracized all brethren from the LHMM that still held on to their High Calling hope; which did him more spiritual harm than it did them. The New Creatures who continued with him had to admit to being crown losers, otherwise they wouldn’t be very comfortable with the brethren in the LHMM.

The Epiphany Messenger had warned the brethren that he couldn’t appoint a Pastor and Teacher – that only the Lord could do that. However, he saw from the Scriptures that RGJ would be a leader of the good Levites. But this didn’t mean he would be the Pastor and Teacher of the Household, anymore than the leaders of the bad Levites would make them the Pastor and Teacher. Any nominal Church preacher is regarded as Pastor and Teacher in his own congregation. When Brother Johnson was with us, he considered the Levites in his Movement to be good Levites, but that didn’t mean they would continue to be ‘good’ Levites if they were led astray by erroneous teachings. We can say the same for That Servant when he died: he left the only clean Truth Movement in the world. Was the Society a ‘clean’ Truth Movement when Judge Rutherford took over? However, That Servant’s death, as well as the Epiphany Messenger’s death, did manifest that all who said “Lord, Lord” were not the Lord’s faithful people. Good Levites can become bad Levites, just the same as those who lost Little Flockship by the skin of their teeth, can also escape the Second Death by the “skin of their teeth,” if they continue their downward course.

RGJ also emphasizes in this same Present Truth that the Youthful Worthies should take instruction from him. Would he have us believe that the Youthful Worthies should follow him even after they are aware of the fact that he has been leading them into error? He certainly did not believe that in 1951 when he specifically asked us to go to the Dawn Convention in Detroit, and do what we could to present Epiphany teachings (instruct them) so that they would be able to come into “present truth.” “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways”! (James 1:8). He is now not only revolutionizing in this particular instance, but against many sound teachings of both Messengers, more of which shall follow; but here we would insert something from E‑4:129: “After the Levites’ (Great Company – JJH) cleansing, they will doubtless partake of the Epiphany truths that are for them; for then they will be somewhat like the good Youthful Worthies, who are privileged to see and appreciate every truth except such truths as the Lord may desire to be limited to the priests… Now the understanding of the priestly matters pertinent to leading Azazel’s Goat to the Gate, delivering him to the fit man and abandoning him to Azazel, is withheld from them.” This probably accounts for the answer RGJ gave at the Jacksonville, Florida Convention in 1955. Apparently he then didn’t understand that he would have to have brotherly fellowship withdrawn from him, as a last resort before he could get his cleansing. And it may be that he does not yet understand the Abandonment process, despite the fact that we have made several attempts to explain it to him, and despite the fact that it is clearly set out in E‑15, page 525:

“As in none of the Great Company do these two forms of the rod prove sufficient fully to free their Holy Spirit from the bondage of developed worldliness, selfishness, error and sin,… the Lord resorts to a second set of untoward experiences,…He delivers them over to Satan,… for the destruction of the flesh,… Their delivery to Satan implies that they come into such a condition as the priests disfellowship them, and thus withdraw all brotherly help and favor from them.”

We continue to hope that he will make sober and sincere study of E‑15 on the Abandonment Process for all Great Company members, which includes himself – also as a companion study it would be well for him to study prayerfully the chapter on Two Houses Built and Tested (the wise and foolish builders) in Epiphany Vol. 5, pp. 473‑529

Following is a quotation from E‑16:125: “The crown‑losers falling into Azazel’s hands quickly upon the Priesthood’s withdrawal of all brotherly help and favor (which in RGJ’s case did not occur until the Lord removed Brother Johnson from our midst in 1950 – JJH); and in his hands they are being led into such excesses of revolutionism as will eventually make it undeniable even by themselves that they have been wrong in their whole course.” That the foregoing is at least partially true regarding RGJ is revealed by his own course: Just a day or two after the Epiphany Messenger’s demise, a “flash” came to him at four o’clock in the morning that there were no more saints left on earth. And he was so determined that his “flash” should be accepted as Truth by all, that he informed Pilgrim Eschrich that he must either accept this teaching or withdraw from the pilgrim work. And Pilgrim Eschrich, as is recorded of his kinsmen with respect to Jesus, “they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (John 12:43), he succumbed to RGJ’s ultimatum: he is still one of RGJ’s pilgrims, and joined him in his revolutionism.

