NO. 268: IN MEMORIAM

No. 268

It is now sixty-one years since Brother Russell left us; and, as promised in our paper No. 256 of last October, we shall now continue with some observations con­cerning him as gleaned from the book of Jeremiah, beginning with Chapter three.

In Jer. 3:1 there is the emphatic condemnation of Israel for their evil conduct, the same being pointedly applicable to apostate Christendom prior to 1914. And see­ing this very clearly, Brother Russell just as emphatically flogged Christendom in like manner. “Thou hast polluted the land with thy wickedness.” (v. 2) And for this reason the showers of Present Truth were withheld from them, causing them to consider that Truth as gross error. (v. 3) “The water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood (error) upon the dry land.” (Ex. 4:9) “Thou gavest them also blood (er­ror) to drink; they deserve it.” (Rev. 16:6, Dia.) But they asked the impudent ques­tion, “My father, art thou not the guide of my youth?” (v. 4) Yet the accusation is thrust back at them: “Thou has spoken and done evil things as thou couldest.” (v.5)

During the period of 1874 to 1893 God asked Brother Russell whether he had seen the evil deeds of apostate Christendom as they approached the state in every great kingdom and every energetic leader – any one or anything that showed promise of in­creased power and wealth for them. “Thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing.” (Rev. 3:17) This conduct reached a climax in 1893 Chicago congress of religions, where the idea is promulgated that it makes no difference what one believes so long as he is sincere – Combinationism of the worst sort.  Today we have prominent evangelists preaching the same thing: Join any religion you wish, just so you join something – a far cry from the Apostle Paul’s teaching: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” (Eph. 4:5) “Neither let us commit fornication (illicit union of church and state), as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.” (1 Cor. 10:8; Num. 25:1-9) But in spite of that evil the invitation came yet once more, “Turn thou unto me; but she returned not.” (v. 7); but “defiled the land.” (v. 9) Yet the invitation came once again – through a world-wide ministry of Brother Russell and associates – “Return, thou backsliding Israel ... for I am merci­ful.” (v. 12)

“A PROPHET UNTO THE NATIONS”

In our paper of last October on this same subject we offered some detailed com­ment in applying Jeremiah 1:5 to Brother Russell: “I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” So far as we know, Brother Russell never applied this prophecy to himself; but what he wrote, what he said and what he did clearly point him out as the antitype of the Prophet Jeremiah. Note the close similarity in many of the words, phrases and clauses in Vol. 4, The Battle of Armageddon, that are found in the book of Jeremiah. To substantiate this we now quote excerpts from Vol. 4 of the Scripture Studies:

“In this critical hour it is, alas! a lamentable fact that the wholesome spirit of ‘The Great Reformation’ is dead. Protestantism is no longer a protest against the spirit of antichrist, nor against the world, the flesh or the devil. Its creeds at war with the Word of God, with reason, and with each other, and inconsistent with them­selves, they seek to hide from public scrutiny.” (pp. 161, bottom, and 162, top)

And on p. 182, Brother Russell treats of The Great Parliament of Religions. “The Chicago Herald, commenting favorably upon the proceedings of the Parliament, said: ‘Never since the confusion at Babel have so many religions, so many creeds, stood side by side hand in hand, and almost heart to heart, as inthat great amphitheater last night. (in 1893) Never since written history began has varied mankind been so bound about with Love’s golden chain. The nations of the earth, the creeds of Christendom, Buddhist and Baptist, Mohammedan and Methodist, Catholic and Confusian, Brahmin and Unitarian, Shinto and Episcopalian, Presbyterian and Pantheist, Monotheist and Polytheist, representing all shades of thought and conditions of men, have at last met together in the common bonds of sympathy, humanity and respect.’

“How significant is the fact that the mind of even this enthusiastic approver of the great Parliament should be carried away back to the memorable confusion of tongues at Babel! What is not, indeed, that instinctively he recognized in the Parliament a remarkable antitype?

“The Rev. Barrows... spoke enthusiastically of the friendly relations manifested among Protestant ministers, Catholic priests, Jewish rabbis and, in fact, the leaders of all religions extant... He said: ‘The old idea, that the religion to which I belong is the only true one, is out of date. There is something to be learned from all religions, and no man is worthy of the religion he represents unless he is willing to grasp any man by the hand as his brother. Some one has said that the time is now ripe for the best religion to come to the front. The time for putting on any airs or superiority about his particular religion is past.’... Rev. Chalmers, of the Disciples church, said: ‘We cannot make out exactly what the Parliament proposes to accomplish... It is pos­sible, however, that the Chicago scheme is to get up some sort of a new and compound re­ligion, which shall include and satisfy every variety of religious and irreligious opin­ion. It is a big job to get us a new and eclectic religion satisfactory all around; but Chicago is confident.’

“It would indeed be strange if the spirit of Christ and the spirit of the world would suddenly prove to be in harmony, that those filled with the opposite spirits should see eye to eye. But such is not the case. It is still true that the spirit of the world is enmity to God (James 4:4); that its theories and philosophies are vain and foolish; and that the one Divine revelation contained in the inspired Scriptures of the apostles and prophets is the only divinely inspired truth.” (pp. 182, 183)

“The theme announced for the last day of the Parliament was, ‘The Religious Union of the Whole Human Family’; when would be considered ‘The elements of perfect religion as recognized and set forth in the different faiths,’ with a view to determining the ‘characteristics of the ultimate religion’ and ‘the center of coming religious unity of mankind.’

“Is it possible that thus, by their own confession, Christian (?) ministers are unable, at this late day, to determine what should be the center of religious unity, or the characteristics of perfect religion? Are they indeed so anxious for a ‘world ­religion’ that they are willing to sacrifice any or all of the principles of true Christianity, and even the name ‘Christian’, if necessary, to obtain it? Even so, they confess. ‘Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked and slothful servant, saith the Lord.’” (pp. 185, 186)

“The great religious Parliament was called together by Christians, Protestant Chris­tians; it was held in a professedly Protestant Christian land; and was under the lead­ing and direction of Protestant Christians, so that Protestants may be considered as responsible for all its proceedings. Be it observed, then, that the present spirit of Protestantism is that of compromise and faithlessness. This Parliament was willing to compromise Christ and his gospel for the sake of the friendship of antichrist and heathendom. It gave the honors of both opening and closing its deliberations to repre­sentatives of papacy. And it is noteworthy that, while the faiths of the various heath­en nations were elaborately set forth by their representatives, there was no systematic presentation of Christianity in any of its phases, although various themes were dis­coursed upon by Christians. How strange it seems that such an opportunity to preach the gospel of Christ to representative, intelligent and influential heathen should be overlooked and ignored by such an assemblage! Were the professed representatives of Christ’s gospel ashamed of the gospel of Christ? (Rom. 1:16) In the discourses Roman Catholics had by far the largest showing, being represented no less than sixteen times in the sessions of the Parliament.

“And not only so, but there were those there, professing Christianity, who earnestly busied themselves in tearing down its fundamental doctrines – who told the representative heathen of their doubts as to the inerrancy of the Christian Scriptures; that the Bible accounts must be received with a large degree of allowance for fallibility; and that their teachings must be supplemented with human reason and philosophy, and only accepted to the extent that they accord with these. There were those there, professing to be Orthodox Christians, who repudiated the doctrine of the ransom, which is the only founda­tion of true Christian faith, others, denying the fall of man, proclaimed the opposite theory of evolution, – that man never was created perfect, that he never fell, and that consequently he needed no redeemer; that since his creation in some very low condition, far removed from the ‘Image of God,’ he has been gradually coming up, and is still in the process of an evolution whose law is the survival of the fittest. And this, the very opposite of the Bible doctrine of ransom and restitution, was the most popular view.” (pp. 187,188)

“Said the Rev. Dr. Rexford of Boston (Universalist): ‘I would that we might all confess that a sincere worship, anywhere and everywhere in the world, is a true worship... The unwritten but dominant creed of this hour I assume to be that, whatever wor­shiper in all the world bends before The Best he knows, and walks true to the purest light that shines for him, has access to the highest blessings of heaven.’

“He surely did strike the key-note of the present dominant religious sentiment; but did the Apostle Paul so address the worshipers of ‘The Unknown God, on Mars Hill? Or did Elijah thus defend the priests of Baal? Paul declares that the only access to God is through faith in Christ’s sacrifice for our sins; and Peter says, ‘There is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4:12; 17:23-31).

“The Rev.  James Devine of New York City said: ‘We are brought now to another funda­mental truth in Christian teaching, the mysterious doctrine of atonement. Sin is a fact which is indisputable.  It is universally recognized and acknowledged... God cannot tol­erate sin or temporize with it or make a place for it in his presence. He cannot parley with it; he must punish it. He cannot treat with it; he must try it at the bar. He cannot overlook it; he must overcome it. He cannot give it a moral status; he must visit it with the condemnation it deserves., (P. 198)

“‘Christianity must speak in the name of God. To him it owes its existence.... It has no philosophy of evolution to propound.’ (p. 199) ‘It speaks, then, to other re­ligions with unqualified frankness and plainness, based on its own incontrovertible claim to a hearing... All this it does with a superb and unwavering tone of quiet in­sistence. It often presses its claim with argument, appeal and tender urgency; yet in it all and through it all should be recognized a clear, resonant, predominant tone of uncompromising insistence, revealing that supreme personal will which originated Chris­tianity, and in whose name it ever speaks...’ (pp. 201,202)

“In marked contrast with the general spirit of the Parliament was also the dis­course of Mr. Grant, of Canada: ‘It seems to me that we should begin this Parliament of Religions, not with a consciousness that we are doing a great thing, but with an humble and lowly confession of sin and failure. Why have not the inhabitants of the world fallen before the truth? The fault is ours. The Apostle Paul, looking back centuries of marvelous, God-guided history, saw as the key to all its maxims this: that Jehovah had stretched out his hands all day long to a disobedient and gainsaying people; that, although there was always a remnant of the righteous, Israel as a nation did not under­stand Jehovah, and therefore failed to understand her own marvelous mission. If St. Paul were here today would he not utter the same sad confession with regard to the nine­teenth century of Christendom? Would he not have to say that we have been proud of our Christianity, instead of allowing our Christianity to humble and crucify us; that we have boasted of Christianity as something we possessed, instead of allowing it to possess us; that we have divorced it from the moral and spiritual order of the world, instead of seeing that it is that which interpenetrates, interprets, completes and verifies that order; and that so we have hidden its glories and obscured its power. All day long our Savior has been saying, ‘I have stretched out my hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people. But the only one indispensable condition of success is that we recognize the cause of our failure, that we confess it, with humble, lowly, penitent and obedient minds, and that with quenchless Western courage and faith we now go forth and do otherwise.’

“Would that these sentiments had found an echo in the great Parliament! – but they did not.  On the other hand, it was characterized by great boastfulness and to the ‘mar­velous religious progress of the nineteenth century’; and Count Bernstorff’s first im­pression, that it meant a bond compromise of Christian principles and doctrine, was the correct one, as the subsequent sessions of the Parliament proved. (pp. 203,204)

“The confident and assertive attitude of Catholicism and the various heathen re­ligions was in marked contrast with the skepticism of Protestant Christianity. Not a sentence was uttered by any of them against the authority of their sacred books; they praised and commended their religions, while they listened with surprise to the skepti­cal and infidel discourses of Protestant Christians against the Christian religion and against the Bible, for which even the heathen showed greater respect.” (p. 204)

“As evidence of the surprise of the foreigners on learning of this state of things among Christians, we quote the following from the published address of one of the dele­gates from Japan at a great meeting held in Yokohama to welcome their return and to hear their report: ‘When we received the invitation to attend the Parliament of Religions, our Buddhist organization would not send us as representatives of the body.  The great majority believed that it was a shrewd move on the part of Christians to get us there and then hold us up to ridicule or try to convert us. We accordingly went as individ­uals. But it was a wonderful surprise which awaited us. Our ideas were all mistaken.  The Parliament was called because the Western nations have come to realize the weakness and folly of Christianity, and they really wished to hear from us of our religion, and to learn what the best religion is. There is no better place in the world to propagate the teachings of Buddhism than America. (We observe here that some heathen religions – sat­urated with spiritism – are presently making great progress here in America, eighty years after Volume 4 was written.—JJH) Christianity is merely an adornment of society in America. It is deeply believed by very few. The great majority of Christians drink and commit various gross sins, and live very dissolute lives, although it is a very com­mon belief and serves as a social adornment. Its lack of power proves its weakness. The meetings showed the great superiority of Buddhism over Christianity, and the mere fact of calling the meetings showed that the Americans and other Western people had lost their faith in Christianity and were ready to accept the teachings of our superior re­ligion.’

“It is no wonder that a Japanese Christian said, at the close of the address, ‘How could American Christians make so great a mistake as to hold such a meeting and injure Christianity as these meetings will do in Japan?’ (p. 105)

“The closing sentiments of the great Parliament show how determined is this spirit of compromise an the part of Protestant Christianity.  So desperate are the straits to which the judgment of this day has driven them, that they hail with the greatest enthus­iasm the least indication of a disposition toward union even on the part of the very grossest forms of heathenism. (p. 233)

“But while the general impression created by the great Parliament was that it was the first step, and a long one, toward a realization of the angel’s message at the birth of Christ, of peace on earth and good will toward men, rightly viewed it was another man­ifestation of the faithlessness of Christendom. Surely, as saith the prophet, ‘The wis­dom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid., (Isa. 29:14) And again we hear him say, ‘Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces; and give ear, all ye of far countries: gird (bind) your­selves (together) and ye shall be broken in pieces. Take counsel together, and it shall come to naught; speak the word (for Unity) and it shall not stand.’ (Isa. 8:9,10)

“With the Psalmist we would again propound the question, ‘Why do the people imagine a vain thing? (Why do they cry Peace! Peace! when there is no peace?) The kings of the earth (civil and ecclesiastical) set themselves and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure., (Psa. 2:1-5)

“When spiritual Israel now, like fleshly Israel anciently – abandon his Word and his leading, and seek to ally themselves with the nations that know not God, and to blend di­vine truth with the world’s philosophies, they take such steps at a peril that they do not realize; and they would do well to mark God’s recompenses to his ancient people, and take warning.” (pp. 238, 239)

SUMMATION

The foregoing is merely selected excerpts from Vol. 4, The Battle of Armageddon; but we continue now with a few paragraphs from the author’s foreword dated October 1, 1916:

“The first edition of this volume was published in 1897 (80 years ago, yet it sounds as though it were written this year – JJH). It relates to the closing epoch of this Gospel Age, the overlapping between it and the New Dispensation – a period which brings to the world wonderful blessings, which, in turn, because of unpreparedness of heart, more and more become causes of friction, discontent, trouble. If the blessings of the last 42 years (from 1874 to 1916) were to continue at the present rate of increase, the discontent of humanity would likewise increase (the evidence of which is presently about us in unmis­takable current events – JJH), and the very purpose of God in the establishment of Mes­siah’s Kingdom and the blessing of humanity through it, would be frustrated.

“Describing our day in the prophecy of Daniel, our Lord says, “Many shall run to and fro and knowledge shall be increased. The wise shall understand, and there shall be a time of trouble such as was not since there was a nation.” (Dan. 12:1-4, 10) In other words, the increase of knowledge is responsible for the increase of discontent and fear which are bringing Armageddon, or the Day of Vengeance of God, upon the whole world.”

Even among the better intellects of men – not instructed in Present Truth – some see this sore developing; and some of them admit their helplessness to provide a cure. We ourselves know that the only cure will be the fruition of the Lord’s Prayer, “Thy king­dom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven.” As we say once more God bless his memory, we close with the quotation of poetry that was published in the Nov. 15, 1916 Watch Tower as a tribute to him!

ECCE HOMO!

“Loved and hated! Revered and reviled!

Spurned and courted! Flattered, defiled!

With never a falter and never a frown

He kept to his moorings, and laid his life down

In the place where God put him.  What more can be said

For soldier or hero? For living or dead?

He wept with the anguished; he smiled with the glad;

He lifted the fallen; he heartened the sad;

He pitied the sinner, inspired the saint;

He strengthened the feeble, recovered the faint.

God gave him a Message — he gave it to men;

He patiently told it again and again.

“When men’s eyes were blinded and ears could not hear,

And men’s souls were stunted by folly or fear,

When minds were beclouded by dullness or doubt

He maneuvered the Message and turned it about

Till ‘the wayfaring man, though a fool’, could behold

And hear the glad Gospel he patiently told.

And yet will like rabble as stood by the Cross,

Not knowing their folly, not sensing their loss,

Flouting and scouting and wagging their head

Stand by in contempt while we weep o’er our dead,

Dishonoring the prophet of this, their own time.

And crowning him saint when the World sees their crime.

“Behold now the Man? — Or wait world-old way

To pay him the tribute we owe him today?

Stand reverently now, with uncovered head,

And look at ‘that Servant’ and honor the dead!

A man has gone from us, leaving none in his place,

Yet his Message of Truth men can never efface.

He’d the mind of a master, the heart of a child,

The courage of Caesar, a soul undefiled.

He’d the love of a father, a shepherd’s kind care,

The faults of a human and sympathy rare.

He lifted a standard and held it up high.

He lived — ready to live and ready to die!”

While we consider the office and work of the Parousia Messenger were much more important than that done by the Epiphany Messenger, we would stress our warm approval and appreciation of his character and the work he did. He valiantly and tenaciously retained and defended the Parousia Truth as given us through Brother Russell, and built his Epiphany structure upon that Truth. He emphasized that advancing Truth is not intended to destroy fundamental Truth already established, but simply enlarges and strengthens the Truth we already have; and we know from our own personal and intimate association with him that he was fully sincere in that belief. We were close personal friends and co-workers together from early in the Epiphany until the day of his death and we are indebted to him for much of our understanding on Jeremiah. So we say of him also, God bless his memory! We honor these faithful servants when we keep the faith “once delivered unto the saints.” God honored them by making them His mouth­pieces, and it is our pleasure and privilege to honor whom God honors.

Sincerely your brother,

John J.  Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – Does That Servant teach that the Epiphany and the “Time of Trouble” are one and the same, as does the Epiphany Messenger?

ANSWER: – Yes, That Servant teaches the same as the Epiphany Messenger on the “Time of Trouble.” Both teach that “The Time of Trouble” began in its wide sense in 1874, but in its narrow sense the “Time of Trouble” began in 1914 when the World War started. In its “narrow sense” – beginning the destruction of Christendom and the Nom­inal Church – the Epiphany and the “Great Tribulation” are one and the same. As most Truth people know, Sodom types Christendom and the Nominal Church, and Egypt types the world of mankind – this “present evil world.” (Rev. 11:8—See Berean Comments)

In “The Battle of Armageddon”. Parousia book 4, is this: “Her destruction will have a beginning by the end of the appointed “Times of the Gentiles” – 1914.” And on p. 158 of this book: “These (the Little Flock—JJH) have no share in the judgment of great Babylon, but are previously enlightened and called out of her. (Rev. 18:4)” And from the Reprints we quote the following:

“To the very best of our ability we have endeavored to make clear that the parousia of our Lord is wholly different from His epiphaneia. Both of these Greek words are translated ‘coming’ in our common Bible, but in the Greek they have very different sig­nifications. The word parousia signifies presence, but does not signify any outward manifestation of that presence. It is used in respect to the first stage of the second advent, in which our Lord is said to come “as a thief in the night” to reckon with his own servants and to take the faithful of them with Him to the heavenly mansion or condi­tion prepared for them.

“Our Lord’s parousia and the gathering of the elect, we understand, has been in progress since October, 1874. It will continue until all of the “elect” shall have been gathered and glorified. In one sense our Lord will continue to be present as the world’s King to the conclusion of the Millennial Age; but His parousia, in the sense of secrecy of presence, will terminate when, as the Scriptures, declare, ‘He shall be revealed in flaming fire (judgments), taking vengeance on all who will not obey the truth,’ but enlightening and revivifying all who will hear and, to the extent of their opportunity, obey His message. The parousia is to the church and for the church only. The epiphaneia or apokalupsis of the Lord in power and great glory is not to the church, nor for the church, but to the world and for the world.” (Reprints 4543, bottom)

“Emphasizing the suddenness with which the calamity will overtake the world, Jesus said that on the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained down fire and brimstone from heaven; and He declared that thus it will be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed. The Greek text shows a difference between the parousia, or presence, of Christ before the time of trouble, and the later epiphaneia, or revealing,” (Reprints 5456, top, col. 2, par. 2)

“The Scriptures indicate that the Gentile governments will receive from their own peoples their first notice that their lease of power has expired. The people will take note of the sign of the Son of Man in the heavens. The judgments of the Lord will be­gin to be manifest in the world, and will run counter to many of their interests. This manifestation of His presence is Scripturally called the epiphaneia, the shining forth, the revealment, of the King of Glory. ‘He shall be revealed in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ (2 Thes. 1:7-10) As a result, the nations of earth will be broken to pieces like a potter’s vessel.—Psa. 2:8,9” – (Reprints 5527, col. 1, top)

There is more from That Servant that will prove that the Epiphany Messenger simply elaborated on his teachings regarding the “Time of Trouble,” or the Great Tribulation, as the Epiphany period, but what we have given will suffice for now. Quite a few of the brethren have lost sight of this Truth – even the LHMM, founded by the Epiphany Messenger, now teaches that we are in the beginning Basileia since 1954 – the overlapping of the Epiphany – when three major stages of the Great Tribulation are yet future. one section of the Epiphany brethren teaches that there are four periods – the Parousia, Epiphany, Apokalypse (a separate period) and the Basileia – something never taught by Brothers Russell and Johnson; nor do the Scriptures support this claim. “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing (the Epiphany) and his kingdom (the Basileia).” The way the Apokalypsis brethren teach, this text should read: “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing (the Epiphany) and at his revealing, or Apokalypsis (a separate period from his “appearing”) and his king­dom (Basileia).”

To some extent the LHMM teaches four periods of the Lord’s Second Advent – the Parousia, the Epiphany, the “Overlapping,” which will witness three more severe stages of the Great Tribulation, as well as the annihilation of the Man of Sin (2 Thes. 2:8), and the Basileia. Their “overlapping” has no similarity to the overlapping of the Pa­rousia of 26 months (1914 to Nov. 1916).  As it is now more than 22 years overlapping, and we are not yet in Armageddon, the second stage of the Great Tribulation, with An­archy and Jacob’s trouble still future after that.

We are living in the day when “they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” (2 Tim. 4:3,4) Some of the Lord’s people who have received present truth are now setting much of it aside for opinions of their own.  Some now say the end of the “Times of the Gen­tiles” is still future, and we are not in the “Time of Trouble” since 1914 - although some of the thinking worldlings realize the world is in a “Time of Trouble” such as has never been before.  Some deny our Lord’s presence; the Jehovah’s Witnesses are teaching that Armageddon will destroy not only this present system of things, but also annihilate all who do not join with them before Armageddon.  This is “bad news” to those whose eyes are blinded (?) and do not accept their teachings.  They teach that the world is not so blinded today, as not to be able to recognize the truth (?) they are now teaching - that when they have had a chance to “learn of them,” and don’t accept them, it will be their last chance.  This is much the same as the Papacy has taught: You must accept us, or receive eternal torment!

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Sir:

Please send me the following: 1. The Resurrection of the Dead; 2. Two Distinct Salvations; 3. The Three Babylons; 4. God’s Great Sabbath Day; 5. The Great Reformer.

Thank you! ------- (SOUTH CAROLINA)

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

Dear Sirs:

I would appreciate receiving whatever information you can send me about your Bible Students. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

  Yours very truly ------- (MARYLAND)

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

Dear Brother Hoefle:

I do enjoy your bulletins, and am sending a small donation to help defray ex­penses. I will try to make my small donations more frequently in the future.

My best wishes to you and yours. Sincerely, ------- (PENNSYLVANIA)

PS – Please note change of address.

NO. 267: A MAGNIFICENT TYPE - (PART TWO)

No. 267

In our paper No. 265 we offered brief discussion leading up to the Passover; but we now go back to some of the things preceding that great event. The arrival of Moses in Egypt, when he was eighty years old, types Jesus returning at His second ad­vent – to deliver first of all His faithful followers from antitypical Egypt; and the arrival of Aaron with Moses types the faithful followers of Jesus at the second advent in their capacity of mouthpieceship for Jesus. Knowing as we do that “the Lord is that spirit” (2 Cor. 3:17), it becomes readily apparent that He would speak through human agencies upon His return to earth; and in due course “That Servant” was maneuvered into the position of spokesman to declare the purposes of that return.

This is typically set forth beginning with Chapter five of Exodus; and, since type and antitype must correspond in every detail, we should expect to glean a wealth of understanding from the things done typically by Moses and Aaron. Moses and Aaron went first to the elders of Israel to inform them that “the Lord looked upon their af­fliction” (Ex. 4:31), which typified that the Church’s first work at the second advent would be with the leaders of the Church. The first public work done in the Parousia was the cry, “Behold the bridegroom” (Matt. 25:6) – from 1877 to 1878. In a literary way this was done through the magazine, The Herald of the Morning, by the small book, The Three Worlds, and with the tract, The Object and Manner of our Lord’s Return. All of these writings were augmented by public lectures, the literature being circulated by pilgrim speakers and by volunteers.

It was further greatly enhanced by gaining an understanding of the sixteenth Chap­ter of Leviticus. The unfolding of this great type at first staggered even Bro. Rus­sell, so he called together the leading lights of the time, who discussed the interpre­tation for eight days, at the end of which time, having been unable to find any flaws in it, they put their stamp of approval on it and began to circulate it among the breth­ren. Pharaoh’s defiance of Moses – “Who is the Lord that I should obey his voice?” (v. 5:2) – typifies the attitude of the leaders in Great Babylon in refusing to accept the truths contained in those publications.