RGJ’s revolutionisms against the Tabernacle are even worse – if possible. He now has tentative justification in the Camp – in a bedlam of confusion. The Gate to the Court is closed so far as new ones entering the Court is concerned; and in his Camp he has three different classes of people; namely, the nominal Church members, his consecrated Campers, and those that have been ejected from the Court – with no chance for any of them ever coming into the Court during the remainder of the Gospel Age. He also has a “narrow way” in the Camp – a new and weird teaching never seen by either Messenger.

Of course, all of the foregoing is a blanket revolutionism against the Two Distinct Salvations, which both Messengers taught must be kept separate if we are not to become bogged down in hopeless confusion. It is simply a replica of the confusion that existed in Big Babylon during the reaping period of the Harvest. mere is an elect salvation for the faith Ages, and a works (common) salvation for the next Age – after the New Covenant becomes operative.

It should be kept in mind that JWK is Pastor and Teacher to those who accept his errors; the leaders of the Jehovah’s Witnesses are Pastors and Teachers to their “dedicated” followers; and RGJ is Pastor and Teacher to all who accept his errors; and all of these Pastors and Teachers have the same identifying stripe of black drawn plainly across their chests: The Witnesses are instructed to refuse to accept any reading matter from us; JWK has instructed his followers to refuse to accept any of our writings; and RGJ has told his trusting henchmen to do the same. As for us, we read reasonably carefully the writings of all of them; and we grant our readers the same privilege if they are inclined to do so. We counsel our readers to place their writings alongside ours, then determine for themselves which they consider to be right. Not only on this point are these three movements alike, but also on each having a consecrated, or “dedicated,” class of Restitutionists sacrificing – the only reward they receive for such sacrificing will be restitution blessings, which all the world will receive if obedient and faithful during the Kingdom, without sacrificing.

Brother Johnson adopted the same course as we do now. When we first became acquainted with him in the early twenties, he knew we were reading the Watch Tower; and never once did he advise against it. Brother Russell even counseled his staunch supporters never to distribute any of his writings until they had first read them and had convinced themselves that he was teaching the Truth. And he was “that wise and faithful servant.”

Furthermore, RGJ has revolutionized against the teachings of both Messengers, who taught the “works” (Kingdom) salvation would be “to the Jew first.” Neither of them ever hinted at any other arrangement. But, according to RGJ his newly‑invented Campers Consecrated will be first under the New Covenant – after the resurrection of the Worthies. Of course, the only way RGJ can see his Campers at all is in his newly‑discovered “types”; and it should be kept in mind here that a type is never used (according to That Servant) to introduce a doctrine; it merely corroborates one already taught. This should not surprise us, when we read RGJ’s letter to Brother Russell in the Nov. 15, 1910 Watch Tower, wherein he admits his folly in manufacturing types; but it is clear enough he never did correct himself; he went right on with his “strong delusions.” After the Lord removed the restraining hand of the Epiphany Messenger, he has been permitted to make pictures and types – also receive ‘flashes’ to support his newly‑invented doctrines.

1951, 1952 OR 1976 ‑ WHICH?