MOSES THE EMANCIPATOR

Inasmuch as Moses is the outstanding man in liberating the Jews from Egyptian slavery, it would seem in order here to offer some detail about this remarkable, ingen­ious and magnetic personality – details which may be gleaned from secular writings, but not found in the Bible.

The Bible does tell us that the baby Moses was rescued from the River Nile by Pha­raoh’s daughter, but it is for the historian Josephus to tell us that her name was Ther­muthis, and we quote from him further on the subject:

“Thermuthis was the king’s daughter. She was now diverting herself by the banks of the river; and seeing a cradle borne along by the current, she sent some that could swim, and bid them bring the cradle to her. When those that were sent on this errand came to her with the cradle, and she saw the little child, she was greatly in love with it, on account of its largeness and beauty; for God had taken such great care in the formation of Moses, that he caused him to be thought worthy of bringing up, and providing for, by all those that had taken the most fatal resolutions, on account of the dread of his nativity, for the destruction of the rest of the Hebrew nation. Thermuthis bid them to bring her a woman that might afford her breast to the child; yet would not the child admit of her breast, but turned away from it, and did the like to many other women. “Now Miriam was by when thishappened, not to appear to be there on purpose, but only as staying to see the child, and she said, ‘It is in vain that thou, 0 Queen, call­est for these women for the nourishing of the child, who are no way of kin to it; but still, if thou wilt order one of the Hebrew women to be brought, perhaps it may admit the breast of one of its own nation.’ Now since she seemed to speak well, Thermuthis bid her procure such a one, and to bring one of those Hebrew women that gave suck. So when she had such authority given her, she came back and brought the mother, who was known to nobody there. And now the child gladly admitted the breast, and seemed to stick close to it; and so it was, that, at the queen’s desire, the nursing of the child was entirely en­trusted to the mother.

“Hereupon it was that Thermuthis imposed this name Mouses upon him, from what had happened when he was put into the river; for the Egyptians call water by the name of Mo, and such as are saved out of it by the name of Uses; so by putting these two words to­gether, they imposed this name upon him; and he was, by the confession of all, accord­ing to God’s prediction, as well for his greatness of mind as for his contempt of diffi­culties, the best of all the Hebrews; for Abraham was his ancestor, of the seventh gen­eration. For Moses was the son of Amram, who was the son of Caath, whose father, Levi, was the son of Jacob, who was the son of Isaac, who was the son of Abraham.

“Now Moses’ understanding became superior to his age, nay, far beyond that standard; and when he was taught, he discovered greater quickness of apprehension than was usual at his age; and his actions at that time promised greater, when he should come to the age of a man. God did also give him that tallness, when he was but three years old, as was wonderful; and for his beauty, there was nobody so unpolite as, when they saw Moses, they were not greatly surprised at the beauty of his countenance; nay, it happened fre­quently, that those that met him as he was carried along the road, were obliged to turn again upon seeing the child, that they left what they were about, and stood still a great while to look on him; for the beauty of the child was so remarkable and natural to him on many accounts, that it detained the spectators, and made them stay longer to look upon him.

“Thermuthis, therefore, perceiving him to be so remarkable a child, adopted him for her son, having no child of her own. And when one time she had carried Moses to her father, and said she thought to make him her father’s successor, if it should please God she should have no legitimate child of her own; and said to him, ‘I have brought up a child who is of a divine form (“Moses was exceeding fair” – Acts 7:20—JJH), and of a gen­erous mind; and as I have received him from the bounty of the river, in a wonderful man­ner, I thought proper to adopt him for my son, and the heir of thy kingdom.’ And when she said this, she put the infant into her father’s hands: so he took him, and hugged him close to his breast; and on his daughter’s account, and in a pleasant way put his diadem upon his head; but Moses threw it down to the ground, and in a puerile mood, he wreathed it round, and trod upon it with his feet; which seemed to bring along with it an evil presage concerning the kingdom of Egypt.

“But when the sacred scribe saw this (He was the same person who foretold that his nativity would bring the dominion of that kingdom low), he made a violent attempt to kill him; and crying out in a frightful manner, he said, ‘This, 0 King!  this child is he of whom God foretold, that if we kill him we shall be in no danger; he himself affords an attestation to the prediction of the same thing, by his trampling upon thy government, and treading upon thy diadem. Take him, therefore, out of the way, and deliver the Egyp­tians from the fear they are in about him; and deprive the Hebrews of the hope they have of being encouraged by him.’ But Thermuthis prevented him, and snatched the child away.

And the king was not hasty to slay him, God himself, whose providence protected Moses, inclining the king to spare him. He was, therefore, educated with great care. So the Hebrews depended on him, and were of good hopes that great things would be done by him; but the Egyptians were suspicious of what would follow such his education. Yet because, if Moses had been slain, there was no one, either akin or adopted, that had any oracle on his side for pretending to the crown of Egypt, and likely to be of greater advantage to them, they abstained from killing him.

“War with the Ethiopians – Moses, therefore, when he was born, and brought up in the foregoing manner, came to age of maturity, made his virtue manifest to the Egyptians; and shewed that he was born for the bringing them down, and raising the Israelites; and the occasion he laid hold of was this: The Ethiopians, who are next neighbors to the Egyp­tians, made an inroad into their country, which they seized upon and carried off the ef­fects of the Egyptians, who in their rage, fought against them, and revenged the affronts they had received from them; but being overcome in battle, some of them were slain, and the rest ran away in a shameful manner, and by that means saved themselves; whereupon the Ethiopians followed after them in the pursuit; and thinking that it would be a mark of cowardice if they did not subdue all Egypt, they went on to subdue the rest with great­er vehemence; and when they had tasted the sweets of the country, they never left off the prosecution of the war; and as the nearest parts had not courage enough at first to fight with them, they proceeded as far as Memphis, and the sea itself; while not one of the cit­ies was able to oppose them.

“The Egyptians, under this sad oppression, betook themselves to their oracles and prophecies; and when God had given them this counsel, to make use of Moses the Hebrew and take his assistance, the king commanded his daughter to produce him, that he might be the general of their army. Upon which, when she had made him swear that he would do him no harm, she delivered him to the king, and supposed his assistance would be of great advantage to them. She withal reproached the priest, who, when they had before admon­ished the Egyptians to kill him, was not ashamed now to own their want of his help.

“So Moses, at the persuasion both of Thermuthis and the king himself, cheerfully undertook the business: and the sacred scribes of both nations were glad; those of the Egyptians, that they should at once overcome their enemies by his valor, and that by the same piece of management Moses would be slain; but those of the Hebrews, that they should escape from the Egyptians, because Moses was to be their general; but Moses pre­vented the enemies, and took and led his army before those enemies were apprised of at­tacking them; for he did not march by the river, but by land, where he gave a wonderful demonstration of his sagacity; for when the ground was difficult to be passed over, be­cause of the multitude of serpents (which it produces in vast numbers, and indeed is singular in some of those productions, which other countries do not breed, and yet such as are worse than others in power and mischief, and an unusual fierceness of sight, some of which ascend out of the ground unseen, and also fly in the air, and so come upon men unawares, and do them a mischief), Moses invented a wonderful stratagem to preserve the army safe, and without hurt; for he made baskets, like unto arks, of sedge, and filled them with ibes, and carried them along with them; which animal is the greatest enemy to serpents imaginable, for they fly from them when they come near them; and as they fly they are caught and devoured by them, as if it were done by the harts; but the ibes are tame creatures, and only enemies to the serpentine kind; but about these ibes I say no more at present, since the Greeks themselves are not unacquainted with this sort of bird.

“As soon, therefore, as Moses was come to the land which was the breeder of these serpents, he let loose the ibes, and by their means repelled the serpentine kind, and used them for his assistants before the army came upon that ground. When he had there­fore proceeded thus on his journey, he came upon the Ethiopians before they expected him; and, joining battle with them, he beat them, and deprived them of the hopes they had of success against the Egyptians, and went on in overthrowing their cities, and in­deed made a great slaughter of these Ethiopians. Now when the Egyptian army had once tasted of this prosperous success, by the means of Moses, they did not slacken their dil­igence, insomuch that the Ethiopians were in danger of being reduced to slavery, and all sorts of destruction; and at length they retired to Saba, which was a royal city of Ethiopia, which Cambyses afterward named Meroe, after the name of his own sister.

“However, while Moses was uneasy at the army’s lying idle (for the enemies durst not come to battle), this accident happened: Tharbis was the daughter of the king of the Ethiopians: she happened to see Moses as he led the army near the walls, and fought with great courage; and admiring the subtlety of his undertakings, and believing him to be the author of the Egyptians’ success, when they had before despaired of recovering their lib­erty, and to be the occasion of the great danger the Ethiopians were in, when they had be­fore boasted of their great achievements, she fell deeply in love with him; and upon the prevalence of that passion, sent to him the most faithful of all her servants to discourse with him about their marriage. He thereupon accepted the offer, on condition she would procure the delivering up of the city; and gave her the assurance of an oath to take her to his wife; and that when he had once taken possession of the city, he would not break his oath to her. No sooner was the agreement made, but it took effect immediately; and when Moses had cut off the Ethiopians, he gave thanks to God, and consummated his mar­riage, and led the Egyptians back to their own land.”

Josephus has much more to say about Moses, but we leave him now to offer some com­ments from other capable writers, but we note here that one very prominent commentator re­fers to him as “this murderer” (presumably because he slew an Egyptian and had to flee to Midian—Ex. 2:15); and the two words we have quoted herein are all we shall offer from that particular source of information, the same undoubtedly being a higher critic.

It is recorded in the last chapter of Josephus above that he relates the marriage of Moses to the Ethiopian princess Tharbis. The Bible is entirely silent about this, except that it does tell us in the twelfth Chapter of Numbers that Moses had an Ethiopian woman for his wife. However, both Brother Russell and Brother Johnson are also silent on this subject, although they both had considerable respect for the general content of the historian’s writings, yet they did not consider his dates reliable.  We shall not attempt to analyze this tale, except to suggest that we do not have enough information, in our opinion, to state it as a fact.

Following are some comments by Doctor John D. Davis and Doctor Henry Snyder Gehman, who corroborate Josephus in much of what we have copied from him – although they omit much of the enlightening information quoted above:

“The adopted son of a princess required a princely education, and Moses became in­structed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts 7:22), who were then unsurpassed in civilization by any people in the world. This was to fit him for the high office under the government, if not even for the Egyptian throne. But in God’ s intention it was to prepare him for the leadership of the Hebrews. He was possessed of great natural abili­ty, and the training which he received schooled him for the great work for which he was destined. He became familiar with court life and intercourse with princes, with the gran­deur and pomp of religious worship and with ritualistic conventionalities and symbolism, with letters and the literary ideas of the time. He witnessed the administration of jus­tice, and he acquired a general acquaintance with the arts which were practiced in civi­lized life. He remembered, however, his origin, believed the promises which had been made to the Hebrew people, and before the close of his sojourn in Egypt he had discovered the call of God to him to be the judge and deliverer of the Israelites.......

“He fled from Egypt to the land of Midian ... became intimately associated with a people who were descended from Abraham and perhaps worshipped the God of Abraham. (See Ex. 18:10-12) This period was likewise a time of preparation. He enjoyed close fellow­ship with a leading man of the Midianites, a man of sound judgment (Ex., ch. 18), and a priest. Here Moses widened his acquaintance with religious thought and forms of worship. He learned the roads of the wilderness, its resources, climate, and mode of life of its inhabitants. Amid its solemn grandeur and its deep solitude he had opportunity for reflection.

“Moses took his wife Zipporah and his two sons to return to Egypt (He was then eighty years old—JJH)..... Arriving in Egypt, he in conjunction with Aaron, repeatedly conveyed to Pharaoh the divine commands ... When the departure from Egypt took place, it was Moses who, under divine guidance, led the people. At Sinai he was admitted to intimate relations with God – ‘He spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend, (Ex. 24:9-11; 33:11, 12, 17-23; 34:5-29); and he revealed his will to Moses from time to time for the instruction of his people, as he did afterwards to the successive prophets. .......

“On each of these occasions (in the mountain—JJH) he fasted forty days and nights (Ex. 24:18; 34:28), as Elijah afterward did (1 Kgs. 19:8), both in this respect fore­shadowing the similar fast of our Lord. (Matt. 4:2) ... When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, after the second sojourn of forty days, with the tables of the law in his hand, the skin of his face shone, sending forth beams (Heb. horns), and the people were afraid to come near him. (Ex. 24:39, R.V. margin)..... He put a veil on his face; but when he went in before the Lord, he took the veil off, until he came out. (Ex. 34:33, A.V.) The R. V. and I.V., following the Septuagint and the Vulgate, and correctly rendering the He­brew, say just the contrary: ‘And when Moses had done speaking with them, he put a veil on his face.’ ....

“In the second year of the sojourn of the Israelites in the wilderness, Moses is men­tioned as having married a Cushite woman (Num. 12:1). Zipporah may have died during the preceding year, although her death is not recorded. Among the later Jews the story ran that the Cushite woman was an Ethiopian princess names Tharbis, who had fallen in love with Mo­ses on the occasion of his leading an Egyptian army into Ethiopia, while he was still a member of Pharaoh’s household. The tale is evidently a fabrication.”

PELOUBET’S SUMMATION

Next we offer some comments from Peloubet’s Bible Dictionary: “Now begins the third period in Moses’ life (when he was eighty years old—JJH). He meets Aaron, his brother, whom God permitted to be the spokesman, and together they return to Goshen in Egypt. From this time the history of Moses is the history of Israel. Aaron spoke and acted for Moses, and was the permanent inheritor of the sacred staff of power. But Mo­ses was the inspiring soul behind. He is incontestably the chief personage of the his­tory, in a sense in which no one else is described before or since. He was led into a closer communion with the invisible world than was vouchsafed to any other in the Old Testament. On approaching Palestine the office of the leader becomes blended with that of the general or the conqueror. By Moses the spies were sent to explore the country. Against his advice took place the first disastrous battle at Hormah. To his guidance is ascribed the circuitous route by which the nation approached Palestine from the east, and to his generalship the two successful campaigns in which Sihon and Og were defeated. The narrative is told so briefly that we are in danger of forgetting that at this last stage of his life Moses must have been as much a conqueror and victorious soldier as was Joshua.

“HIS CHARACTER – Moses stands among the few greatest men in history. In every direc­tion he was great and good.

“1. – As a prophet – A prophet is one who speaks and acts under the direction of God, the medium through which God reveals his will to men.

“2. – As a saint – Moses’ goodness shines as brightly as his greatness. He was un­selfish. He devoted himself at every cost to the good of his people. He encountered every danger for their sakes.  He was willing to die to save them. He was the embodi­ment of love to God and love to man. By seeing God face to face he was becoming trans­formed into his spiritual likeness.

“3. – His meekness – Moses was in a sense peculiar to himself the founder and rep­resentative of his people; and in accordance with this complete identification of him­self with his nation is the only strong personal trait which we are able to gather from his history. (Num. 12:3) The word ‘meek’ is hardly an adequate reading of the Hebrew term, which should be rather much enduring.’ It represents what we should now desig­nate by the word ‘disinterested.’ All that is told of him indicates a withdrawal of himself, a preference of the cause of his nation to his own interests, which makes the most complete example of Jewish patriotism.

“4. – His imperfection – Two or three times some fault is attributed to Moses, as every saint has failed in some point at some time. There is no garden but has some weeds. But the most unjust thing we can do is to measure its value by its weeds and not by its fruits. ‘By their fruits ye shall know them.’ Moses’ few faults are such that they would never be noticed at all in a worldly man.  They are like a broken limb on a tree loaded with magnificent fruit. All God’s works through men are done by imperfect instruments.

“5. – As a statesman – ‘Inspiration apart, Moses possessed all those endowments and qualities which form the consummate statesman and chief magistrate: an intellect of the highest order; a perfect mastery of all the civil wisdom of the age; a pene­trating, comprehensive, and sagacious judgment; great promptness and energy in action; patriotism which neither ingratitude, ill treatment nor rebellion could quench, or even cool; a commanding and persuasive eloquence; a hearty love of truth; an incorruptible virtue; and entire freedom from selfish ambition; an invincible hatred of tyranny and in justice; a patient endurance of toil; a courageous contempt of danger; and a great­ness of soul in which he has never been surpassed by the most admired heroes of ancient or modern times. Comprehensiveness, grasp, force, sagacity were the predominant charac­teristics of his mind; magnanimity, disinteredness, an enthusiastic devotion to liberty, and an ardent but rational piety, the leading qualities of his heart.’

“6. – As a general – Moses delivered his people from the most powerful nation on earth; maintained them amid the perils of the desert for forty years, and led them in confidence against a country settled by fierce tribes, which they conquered.

“7. – As a lawgiver – However much may have been added by the development of the people, like the amendments to the Constitution and laws of the United States, yet through Moses was instituted the great system of civil and religious law. (In all of this he was about 3,500 years ahead of his time—JJH)

“8. – As a poet – The two songs in Deuteronomy 32 and 33, and Psalms 90.

“9. – As an orator – The great orations in Deuteronomy stand among the few great­est masterpieces of eloquence in the world’s history, if not at their head.

“Close of his life – The song and the blessing of the tribes conclude the farewell, chs. 32,33. And then comes the mysterious close. He is told that he is to see the good land beyond the Jordan, but not to possess it himself. He ascends the mount of Pisgah and stands on Nebo, one of its summits, and surveys the four great masses ofPalestine west of the Jordan, so far as it can be discerned from that height. The view has passed into a proverb for all nations. ‘So Moses the servant of Jehovah died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of Jehovah. And he buried him in a ravine in the land of Moab, before Beth-peor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day’... ‘And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days.’ (Deut. 34:5, 6, 8) This is all that is said in the sacred record.

“Moses is spoken of as a likeness of Christ; and as this is a point of view which has been almost lost in the Church, compared with the more familiar comparisons of Christ to Adam, David, Joshua, and yet has as firm a basis in fact as any of them, it may be well to draw it out in detail. (1) Moses is, as it would seem, the only charac­ter of the Old Testament to whom Christ expressly likens himself: ‘Moses wrote of me.’ (John 5:46) It suggests three main points of likeness: (a) Christ was, like Moses, the great prophet of the people – the last, as Moses was the first; (b) Christ, like Moses is a lawgiver: ‘Him shall ye hear’; (c) Christ, like Moses, was a prophet out of the midst of the nation – ‘from their brethren.’ As Moses was the entire representative of his people, feeling for them more than for himself, absorbed in their interests, hope and fears, so, with reverence be it said, was Christ. (2) In Heb. 3:1-19; 12:24-29; Acts 7:37, Christ is described, though more obscurely, as the Moses of the new dispensation – as the apostle or messenger or mediator of God to the people – as the controller and leader of the flock or household of God. (3) The details of their lives are sometimes, though not often, compared. (Acts 7:24-28,35)”

Because we have quoted so copiously from these various writers does not mean we approve of everything they say, as we believe all of them are slightly ‘off base’ in some of their statements.  However, we think they are to be warmly commended for the lavish rhetoric they have given about Moses, along with the great store of information concerning him; and we hope our readers will receive great blessing from what we have given. Moses is one of the outstanding characters of all history, and we rejoice with him in the great victory of faith that was his. He undoubtedly believed his own writ­ings: “The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms.” (Deu. 33:27) The Jews have a saying that God kissed him there that last night before he died. “Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated”—Deu. 34:7.

“But the salvation of the righteous is of the Lord: he is their strength in the time of trouble.  And the Lord shall help them, and deliver them: he shall deliver them from the wicked, and save them, because they trust in him.” (Psa. 37:39,40) (Continued in Part Three)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

ANNOUNCEMENT OF GENERAL INTEREST

We suggest Sunday, October 19 through Sunday, November 16, for our Fall Special Effort in antitypical Gideon’s Second Battle against the two King Errors: Eternal Torment and the Consciousness of the Dead. (See E-5, pp. 234-2l6) All who wish to join with us in this “good fight,” please order the pertinent literature in time to participate. Our tracts are free, postage paid.

We honor the Lord when we honor His faithful Mouthpieces, and “continue in what we have learned and been assured of.” We invite all of like mind to join with us in prayer, God bless their memory! (1 Tim. 5:17; 1 Sam. 2:30)

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

LETTER OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle:

Enclosed is a check to help with the Lord’s work. I hope this will find you and yours in the best of health and spirits.

I thank you for the knowledge I have received from your writings, and pray for your continued success.  Your brother in His name ------- (FLORIDA)

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

Dear Sir:

Please send me the following copies: The Resurrection of the Dead, The Day of Judgment, The permission of Evil, The Three Babylons.  Sincerely, ------- (NORTH CAROLINA)

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

MOSES THE SERVANT OF GOD

By Nebo’s lonely mountain,

On this side Jordan’s wave,

In a vale in the land of Moab

There lies a lonely grave;

And no man knows that sepulcher,

And no man saw it e’er;

For the angels of God upturned the sod

And laid the dead man there.

That was the grandest funeral

That ever passed on earth;

But no man heard the trampling,

Or saw the train go forth;

Noiselessly as the daylight

Comes when the night is done,

And the crimson streak on ocean’s cheek

Grows into the great sun.

Noiselessly as the springtime

Her crown of verdure weaves,

And all the trees on all the hills

Open their thousand leaves;

So without sound of music,

Or voice of them that wept,

Silently down from the mountain’s crown

The great procession swept.

Perchance the bald old eagle

On great Beth-Peor’s height,

Out of his lonely eyrie

Looked on the wondrous sight;

Perchance the lion stalking,

Still shuns that hallowed spot;

For beast and bird have seen and heard

That which man knoweth not.

But, when the warrior dieth,

His comrades in the war,

With arms reversed and muffled drubs

Follow his funeral car;

They show the banners taken,

They tell his battles won,

And after him lead his masterless steed,

While peals the minute gun.

Amid the noblest of the land

We lay the sage to rest,

And give the bard an honored place,

With costly marble dressed,

In the great ministering transcept

Where lights like glories fall,

And the seated choir sings,

And the organ rings

Along the emblazoned wall.

This was the truest warrior

That ever buckled sword;

This the most gifted poet

That ever breathed a word;

And never earth’s philosopher traced,

With his golden pen,

On the deathless page, truths half so sage

As he wrote dawn for men.

And had he not high honor?

The hillside for a pall!

To lie in state, while angels wait,

With stars for tapers tall,

And dark rough pines like tossing plumes,

Over his bier to wave,

And God’s own hand, in that lonely land,

To lay him in the grave.

In that strange grave without a name,

Whence his uncoffined clay

Shall break again - 0 wondrous thought!

Before the Judgment Day,

And stand, with glory wrapped around,

On the hills he never trod,

And speak of the strife that won our life

With the carnate son of God.

0 lonely grave in Moab’s land!

0 dark Beth-Peor’s hill

Speak to these curious hearts of ours,

And teach them to be still.

God hath his mysteries to grace,

Ways that we cannot tell,

He hides them deep like the hidden sleep

Of him he loved so well.

=========

NO. 266: "THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS"

No. 266

Once again we feel impelled to discuss some of the errors of the Jehovah’s Wit­nesses, this time using what they say on p. 651 of the November 1, 1976 Watch Tower, col. 2, par. 1 – having to do with the Rich Man in Hell. (Luke 16:19-31) That this is a parable they themselves admit; and it should be stressed that in a parable the thing said is never the thing meant. Thus, the interpretation of any parable should be strict­ly in accord with all other teachings of the Bible; in other words, it should be “sound doctrine.”

In their comment they say “The rich man depicts religious leaders of the Jews back there, whereas Lazarus represents the common people who accepted Jesus Christ.” This is quite a contrary opinion to the one given by their one-time leader, Pastor Russell; and it is our opinion that his interpretation is the correct one, while theirs is error. To offer the distinction they do between the rich and the poor Jews is simply arbitrary teaching, not in harmony with the general concept of the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible refer to the ordinary Jew as being licked by dogs; but it is common knowledge that the Jews generally (rich and poor) in Jesus’ day did rate the Gentiles as so many dogs.

The foregoing is confirmed by Jesus in Matt. 15:21-28, where the “woman from Ca­naan” (a Gentile) asked a favor of Jesus; and He answered her: “It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.” Here is the comment in one edition of the Bible: “The children are the Jews; and the dogs are the Gentiles. This was the name applied by the Jews to all outside the chosen race, the dog being in the East a symbol of impurity... the woman takes Jesus at his word, accepts the name of reproach, and claims the little share that falls even to the dogs.” Clearly enough, even the nominal church (Babylon) has a better understanding of Lazarus and the Rich man, as re­spects the company of Lazarus with dogs, than do the Witnesses. This latter was also the view of Pastor Russell, as we shall presently show.

While there is only one paragraph in the Tower cited above, this subject is given quite some elaboration in their book, “Is This Life All There Is?” – first published in 1974. In this book they also mingle others of their errors, upon which we may comment later. But as of now, we simply raise the question – Why are the Witnesses so ready to change so many things that Pastor Russell taught? In this Lazarus item we offer two reasons: (1) they have repeatedly changed his teachings, much as a child changes fairy-tale books. This keeps the “unstable and the unlearned” among their followers constantly in turmoil, so that they are never quite sure what they believe.

Secondly, in this particular case, we believe it is to bolster up their glaring error that those Jewish leaders back there have all gone into the second death; there is no hope of resurrection for them. They do not say as much in the book or in the Nov. 1, 1976 Watch Tower; but that has been their teaching in the past, so we still consider it from that standpoint. However, we quote a clear contradiction to their position in Matt. 26:64: “Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of Heaven.” And further in Luke 13:28: “Ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.” Self-evidently, if those leaders are to “see” those things in the Kingdom, they would have to be alive – not dead!

THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION

Below we offer the explanation of Pastor Russell, as found on pages 97-101 of the March 15, April 1, 1900 Watch Towers – PARABLE OF THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS – Luke 16: 19-31:

“The great difficulty with many in reading this Scripture is that, though they regard it as a parable, they reason on it and draw conclusions from it as though it were a literal statement. To regard it as a literal statement involves several absurdities; for instance, that the rich man went to ‘hell’ because he had enjoyed many earthly blessings and gave nothing but crumbs to Lazarus. Not a word is said about his wickedness. Again, Lazarus was blessed, not because he was a sincere child of God, full of faith and trust, not be­cause he was good, but simply because he was poor and sick. If this be interpreted lit­erally, the only logical lesson to be drawn from it is, that unless we are poor beggars full of sores, we will never enter into future bliss; and that if now we wear any fine linen and purple, and have plenty to eat every day, we are sure of future torment. Again, the coveted place of favor is ‘Abraham’s bosom’; and if the whole statement be literal, the bosom must also be literal, and it surely would not hold many of earth’s millions of sick and poor.

“But why consider absurdities? As a parable, it is easy of interpretation. In a parable the thing said is never the thing meant. We know this from our Lord’s own ex­planations of his parables.  When he said ‘wheat,’ he meant ‘children of the kingdom’; when he said ‘tares’ he meant ‘the children of the devil’; when he said ‘reapers,’ his servants were to be understood, etc. (Matt. 13) The same classes were represented by different symbols in different parables. Thus the ‘wheat’ of one parable correspond to the ‘faithful servants,’ and the ‘wise virgins’ of others. So, in this parable, the rich man represents a class and Lazarus represents another class.

“In attempting to expound a parable such as this, an explanation of which the Lord does not furnish us, modestly in expressing our opinion regarding it is certainly appro­priate. We therefore offer the following explanation without any attempt to force our views upon the reader, except so far as his own truth-enlightened judgment may commend them as in accord with God’s Word and Plan. To our understanding, Abraham represented God, and the ‘rich man’ represented the Jewish nation.  At the time of the utterance of the parable, and for a long time previous, the Jews had ‘fared sumptuously every day’ ­being the especial recipients of God’s favors. As Paul says: ‘What advantage, then, hath the Jew? Much every way: chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God (Law and Prophecy).’ The promises to Abraham and David and their organization as a typical kingdom of God invested that people with royalty, as represented by the rich man’s ‘purple.’ The typical sacrifices of the Law constituted them, in a typical sense, a holy (righteous) nation, represented by the rich man’s ‘fine linen’ – symbolic of righteousness.—(Rev. 19:8)

“Lazarus represented the outcasts from divine favor under the law, who sin-sick, hungered and thirsted after righteousness. ‘Publicans and sinners’ of Israel, seeking a better life, and truth-hungry Gentiles who were ‘feeling after God’ constituted the Lazarus class. These, at the time of the utterance of this parable, were entirely destitute of those special divine blessings which Israel enjoyed. They lay at the gate of the rich man. No rich promises of royalty were theirs; not even typically were they cleansed; but, in moral sickness, pollution and sin, they were companions of ‘dogs.’ (A statement not applicable to the Jews in the slightest degree—JJH) Dogs were regarded as detestable creatures in those days, and the typically clean Jew called the outsiders ‘heathen’ and ‘dogs.’ and would never eat with them, nor marry, nor have any dealings with them. (John 4:9)

“As to how these ate of the ‘crumbs’ of Divine favor which fell from Israel’s table of bounties, the Lord’s words to the Syro-phoenician woman give us a key. He said to this Gentile woman – ‘It is not meet (proper) to take the children’s (Israelite’s) bread and cast it to dogs (Gentiles)’; and she answered, ‘Truth, Lord, but  the dogs eat of the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.’ (Matt. 15:26,27) Jesus healed her daughter, thus giving the desired crumb of favor.

“But there came a great dispensational change in Israel’s history as a nation as they rejected and crucified the Son of God. Then their typical righteousness ceased – ­then the promise of royalty ceased to be theirs, and the kingdom was taken from them to be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof – the Gospel Church, ‘a holy nation, a peculiar people.’ (Tit. 2:14; 1 Pet. 2:7; Matt. 21:43) Thus the ‘rich man’ died to these special advantages, and soon he (the Jewish nation) found himself in a cast-off condition – in tribulation and affliction. In such condition that nation has suffered from that day to this.

“Lazarus also died: the condition of the humble Gentiles and the God-seeking ‘out­casts’ of Israel underwent a great change, being carried by the angels (messengers ­apostles, etc.) to Abraham’s bosom. Abraham is represented as the father of the faith­ful, and receives all the children of faith, who are thus recognized as the heirs of all the promises made to Abraham; for the children of the flesh are not the children of God, ‘but the children of the promise are counted for the seed’ (children of Abraham); ‘which seed is Christ’; and ‘if ye be Christ’s, then are ye (believers) Abraham’s seed (chil­dren), and heirs according to the (Abrahamic) promise.’ (Gal. 3:29)

“Yes, the termination of the condition of things then existing was well illustrated by the figure, death – the dissolution of the Jewish polity and the withdrawal of the favors which Israel had so long enjoyed. There they were cast off and have since been shown ‘no favor,’ while the poor Gentiles who before had been ‘aliens from the common­wealth (the polity) of Israel and strangers from the covenant of promise (up to this time given to Israel only) having no hope and without God in the world,’ were then ‘made nigh by the blood of Christ’ and reconciled to God. (Eph. 2:12,13)

“To the symbolisms of death and burial used to demonstrate the dissolution of Is­rael and their burial or hiding among the other nations, our Lord added a further fig­ure – ‘in hell (hades, the grave) he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off,’ etc. The dead cannot lift up their eyes, nor see either near or far, nor converse; for it is distinctly stated, ‘There is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave’ ; and the dead are described as those who ‘go down into silence.’ (Eccl. 9:10; Psa. 115:117) But the Lord wished to show that great sufferings or ‘tor­ments’ would be added to the Jews as a nation after their national dissolution and burial amongst the other peoples dead in trespasses and sins; and that they would plead in vain for release and comfort at the hand of the formerly despised Lazarus class.

“And history has borne out this parabolic prophecy. For eighteen hundred years the Jews have not only been in distress of mind over their casting out from the favor of God and the loss of their temple and other necessaries to the offering of their sacrifices, but they have been relentlessly persecuted by all classes, including professed Christians. It was from the latter that the Jews have expected mercy, as expressed in the parable ­‘Send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue’; but the great gulf fixed between them hinders that. Nevertheless, God still recognizes the relationship established in his covenant with them, and addresses them as children of the covenant. (v. 25) These ‘torments’ have been the penalties attached to the violation of their covenant, and were as certain to be visited upon them as the blessings promised for obedience. (See Lev. 26)

“The ‘great gulf fixed’ represents the wide difference between the Gospel church and the Jew – the former enjoying free grace, joy, comfort, and peace, as true sons of God, and the latter holding to the law, which condemns and torments. Prejudice, pride and error, from the Jewish side, form the bulwarks of this gulf which hinder the Jew from coming into the conditions of true sons of God by accepting Christ and the Gospel of His Grace. The bulwark of this gulf which hinders true sons of God from going to the Jew – under the bondage of the law – is their knowledge that by the deeds of the law none can be justified before God, and that if any man keep the law (put himself un­der it to try to commend himself to God by reason of obedience to it), Christ shall prof­it him nothing. (Gal. 5:2-4) So, then, we who are of the Lazarus class should not attempt to mix the Law and the Gospel, knowing that they cannot be mixed, and that we can do no good to those who still cling to the Law and reject the sacrifice for sins given by our Lord. And they, not seeing the change of dispensation which took place, argue that to deny the Law as the power to save would he to deny all the past history of their race, and to deny all of God’s special dealings with ‘the fathers, (promises and dealings which through pride and selfishness they failed rightly to apprehend and use); hence they cannot come over to the bosom of Abraham into the true rest and peace – the portion of all the true children of faith. (John 8:39; Rom. 4:16; Gal. 3:29)

“True, a few Jews probably came into the Christian faith all the way down the Gos­pel Age, but so few as to be ignored in a parable which represented the Jewish people as a whole. As at the first, Dives represented the orthodox Jews, and not the ‘out­casts of Israel,’ so down to the close of the parable he continues to represent a simi­lar class, and hence does not represent such Jews as have re­nounced the Law Covenant and embraced the Covenant of Grace, or such as have become infidels ...

“The plea of the ‘rich man, for the sending of Lazarus to his five brethren we in­terpret as follows: The people of Judea, at the time of our Lord’s utterance of this parable, were repeatedly referred to as ‘Israel,’ ‘the lost sheep of the house of Is­rael,’ ‘cities of Israel,’ etc., because all of the tribes were represented there; but actually the majority of the people were of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, but few of the ten tribes having returned from Babylon under Cyrus’ general permission. If the nation of the Jews (chiefly two tribes) were represented in the one ‘rich man,’ it would be a harmony of numbers to understand the ‘five brethren’ to represent the ten tribes chiefly scattered abroad. The request relative to them was doubtlessly introduced to show that all special favor of God ceased to all Israel (the ten tribes, as well as to the two more directly addressed). It seems to us evident that Israel only was meant, for no other nation than Israel had ‘Moses and the prophets’ as instructors. (v. 29) The majority of the ten tribes had so far disregarded Moses and the prophets that they did not return to the land of promise, but preferred to dwell among idolaters; and hence it would be useless to attempt further communications with them, even by one from the dead – the figuratively dead, but now figuratively risen Lazarus class. (Eph. 2:5)

“Though the parable mentions no bridging of this ‘great gulf,’ other portions of Scrip­ture indicate that it was to be ‘fixed’ only throughout the Gospel Age, and that at its close the ‘rich man,, having received the measurement of punishment for his sins, will walk out of his fiery troubles over the bridge of God’s promises yet unfulfilled to that nation.

“Though for centuries the Jews have been bitterly persecuted by pagans, Mohammedans and professed Christians, they are now gradually rising to political freedom and in­fluence; and although much of ‘Jacob’s trouble’ (natural Israelites—JJH) is just at hand, yet as a people they will be very prominent among the nations in the beginning of the Millennium. The ‘vail’ (2 Cor. 3:13-16) of prejudice still exists, but it will be grad­ually taken away as the light of the Millennial morning dawns; nor should we be surprised to hear of great awakenings among the Jews, and many coming to acknowledge Christ. They will thus leave their hadean state (national death) and torment, and come, the first of the nations, to be blessed by the true seed of Abraham, which is Christ, Head and Body. Their bulwark of race prejudice and pride is falling in some places and the humble, the poor in spirit, are beginning already to look upon Him whom they have pierced, and to inquire, Is not this the Christ? And as they look the Lord pours upon them the spirit of grace and supplication. (Zech. 12:10) Therefore, ‘Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her that her appointed time is accomplished.’ (Isa. 40:1,2, margin)

“In a word, this parable seems to teach precisely what Paul explained in Romans 11:19-32. Because of unbelief the natural branches were broken off and the wild branches grafted into the Abrahamic root-promise. The parable leaves the Jews in their trouble and does not refer to their final restoration to favor – doubtless because it was not pertinent to the feature of the subject treated; but Paul assures us that when the fullness of the Gentiles – the full number from among the Gentiles to make up the bride of Christ – is come in, ‘they (natural Israel) shall obtain mercy through your (the Church’s) mercy.’ He assures us that this is God’s covenant with fleshly Israel (who lost his higher spiritual promises, but are still the possessors of certain earthly promises, to become the chief nation of earth, etc. In proof of this statement, he quotes from the prophet, saying ‘The deliverer shall come out of Zion (the glorified church), and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob (the fleshly seed). ‘For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. 0 the depth of the riches, both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God.’ (Rom. 11:26-33)”

It is our opinion that the foregoing will present itself to our readers as a winsome and rational interpretation; and it certainly offers eloquent testimony that Bro. Russell was “wise.” (Matt. 24:45) As evidence that the ‘rich man’ was “in torments” during this generation we would cite the Russian pogroms during the administration of Theodore Roosevelt just after the turn of the century. The dictionary defines ‘pogroms, as “an organized massacre of helpless people; especially such a massacre of Jews.” The Russian atrocities were so vicious, and the suffering of the Jews was so pronounced at that time that they appealed to President Roosevelt to use his influence with the Rus­sian government to ease up even just a little on the punishment the Jews were experienc­ing. It requires no stretch of the imagination to apply their request at that time to the text: “Send Lazarus (the Gentiles) that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tortured in this flame.”