On pages 86, 91 of the paper under discussion RGJ makes animated charges against JWK’s teaching activities; and on page 90 there is this: “The book of Ruth shows clearly that the Great Company is a higher class than the Youthful Worthies and that the executive, pastoral and teaching office has been given to the Great Company... in that Naomi directed and instructed Ruth – and not vice versa.” It would be most interesting to know just when this “flash” occurred to him – because this is a complete reversal of what he taught in the years 1951, 1952. We direct attention to pp. 9‑12 of the January 1951 Present Truth, where RGJ published a letter from JWK, wherein JWK is teaching every one who reads it, including RGJ himself. We would say the same for page 93 of the June 1951 Present Truth, where the question is raised about the validity of the Pyramid and JWK’s teachings on that subject. Here is what RGJ himself said about that statement: “Those who reject God’s word as to the Epiphany Messenger being the last member of the Little Flock would naturally also reject anything else God might use to corroborate it.” It is certainly clear enough that RGJ was accepting JWK as his teacher then! There is considerably more on this same subject in the July 1, 1951 PT, pp. 99‑105 under the caption “The Pyramid Witness,” etc.

Coming now to pp. 9 and 14 of the January 1, 1952 Present Truth, we call attention to a letter to RGJ from JWK, labeled as follows: “Bro. Russell’s Epiphany Parallels.” This letter makes great play upon RGJ being the Epiphany parallel to Brother Russell; and this is RGJ’s comment about it: “The Lord must have had a purpose in revealing this to Bro. Krewson, and he did the proper thing in presenting it to us. After careful study, meditation and watchfulness, amidst much prayer, and in view of many letters received from the brethren inquiring along these lines, we feel it to be the Lord’s will that we share it with the brethren, and therefore we do so, with the prayer that it may be a blessing to the Lord’s dear ones as it cheers their hearts and strengthens their faith and increases their joy at this further evidence that the Lord is with us and has not forsaken His people... We realize that the above letter and comments will bring added ridicule and persecution upon us individually and collectively, but we will count this all joy that we may faithfully do God’s holy will and have His smile of approval (Matt. 4:11,12).”

In September 1955 we wrote RGJ the following: “You said you would rather die than accept Brother Krewson as a teacher. Inasmuch as you accepted so much of his teaching for a few years, were you heading toward death then? Also, you accuse him of pre‑arranging dates, then planning his course to make them fit his parallels. Since he told you that you were paralleling Brother Russell for the balance of the Epiphany, can it be possible you yourself did any of that same arranging of parallels especially arranging your trip to England with the Bible Films in 1954, and feigning surprise when Brother Armstrong spoke of the 1914 parallel (See Sept. 1954 PT, p. 71, col. 1, par. 2) – although Brother Armstrong himself had already called it to your attention in 1953, so you had plenty of notice of it long before you even started for England?

It should be mentioned here also that during those few years after Brother Johnson died, when RGJ was blindly swallowing the “teachings” of JWK, he was then likewise being “taught” by JWK that he was “antitypical Zerubbabel,” and that he (RGJ) would have to defend every important feature of the Parousia and Epiphany Truth from attacks from other groups; and this also he greedily gobbled up – only to learn later on that that was all mirage. It is our understanding that JWK now has another close associate whom he has named as antitypical Zerubbabel.

It would seem to be in order here to quote from E‑10:588 (top): “The Epiphany crown‑losers also made such statements as make vs. 18‑30 applicable to the three Levite groups, as well as to the nominal church, and that because they constitute Little Babylon.” To be coupled with this is the following from E‑13:744: “They who dash the little sects of both Babylons against the doctrines of the Truth would be favored of God.”

Such teachings as the above actuate us in much of our exposures; and our efforts are in great disfavor with those whose evils we expose. However, we are assured of the Lord’s favor, and we regard this more highly than “the praise of men.” We have no wish whatever to follow a “multitude” to do evil. (See Ex. 23:2) As we review the record of RGJ over the years since 1955, we observe that he has suffered one crushing defeat after another, the last one being his hodge‑podge on Cornelius. His claim to be “Pastor and Teacher” has no standing, even to be mentioned, on the same pages with the Parousia and Epiphany Messengers, who gained victory after victory over their gainsayers. Surely, Isa. 54:17 fits them like a hand in a glove: “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that is raised against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.”