Further in regard to this matter, some years ago we were very well acquainted with a man – a German born in Russia – who was inducted into the Russian Army; and, as was the policy in those days, the new inductees were sent to parts quite some distance from their homes, and separated from each other, to prevent insurrection. Our friend received the same treatment, found himself in a barracks next to a complete stranger. Of course, he engaged in friendly conversation with his comrade; but one day, after several weeks, his friend received a letter from his parents, written in Yiddish. Much surprised my friend exclaimed, You are not Jewish, are you? When the man said he was, my friend said he thought all Jews had horns growing out of the top of their heads – much the same as the devil, because that was the way they were always pictured in the newspapers. Surely the words of Psa. 107:17 apply pointedly to the Jews here: “Fools because of their trans­gression (they crucified the Lord of Glory – their great transgression), and because of their iniquities (their violations of the Law Covenant), are afflicted.”

A third reason for this new truth (?) by the Witnesses is that they now completely reject the Jews as a nation – to make way for their newly-invented “great crowd” – much the same as the Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement also attempts the same “sleight of hand and cunning craftiness” (Eph. 4:14) to make a place for their non-existent “Consecrated Campers.” We would emphasize here that it takes very little effort for those of us who still adhere to “Present Truth” to refute those who have departed from what “they have learned, and been assured of” by God’s real ‘‘Witnesses” – the true Laodicean Messengers. The foregoing quotation from Brother Russell is a pronounced case in point; and it pro­vides us ample ability always “by sound doctrine to exhort and convince the gainsayers.” (Tit. 1:9)

The Jehovah’s Witnesses claim they are God’s chosen people now, and not the Jews: They say they are now God’s Kingdom on earth. However, they will permit any individual Jew to join with them, if he wholeheartedly accepts them; and in this way the indivi­dual Jew can still claim God’s promise, “To the Jew first.” The LHMM takes a more lib­eral view; the Jews will still find a place in the Kingdom if they do not become Conse­crated Campers – a secondary place – although they may yet claim first place if they now become Consecrated Campers; but we have not heard of any of them doing that.

However, if Brother Russell is right in the article aforegoing – and we certainly think he is right – then the Witnesses and the LHMM Campers will have to become Jews be­fore they can receive the Kingdom blessings, as Brother Russell has stated. “Those who have been teaching errors will soon be ashamed (Isa. 66:5), while the fire of this day (this Epiphany day—JJH) will only manifest the truth to all. No power, no tongue, no pen, can successfully contradict the truth, the great Divine Plan of the Ages.  It is strong before its enemies and before all who make assaults upon it, and ere long the folly of its foes shall be made known to the whole world. ‘There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.,” (Reprints 5916, col. 2, par. 3. And we add the Berean Comment on Matt. 25:30: “Gnashing of teeth – Sorrow, disappointment and chagrin in every sense.”)

It should be emphasized here that time itself is already accomplishing some of the foregoing with these two organizations that emanated from the Harvest Truth; and time will continue to put increasing pressure on them in the not far distant future. In the Jan. 15, 1977 Tower, p. 49 (23) there is this: “While individuals among the Lord’s peo­ple may be killed (not live through Armageddon as was promised to those who would join with them—JJH) between now and then (modifying their former teaching—JJH)... yet Jehovah’s people as a class will survive the ‘great tribulation’ (Armageddon—JJH). Even if you personally should prove to be one who suffers great hardships and calamities – such as the collapse of your health, a death in your family, loss of children or material posses­sions, or economic disasters – yet, in spite of what occurs, you should never suffer the loss of your faith and confidence in Jehovah (which is quite true of the Lord’s faithful, although they might – and should – lose faith in those who have made promises that are not in accord with God’s Word—JJH).  Never doubt the promises of your God (which means that you shouldn’t lose faith in the Jehovah’s Witnesses, even if they make promises that self-evidently the Lord doesn’t approve—JJH). Never grow fearful and run in a cowardly way for cover (don’t leave God’s organization on earth – the Jehovah’s Witnesses!—JJH); never deny your God or compromise your integrity. And never allow your vision to become dim as regards angelic backing of those holding to their dedication to Jehovah.”

All of the above is certainly sound teaching – just as it stands; but when we con­sider it is just a shoddy attempt to cover-up for their erroneous teachings of the past, then quite a different viewpoint arises. If all their good exhortations to their devoted followers would mean that they want them to look to God and His Word, it would be correct – but what they actually mean is to look to them for future guidance and forget what they had promised before. The memory of the average man is very short, and politicians take full advantage of this; but such technique does not sully the teachings of the Lord and the Apostles, nor did it find any place in the teachings of Pastor Russell. He offered the Lord’s people no promises except those promises God Himself gives them in His Word. The main reason for so many of these promises that the Jehovah’s Witnesses have  given from time to time, is to put fear into their hearts, thereby enticing them to join with them in order to have “survival” through Armageddon – just as other sects in Big Babylon have done to bring in converts because of the fear of eternal torment.

When J. F. Rutherford wrote “Comfort For The Jews,” he then believed the inter­pretation of the Rich Man and Lazarus as given aforegoing by Pastor Russell. However, when the Witnesses changed their teaching on the Jews, this book was discarded, as has been done with quite a few others when they changed their teaching.  We have a book of a collection of writings by Brother Russell – Life-Death-Hereafter – which treats on the Rich Man and Lazarus, Where Are The Dead, etc., which we will supply to all who wish a copy. This book is as true now as it was in the year 1900, when first published, and will never need to be discarded by those who have “continued in what they have learned and been assured of.” This book would adorn any religious library.

It is probably a sound conclusion that the Witnesses have descended into the “bottomless pit” (error, which has no foundation or bottom to it—Rev. 20:3) faster than any other organization during the entire Gospel Age. It took many years for Papacy and other sects of Babylon to pervert the Truth; but the Witnesses have put on all speed possible to discard the sound system of Truth left them by Pastor Russell; and they have succeeded in accomplishing these perversions of just about all the impor­tant tenets of his teachings except the state of the dead, immortality, and the like. And the compelling truth on these items is so appealing to thinking people that many readily then also accept their errors – until they begin to think a little bit. We are informed that many thousands have left them after wholeheartedly accepting them for a time. Quite a number have written to us of their own experiences, so we write from first-hand information. In fact, any time we see any group attracting large numbers, we should immediately become suspicious, for St. Paul tells us that specifically here in the end of the Age, “they will not endure sound doctrine.” (2 Tim. 4:3) The Roman Catholic Church is certainly an outstanding example of this truth.

And in all this bedlam that has arisen since 1916, it pleases us much to state that most of the Truth groups of any prominence, aside from the Witnesses, have not cast aside the Six Volumes of the Studies in the Scriptures, and substituted their own literature therefor. The Witnesses alone have done this, so far as we know; and they have been forced to do it to accommodate their changes – such as the one concerning the Rich Man and Lazarus.

ANOTHER CONSPICUOUS ERROR

In the book, Is This Life All There Is? – pp. 98-110, the Lazarus item is greatly elaborated; and on p. 109 the Witnesses make this statement: “There is little reason for Christendom’s clergymen not to be familiar with this understanding of Jesus’ par­able.” There is no reason at all why they should be familiar with “this understanding,” because “this understanding” is rank error – i.e., if we accept the true interpretation as given by Pastor Russell. Having cast aside the true explanation to harmonize their distorted teaching about the Jews, we would say they are much more guilty than any cler­gyman who has never had the truth on the parable. When they treat Pastor Russell’s in­terpretations as they have been doing, they stand exactly in the same position as do the “Higher Critics” of the Bible itself. “They have rejected the word of the Lord (so well clarified by Pastor Russell); and what wisdom is in them?... from the prophet even un­to the priest every one dealeth falsely.” (Jer. 8:9,10)

And on p. 106, par. 2, there is this: “On the day of Pentecost of the year 33 C.E. the change in conditions was accomplished. At that time the new covenant replaced the old Law covenant.” This “new covenant” contention entered very conspicuously into the 1908-11 sifting; and the sifters were thoroughly refuted at that time – so decisively that it is unbelievable that that error is now being resurrected by the Witnesses. We assume they still believe that the Mediator of the New Covenant is Christ and His Church, so we quote from Heb. 9:15, 16: “He (Jesus) is the mediator of the new testament... Where a Testament is there must also of necessity be the death of the ­testator.” Since they claim some ten thousand of their “remnant” are still with us, the Mediator of the New Covenant cannot yet be completed; and until the last one dies, the New Covenant cannot possibly be in operation, but is yet some years in the future. So here we have one more doctrine by Pastor Russell that they now cast aside. J. F. Rutherford at the outset did not believe we are under the New Covenant. That is one reason for his casting aside Brother Rus­sell’s teaching that there would be a Class of unbegotten consecrators between the Ages – from the time the High Calling closed and the beginning of Restitution – that there could be no such Class until the New Covenant is inaugurated.

They wobble on all their teachings when time catches up with them, even as they now wobble on the Armageddon hoax; and we may safely predict they will yet wobble still more on it – when “their foolishness shall be very plain to all.” (2 Tim. 3:9, Dia.) Cer­tainly the words of St. Paul are applicable here: “Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth. As Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth.” (2 Tim. 3:7,8)

“The mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children’s children; To such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them.” (Psa. 103:17,18)

Sincerely your brother,

John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

QUESTION OF GENERAL INTEREST

QUESTION: – Heb. 2:14 tells us that our Lord will destroy Satan “who hath the power of death.” Then Matt. 10:28 says “fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell”; and Psa. 68:20: “He that is our God is the God of salvation; and unto God the Lord belong the issues of death.” Please harmonize these texts.

ANSWER: – These statements are all harmonious if we “rightly divide the word of truth.” (2 Tim. 2:15) The Devil cannot destroy any of the saints; nor can he de­stroy any other persons that God wishes to remain alive. Satan is “the god of this world” (2 Cor. 4:4); he has the empire, the dominion over death; but he does not have the power to resurrect any one, although he can cure certain diseases if he wishes to do so, and thus prolong the lives of those he heals. By the same reasoning, he can dimin­ish the life span of those who yield to his temptations; and in that sense be has lim­ited power over death.

One commentator states it quite well: “Satan has the power, not as lord, but as executioner; his present power is only a permissive one... in accordance with the just will of God.” This “permissive power” is definitely pertinent as respects the faithful Household of Faith. They can be assured that their “times are in thy hand.” (Psa. 21:15) Nor does Satan have any power whatever in the Adamic-death process in the “goat for the Lord” (Lev. 16:8) – they “have passed from death unto life” (1 John 3:14). From the Apostle John’s statement it should be clear enough that those in God’s Household were once considered “dead” – a member of the dead world. It is over the “dead world” that Satan “hath the power of death.” Jesus made this clear enough in His statement in Matt. 8:22, Dia.: “Leave the dead ones to inter their own dead.” There­fore, Satan’s “power over death” applies only to those who accept his influence, as it is ably stated, “Good understanding giveth favor: but the way of transgressors is hard” – hard on themselves and on others.

The “goat for the Lord,” in every one of its members, diminished the Adamic death process in themselves, although the “covenant by sacrifice” exacted its toll during their lifetime – even as Jesus “poured out his soul unto death.” And so it has been with all of His true followers.

However, it is different with the measurably faithful new creatures, over whom Satan does have limited power. This is clearly typified in Lev. 16:8: “one lot for the Lord, and the other for Azazel.” Over this second lot the Devil (Azazel) has a limited authority. When they are abandoned by the Lord they have their wilderness ex­periences, during which the Devil is permitted to buffet them severely – for a good purpose: “for the destruction of the flesh (the fleshly minds), that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” (1 Cor. 5:5) Such experiences do have the effect of partially destroying the lives of some of such people, although there is no record that the Devil has ever been allowed to carry these adversities to the full and produce com­plete cessation of life, because they are still in the Lord’s Household so long as they don’t commit the sin unto death.

“Many (a “great multitude”—JJH) hear the good tidings of great joy for all people, and while declaring it to be the grandest message conceivable, yet selfish interests ­especially sectarianism, and the feeling that instead of this message building up their favorite sect or party it will have the effect of discrediting the same – seem to evilly influence those who rejoiced in the gracious message but a short time previously.” (Re­prints 3302, top) However, the lives of the fully faithful cannot be taken from them in any manner until the work the Father has given them to do is finished.

Those who have not come into the Lord’s Household during this Faith Age are consid­ered the “dead world” (Eph. 2:1), because the sentence of death is upon them, whether they live to be 100 or die in infancy. Our Lord will call all of them from the grave. (John 5:28,29) They will then learn righteousness. (Isa. 26:9) 0 blessed Hope! This is the “good tidings of great joy that will be unto all people.”

NO. 265: A MAGNIFICENT TYPE

No. 265

“Now all these things happened unto them (the Jews) for ensamples (types – see margin): and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (the ages) are come.” (1 Cor. 10:11) The various types described by St. Paul in this par­ticular chapter of Corinthians have to do with the Jews after they left Egypt – during their forty years of wandering in the Wilderness of Sin, which we have discussed in our paper No. 257. But their delivery from the Egyptian army in the Red Sea is per­haps the grandest, most interesting and most instructive of all the Old Testament types, because it offers much detail and illumination about the delivery of the “sheep” and the destruction of the “goats” at the full end of the Little Season. (Matt. 25:31-46; 1 Cor. 15:24) The destruction in the Red Sea has to do with the final elimination of sin from the earth.