PARTNERS IN REVOLUTIONISM

So far as we know, both “Pastors & Teachers” still recognize the Epiphany Messenger as such, although they cast aside large portions of the fundamentals of his teachings, when it suits their purposes. One we specifically emphasize here is the Epiphany as a period of time. The Epiphany Messenger was very pronounced in telling us that the Epiphany and the Apokalypsis are identical – as acts and period of time they are synonymous. (E‑4, Chapter One) With this we are in full agreement, not just because the Epiphany Messenger said so, but because it is a clear Scriptural teaching. We quote 2 Thes. 2:8 from the Diaglott: “Then will be revealed the lawless one, whom the Lord Jesus will... annihilate by the appearing (Epiphaneia) of his presence (Parousia).”

It is our conviction that no sound Bible student would contend that the “lawless one” has already been destroyed. But, if he is still with us, then the Epiphany must also still be with us; because it is in this period – the last special period of the Gospel Age – that the destruction must occur. Yet one of these Pastors and Teachers (JWK) says we are now in the Apokalypsis as a separate period from the Epiphany, while the other one (RGJ) says we are now 22 years in the Basileia; but neither of them can harmonize his teachings with those of the Epiphany Messenger. “Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: For the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the earth.” (Hos. 4:1) “Who is wise, and he shall understand these things? prudent, and he shall know them? For the ways of the Lord are right, and the just shall walk in them; but the transgressors shall fall therein.” (Hos. 14:9)

Let us keep in mind that, when the Time of Trouble broke forth in 1914, the Epiphany was “in our midst,” even though there was an overlapping of 26 months by the Parousia into the Epiphaneia. Certainly there is no relationship whatever between that 26 months than the more than 22 years of RGJ’s overlapping; nor is there any harmony with JWK’s contention that the Epiphany as “the last special period of the Gospel Age” is now a complete thing of the past. If RGJ’s reasoning is correct, then we are 22 years into the Basileia – just as we were actually 26 months into the Epiphany when the Parousia ended. Also, his Consecrated Epiphany Campers was not announced until we were actually into the Basileia – according to him; so why doesn’t he call his newly‑invented (non‑existent) Class “Consecrated Basileia Campers”?

It has never been our wish to “sound a trumpet before us as the hypocrites do... that they may have glory of men” (Matt. 6:2). At the outset we made honest endeavor to publish the “wisdom from above... without partiality and without hypocrisy” (James 3:17); and that has been sufficient to attract to us some of the very best supporters of Brother Johnson. We instance Brother Roach of Trinidad (who had been Brother Johnson’s representative in that country from 1931 to the time of Brother Johnson’s demise); also Brother Cotton, who told us personally he was with us “all the way,” and would write a letter to that effect, but he died before he could do that. And there are several others we do not give personal mention because their relatives might feel sensitive about it. However, the following quotations from letters Brother Johnson wrote us have encouraged us to “keep on keeping on,” and which needs no elaboration from us:

“This explanation is given to you in confidence, with the distinct understanding that you will not give it to others. My confidence in your integrity and loyalty to the Lord’s word has moved me to give you what I would not even give the Church Class now... I do many things for you, my dear Brother, because of your faithfulness to the Truth, that I have not done for others.” (Oct. 31, 1947) And further from a letter of March 16, 1948: “Dear Brother, don’t worry about this matter from any standpoint. You know I love you, and I know you love me.”

Our Lord tells us, “If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:31,32) “The steps of a good man are ordered of the Lord: and he delighteth in his way.”

==========================

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Sir: Would you please send me a list of your current publications and information about your set‑up. Thank you! ------- (CALIFORNIA)

………………………….

Dear Sir: Would you please provide me with information about any literature you may publish. I am also interested in the background, the history and the doctrines of your organization. I would appreciate this information.

Sincerely, ------- (FLORIDA)