Before treating of the type proper it would seem to be in order to relate the cir­cumstances leading up to its full accomplishment. “The children of Israel were fruit­ful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled (swarmed) with them.” (Ex. 1:7)  However, some years before this be­came fact, “Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation. There arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.” (Ex. 1:8)

The first fourteen chapters of Exodus give typical information on the time from the end of the flood until the Age following the Little Season – that Age that will be entirely free from sin, with no evil personages to be found anywhere in it. “And Israel (typical of the “sheep” at that time) saw that great work which the Lord had done upon the Egyptians (by destroying the entire Egyptian army in the Red Sea): and the people feared the Lord, and his servant Moses.”

The bulk of these chapters is typical of conditions during the second world ­“this present evil world” – from the end of the flood until the establishment of the earthly phase of the Kingdom, with chapters 14 and 15 typing Millennial and post Mil­lennial conditions. Egypt, as a land, in this picture types “this present evil world” from the flood to the Millennium. “And their dead bodies (the Old and New Testaments) shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” (Rev. 11:8) Pharaoh, king of Egypt, types Satan as “the god of this world.” (Eph. 2:2; 2 Cor. 4:4) The Israelites type God’s people during the Patriarchal, the Jewish, the Gospel Ages, and those who will yet become God’s people in the next Age. Israel’s oppression represents the oppression of the race under the curse of sin and death; whereas, the Egyptians type Satan’s servants, their nobles typing the fallen angels and prominent leaders among the human race, the balance of the Egyptians typing the generality of Satan’s servants. The “taskmasters” (Ex. 1:11) that Pharaoh placed over them type sin, error and death.

It is stated that the Israelites “increased abundantly” (swarmed). It is scien­tifically true that the air of Egypt is specially favorable to such rapid increase. If the Jews doubled in number every fifteen years, as it may easily have done at that time, the increase of seventy men (Ex. 1:5), with their wives, would amount to as many as 2,293,700 in two hundred years. During the Patriarchal Age – from the flood to the death of Jacob – God’s people were few. Their increase really began when they “multiplied” in Egypt, and has continued during the Jewish and Gospel Ages. Especially has this been true during the Gospel Age, with the Christians literally swarming in the more enlightened Caucasian countries. The rise of “a new king, which knew not Joseph” types Satan in his capacity of not showing affection for, and benefaction toward God’s servants. The more eminent and ca­pable and righteous their leaders were, the more Satan developed a dislike for them; and this prompted him to take a more oppressive attitude toward them. Pharaoh’s concern over the great increase of the Jews types Satan’s activity against Christians, especially dur­ing the Dark Ages, and up to the present time. The very word Christian was anathema to the millions of Chinese, Japanese, Mohammedans, etc., although these have now assumed a more tolerant attitude toward Christian countries because of their greater artistic and inven­tive genius. Almost all of the great inventions that have appeared since “the time of the end” began in 1799 (Dan. 12:4) have been produced by the Caucasian race – the first Bible Society in 1804, the steamboat in 1807, the steam locomotive in 1813, and so on with the typewriter, the telephone, the automobile, the airplane, etc.

And just as Pharaoh counseled his subjects to put the pressure on the Jews to prevent their increase, so has Satan done against true Christians. But, “the more they afflicted the Jews, the more they multiplied and grew.” (Ex. 1:2) The same has been true of Christians in the Gospel Age – “the blood of the martyrs has been the seed of the Church!” The persecutions have simply stimulated their spiritual might. The fail­ure of harsh methods to retard the increase of the Jews then prompted Pharaoh to order the death of all male children at birth. (Ex. 1:16) However, the midwives “feared God” (v. 17), and did not carry out the order, which angered the king, and he gave orders that “every son that is born ye shall cast into the river.” (v. 22) This types Satan’s attempt to corrupt especially the leaders of the Jews after they left Egypt; and contin­ued increasingly so during the Jewish Age and the Gospel Age.

It is historical fact that the plagues of the wilderness experiences, the spread of disease, famine, calamities and wars greatly increased the rigors of the dying pro­cess during the Jewish Age. The same has also been evident during the Gospel Age. Sin especially began to oppress God’s people during their wilderness journey, as is evident in the five great plagues as explained by St. Paul in 1 Cor. 10:1-11. After their en­trance into Canaan their afflictions increased greatly – increasingly so whenever they had bad leadership, which was true a great part of the time, particularly after the re­bellion of the ten tribes, when many of their kings forsook the Law and the counsel of the true prophets. And all of this was typical of what would follow in the Gospel Age, as the Christian leaders became more and more corrupt and fell into grievous errors of teaching and practice. This was one great factor contributing to the outbreak of the World War in 1914. It requires no elaboration to state that sin, error and death in this “evil day” are increasing at a tremendous rate since 1914.

The war in 1914 was the culmination of developed evils during the Gospel Age. St. Paul had predicted that there would be a “falling away” (2 Thes. 2:3), that it was al­ready working in his day (2 Thes. 2:7). It really had developed in a pronounced way by about 315 A.D., when it was considered proper to unite the Church with the Roman Empire, which union quickly developed a debasing and secularizing spirit in teaching and prac­tice. In Revelation 17-19 this union is blamed for all the false doctrines and secu­lar spirit that gradually engulfed the church as a nauseating flood, embracing as it did the theoretical and practical elements of heathen religions – under Christian names. The revelator styled this combination as Babylon (confusion), which indeed it was.

This Babylonish union incited the leaders in civil and religious position to anni­hilate any leaders that might arise to oppose this contagion. Previous to 313 AD the Roman government had acted individually to rid itself of the Christians, the last pro­nounced effort of its kind being under Emperor Diocletian from 303 to 313 – the final years of the Smyrna period of the church. Smyrna means ‘bitter,’ and it fittingly de­scribes the experiences of the church during that time. “The devil shall cast some of you into prison... and ye shall have tribulation ten (symbolic) days” (Rev. 2:10) – ten literal years from 303 to 313.

MOSES ARRIVES

“He was a goodly child..., she hid him three months... took for him an ark of bul­rushes... laid it in the flags by the river’s brink.” (Ex. 2:2,3) Moses’ fine features and precociousness type our Lord’s splendid qualities of body, heart and mind from His temple presentation when He was forty days old (“present him to the Lord”—Luke 2:22 ­until he was twelve years old). The ark of bulrushes made waterproof types the care­ful religious teaching and character training that Mary, Joseph and the Levites bestowed upon the boy Jesus especially as He was approaching his twelfth year – when He would soon undergo His “bar mitzvah” (Hebrew for “son of the commandment”), after which He would be considered an adult, responsible for His moral and religious duties.

 “When Jesus was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast” (the Passover)—Luke 2:42. The story relates that Joseph and Mary then started back home, and did not miss the boy until they were a day’s journey gone. When they re­turned, they found him in the temple “in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.” (Luke 2:46,47)

It is pertinent here to state that many of the better minds among the Jews memorized the entire Old Testament as a part of their religious education. In fact, in the early days of the Christian Church no one could be elected an elder in the church unless he had memorized the Old Testament. The historian Josephus relates of himself that, when he was only fourteen years of age, the priests often consulted him on certain features of the Law; and we may be sure that Jesus had a better mind than did Josephus; so it is probable that the boy Jesus had committed the entire Old Testament to memory by the time he was twelve years old.

In those days Jewish sectarianism was always on the lookout for brilliant young men to bolster their system; the same has been true of Christian sectarians during the Gos­pel Age. Of course, all sectarianism is of Satanic origin, because it so often closes the mind to the Truth. And Pharaoh’s daughter would well type these systems, since her father typed Satan himself. Moses being in shallow water would typify these systems be­ing on the fringe of “this present world,” the Nile River as an overall picture repre­senting the peoples of this world. Inasmuch as those Jewish leaders were rabidly sec­tarian at that time, they would enthusiastically embrace such a brilliant boy as Jesus then was.

The mother of Moses being called to nurse the baby was exactly what his parents had hoped to secure. In those days it was oriental custom to nurse an only child, or the youngest, for five years; and Moses’ bright mind would readily absorb this Jewish religious training, and lead him away from Egypt’s idolatry. As he continued in Pharaoh’s court for a total of forty years, but did not succumb to Egypt’s religion, so Jesus, after twelve years of age, did not become contaminated with Jewish sectarianism. Instead, He “increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” (Luke 2:52)

When Moses was forty years old he visited his people – “refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter... esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt.” (Heb. 11:24-26) And as he resented the “taskmaster” of Egypt, so our Lord, when He was come to full manhood and seeing the taskmaster death afflicting the human race, refused to join with Jewish sectarianism. “He was bruised for our in­iquities.” (Isa. 53:5) “He was touched with the feeling of our infirmities” – physical, mental, artistic, moral and religious respects. (Heb. 4:15)

When Moses “slew the Egyptian,” and was forced to flee for his life (Ex. 2:12-15), he became completely separated from Egypt. So also our Lord, after His baptism in Jor­dan, completely separated Himself from the peoples of antitypical Egypt, represented by Moses losing himself in Midian for forty years, after which Moses was told by God to go back to Egypt to deliver Israel from Egyptian bondage. Jesus likewise realized that His mission was to “bear witness to the Truth” (John 18:37), to free those who desired freedom from the bondage of antitypical Egypt – “if ye continue in my word... ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:31,32)

Before treating of the actual deliverance, it would seem in order here to discuss somewhat the plagues that were sent upon the Egyptians. The first was the water of the river turned into blood. (Ex. 7:20-25) “He smote the waters that were in the river... and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood.” (v. 20) The second was the plague of frogs (Ex. 8:5–15). “The frogs came up, and covered the land.” (v.6) Third came the plague of lice (Ex. 8:16–19). “Smote the dust of the land, and it became lice in man, and in beast.” (v. 17) Fourth, the plague of flies. (Ex. 8:21–24) “And Yaveh brought a grievous gad-fly into the house of Pharaoh, and the houses of his ser­vants and in all the land of Egypt, and the land was laid waste by reason of the gad-fly.” (v. 24, Rotherham) The gad-fly is much more vicious than the ordinary house fly, being defined by Webster as “a horsefly, botfly, or warble fly – that bite or annoy livestock.” Of course, such flies would be no respecter of persons – no reason to select the Egyptians instead of the Jews, unless restrained by some unseen power. Thus, this “first” of the seven last plagues must be described as a miracle of the first order; and only a be­fogged brain such as Pharaoh apparently possessed at the time would not be fully persuaded that he was making a fool of himself to continue his obdurate course.

The plagues were divided into two general groups – the first three, and the seven last plagues. Thus, the plague of flies is the first of the “seven last plagues.” Came then the fifth – No. 2 of the seven last plagues. (Ex. 9:3–7) “Upon thy cattle which is in the field, upon the horses, upon the asses, upon the camels, upon the oxen, and upon the sheep:... a very grievous murrain” (v. 3), the same being a pestilence affecting domestic animals or plants. Next the plague of boils (Ex. 9:9-12) – “A boil breaking forth with blains upon man, and upon beast.” (v. 9) – (The third of the seven last plague­). Then follows the plague of hail (Ex. 9:18-21) “A very grievous hail, such as hath not been in Egypt since the foundation thereof” (v. 18) – type No. 4 of the seven last plagues. Came next the plague of locusts (Ex. 10:4-7) – “tomorrow will I bring the locusts into thy coast; and they shall cover the face of the earth.” (vs. 4,5) – type No. 5 of the seven last plagues. The sixth of the seven last plagues was a plague of darkness: “Darkness over the land of Egypt, even darkness which may be felt.” (v.21)

There is special significance in the expressions “first three plagues, and the seven last plagues.” The first three were general over Jews and Egyptians; but the seven last plagues were upon the Egyptians only; they did not plague the Jews at all. “I will sever in that day the land of Goshen, in which my people dwell, that no swarms of flies shall be there... and I will put a division between my people and thy people: tomorrow shall this sign be.” (Ex. 8:22,23) This significant protection was in itself a miracle, and should have taught Pharaoh a lesson, but “whom the gods would destroy they first strike blind.” Although the Jews were markedly involved in the tenth plague ­the death of the firstborn – they were not harmed by it.

THE DELIVERANCE

The foregoing is a very limited introduction to the actual deliverance of the Jews from Egypt (through the tenth, or the last of the plagues), so we consider now some thoughts on Chapter 11 of Exodus, leading up to the institution of the Passover, and the beginning of the Law, with its wealth of types, the actual deliverance through the Red Sea being per­haps the grandest of them all. “The Lord gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians.” (11:3) This first clause of v. 3 is poorly rendered in the King James ver­sion. The oldest Hebrew manuscript extant states it as follows: “For I will give the favor of the people in the sight of the Egyptians.”

Also, Ex. 11:2 is a very misleading rendition: “Let every man borrow of his neigh­bor, and every woman of her neighbor, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold.” Critics have pounced upon this text, declaring the Jews had no intention of ever repaying the Egyptians; therefore, they were defrauding them, and that God encouraged them in this evil. However, this text should be rendered, “Let every man ask,” etc. (from the He­brew word ‘shaal,’ which actually means ‘ask’). It is a historical fact that in the Orient, at the time we are discussing, it was common practice for a departing servant ­if he had been faithful – to “ask” for some reasonable compensation; and his employer was obligated to grant his request. Inasmuch as the Jews had been in Egypt about two hundred years as servants of the Egyptians, they were fully entitled to ask compensation for the work they had done.

Moses had spoken prophetically of the havoc, chagrin and sorrow that would result from the operation of the tenth plague: “About midnight I will go out into the midst of Egypt: and all the firstborn in the land shall die, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts. And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it... But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog move his tongue, against man or beast: that ye may know how that the Lord doth put a difference between the Egyptians and Israel.” (Ex. 11:4–7)

After the tenth plague had done its appalling work, the Egyptians were more than willing to comply with the Jews’ request for compensation; and they gave them gener­ously of their silver and their gold. This is evident from the fact that, when Moses wished to construct the tabernacle in the wilderness, and asked the Jews for contribu­tions of those precious metals to build the various pieces of furniture in the Holy and the Most Holy, they brought more than was necessary for the task at hand.

After the plague of locusts (Ex. 10:1-7) – plague No. 5 of the seven last plagues – the Egyptians had had more than enough of the torments that had come upon them. “And Pharaoh’s servants said unto him, How long shall this man be a snare unto us? let the men go, that they may serve the Lord their God: knowest thou not yet that Egypt is de­stroyed?” (v. 7) Having had about all they could take after plague No. 8, we may read­ily understand why, after the next two – and especially so after the tenth plague which had killed all the firstborn of men and beasts – the Egyptians were more than willing to pay the Jews just to be gone, and leave them thenceforth alone. “There shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as there was none like it, nor shall be like it any more.” (11:6)

PREPARATION FOR THE TENTH PLAGUE

The punishment that came upon all in Egypt – from the least unto the greatest ­was typical of the punishment that came upon Christendom in 1914, when the great tribu­lation began, was intensified by the great world-wide depression from 1929 to 1933; and increased yet more in the second World War and the minor wars that have followed. The antitypical “taskmasters” have been doing their deadly work. All the religious sects in Christendom have been severely punished by these various features of the great tribu­lation; and this will be increased in the very near future.

Chapter twelve of Exodus gives exacting detail of how the Passover should be kept. “Speak ye unto the congregation of Israel, saying, in the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb... without blemish, a male of the first year... from the sheep or from the goats... keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening. And they shall take of the blood and strike it on the two side-posts and on the upper door post of the houses... and the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood I will pass over you.” (Ex. 12:3-13)

Here we have the origin of the Passover and the underlying meaning of the name. It is well to emphasize here that there was but one Passover – the one described above; the subsequent observances even to this day are but a “memorial” of that one Passover. “Ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sons forever.” (V.24) So also there is but one antitype – “Christ our passover” (1 Cor. 5:7). As we partake of the bread and the wine we are but keeping a memorial of the antitype – “This do in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19)

The exact date (Nisan 14), and the particular time of day (in the evening) are an exact guide for keeping the Memorial; also, the exact time for selecting the lamb (the tenth day of this month – v. 3); but it was not to be killed until the 14th day of that month. This is typical of Jesus presenting Himself to the Jews four days before He was crucified – observed throughout Christendom as Palm Sunday, although Jesus actually rode into Jerusalem on Monday, not Sunday.

Furthermore, the command to set the lamb aside on Nisan 10 must have been given to Moses some days before the tenth, as there was no means of quick communication at that time, and many of the Jews were housed some considerable distance away. Likewise, Ex. 12:2 (“this month shall be was unto you the beginning of months”) infers that the command was given at the latest on Nisan 1. There is no particular significance to this so far as we know.

Nisan being indicated as the first month of the year involved a change in the Jewish calendar. Previously, the first month of the Fall – the month Tishri – had been the first month of the year. Consequently, thenceforth the Jews had a two-fold year, a secular year beginning in the ­Fall with the month Tishri, and an ecclesiastical year beginning in the Spring with the first month, Nisan, first called Abib.

There was an antitype in this change, which antitype is suggested in the name given to these two kinds of years, the secular year suggesting the earthly character of the dispensation before the present one, and the ecclesiastical year suggesting the spiri­tual character of the present dispensation.   Thus, we understand the change from the secular to the ecclesiastical year to type the change from the previous dealings – es­pecially from the Law through the Jewish Age to God’s dealings by grace during this Gospel Age. It is well established that God’s dealings with His people previous to this Age were along earthly, secular, lines; whereas, they have been along spiritual lines dur­ing the Gospel Age. Inasmuch as this change all hinged with the Passover, these conclu­sions seem to be entirely logical; they all forecast the events concerning “Christ our Passover.”

In the type (“a lamb for an house” – v. 3) a lamb was to serve for each house, each family. Thus each family was used to type the entire household of faith, and each lamb was used to type Jesus, our Lamb. Also, a lamb would very fittingly type Jesus’ inno­cence, purity and harmlessness – “a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Pet. 1:19). The unblemished condition of the lamb (v. 5) was required to type our Lord as perfect in His physical, mental, artistic, moral and religious faculties, as well as in His human character. Thus the freedom in His humanity from sin and error, and His perfection in every good thing were typed. “He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” (2 Cor. 5:21)

The lamb’s being a male was to type Christ’s perfect character strength as a human being; and its being a yearling was to guarantee its being a lamb, so that not as a sheep, but as a genuine lamb it might represent our Lord as the Lamb of God, not as the sheep of God. The stipulation that it might be the young of the sheep or goats was for the convenience of the Israelites, some having only the young of sheep, others having the young of goats, the provision being made broad enough to accommodate the actual pos­session of every Israelitish family; hence, nothing typical in this liberty of choice.

The order to keep the lamb for four days before killing it on Nisan 14 has two sig­nificant features, we think: So far as the Jews were concerned, having the lamb set aside for four days would surely impress the solemnity of the ceremony upon their minds and upon their hearts, thus putting them into the proper attitude for the awesome occasion; and there is nothing in the record to indicate that a single Jew did not adhere meticulously to every detail as it was told them through their elders – after they had received the in­structions from Moses. (Ex. 12:21)

Secondly, though Jesus was marked for death on Nisan 10, 33 A.D., He was actually not put to death until Nisan 14. The charge that the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel should kill it, not before, but on the evening of the 14th, types Jesus so acting from Nisan 10 to Nisan 14 in His activities with the Jews during those four days that He gave them no opportunity to seize Him before the exact time that He was to be delivered up. His willing submission to them on the evening of Nisan 14 (the day actually began at 6 p.m. on Thursday evening), His forbidding the disciples to resist His accusers ­and so on during that night through the trial before Pilate early Friday morning, then the cross itself – designate Him very emphatically as “the Lamb of God” to be put to death on Nisan 14. The whole house of nominal fleshly Israel became guilty through their lead­ers for His crucifixion; and His blood was upon all of them, as shown by the treatment they received at the hands of Roman Emperor Titus in the year 70 AD, when Jerusalem was almost completely obliterated, and the “wandering Jew” began the tribulation at the hands of the Gentiles.

The Jews at that time had two evenings, the first beginning about 3 p. m., and the second at 6 p.m. and ending at 9 p.m. Thus, slaying the lamb between the “two evenings” would place it at 6 p.m.  This harmonizes the seeming difference in the statements of Matt. 14:15 and Matt. 14:23. Thus also was shown the end of the Jewish Age (which Age began at the death of Jacob 1812 BC), and the beginning of the Gospel Age. From this viewpoint the night of Nisan 14 would represent the entire Gospel Age – with each Jew­ish house and its occupants typing the entire Household of Faith during that time.

The sprinkling of the blood on the doorposts and on the lintel by the Jews types for us in this Gospel Age the “blood of Jesus Christ, which cleanseth us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7) It also reckons to all who come “under the blood” a righteousness they cannot attain on their own merit – “there is none righteous, no not one.” Thus it pro­vides for us forgiveness of sins. Therefore, the charge to eat the lamb’s flesh the night of Nisan 14 types the charge throughout the Gospel Age to partake by faith of Christ’s perfect humanity – His right to life, and His life–rights.

That night the Jews were to eat the lamb with “loins girded, shoes on, staff in hand – eat it in haste.” (v. 11) Thus they would be ready for departure as soon as the command was given – for “against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment.” (V. 12) And this eventually occurred exactly as spoken.

Having given very briefly the events leading up to the Passover, and the actual act itself, we leave for a future article a discussion of the miracle destroying the Egyptian firstborn; then the grand finale of the great type – the destruction of the entire Egyptian army in the Red Sea, and what it tells us about the future. We pray the Lord’s blessing upon all who have read this far. “No trial has assailed you ex­cept what belongs to man. Wherefore, my beloved, flee away from image-worship.” (1 Cor. 10:13,14)

Sincerely your brother, John J. Hoefle, Pilgrim

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

LETTERS OF GENERAL INTEREST

Dear Brother Hoefle: Grace and peace!

Your letter of Jan 26 with enclosure is gratefully received. I was shocked to hear of the passing of dear Sr. Dixon. May her passing insure for her His well done.

We here are still in good spirits and enjoying your good articles which are so refreshing. The manifesting events of the day gives much evidence that the epiphania is twice as long as the Parousia. I have been noticing much the changes in the various Governments, which policies more or less are the same. The gathering and assembling of these kingdoms seem preparatory to their destruction in the great fire just ahead of us.

Much Christian love for you and all the dear ones with you – especially at the Bible House. Your brother ------- (JAMAICA)

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

Dear Friends:

Thank you for your prayers and cards while I was in the hospital. I am slow in writing, but I am very grateful for your thoughtfulness.

Ruth and I observed the Memorial in her home last evening. She has such a wonder­ful knowledge of the Bible, and I feel very privileged to be able to study with her. Your Memorial leaflet was very helpful to me in understanding – and a better and in­creased knowledge of The Passover and Christ’s death. I hope this finds you both in good health. Sincerely, ------- (KANSAS)

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

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

I am writing you this letter to thank you for sending your articles to my wife, She has not read any of them yet, and probably never will. I have not read them all completely but have gone over them pretty much, at least enough that we have decided to ask you to please not send us any more literature.

You see, we are not hard-shell “Russellites.” We do not figuratively place Bro. Russell on a pedestal by claiming that he is “that servant,” and thereby making him out to be a sort of an “infallible pope... We get the impression that “Russellites” are sitting at the feet of Bro. Russell much more than they are sitting at the feet of our Lord..........

We agree with Bro. Russell on a lot of his beliefs (He should name some—JJH), but reject entirely his chronology, which he also practically did before his death. We do not believe our Lord has been secretly present for over a hundred years... Has Jesus and Satan been reigning at the same time all these years? ........

We believe the “great crowd” of Rev. 7:9 is the whole human race. We do not be­lieve in “tentative” but actual justification. According to what our Lord said in Luke 21:24 (and I would never qualify what He said here), the “seasons of Gentiles” – Diag. Inter – ended on – was “fulfilled” – not in 1914 but in June 1967 when Israel recaptured the old city of Jerusalem and thereby liberated all of it from being “trod­den down” by the Gentiles after some 2500 years. .

We believe that the New Covenant went into effect at our Lord’s first advent... According to Rom. 8:28-30 and Eph. 1:11, we believe in individual predestination. We do not believe that the “time of trouble” has started as yet, nor that any of the sleeping saints have been resurrected. Furthermore, Jesus said to observe the Memo­rial of His death “until He comes.” Therefore, if He came about 1874, then, according to His command we should not be doing this any longer. Right? Your brother by His Grace ------- (NEW  MEXICO)

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

NOTE: – Berean Comments on 2 Thes. 2:10, 11 seem to the writer of the above letter: “If we do not cultivate love for the truth until it outweighs all other things, we will not be fit for the Kingdom. Giving them over to error, which they prefer to the Truth. Great delusions are just before us, and some of these may come closest upon those possessing the most light of Present Truth.” (Of course, we have no way of knowing whether this brother was ever in Present Truth—JJH)

Also from That Servant: “Let us remember, too, that God has promised to keep and guide the minds of those whose hearts are loyal and true to Him. We should there­fore conclude that if the Lord is thrusting any one out of the light as unworthy of it, into the outer darkness of the world, if he is permitting unfaithful ones to be seduced by the great enemy, it is not our mission to follow them into the outer darkness by reading, conversation, etc. We are to remain with the Lord and those who are walking in the light... Neither are we to waste sympathy upon those who depart.” (Reprints 5949, col. 1, par. 1) (We feel honored by being called “Russellites” – not offended in the least—JJH)

Those who cast the teachings of That Servant aside for “new light” as have the JW’s (and the writer of this letter seems to be in harmony with quite a few of their errors), it is more difficult for them to receive “sound doctrine” than if they had never known the Truth. (See 2 Tim. 4:3 and Berean Comments)

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)