Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
sympathy, love, desire for practical results for efforts put forth, expectation of temporary reverses, patience amid hope deferred, prayer for the Lord's work, confidence in telling God all our heart's holy sentiments and confidence in, and use of our Lord's High-priestly ministry on our behalf for our development.
(20) We now come to the study of Ex. 6. The last two verses of Ex. 5 presented to our attention how Moses (and Christ) were pained over the increased oppression of the people resulting from their first efforts at their deliverance; and Ex. 6: 1-13 shows God's response in the way of encouraging His typical and antitypical Messengers. If Pharaoh thought that he could cope with the God of Israel, he was to learn differently by bitter experience, typical of Satan's thinking that he could cope with the God of antitypical Israel, yea of the whole universe, and learning by experience otherwise. The typical encouragement that God offered to Moses (v. 1) represents the encouragement that God offered our Lord in His sympathetic concern over the increased severity of the curse inaugurated by Satan to offset our Lord's first efforts at delivering antitypical Israel. Did Pharaoh and Satan set into operation counteractive measures? God would set into operation against them measures more effective by far, both in the type and the antitype. ("Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh!") As Moses did not know in advance all the details of God's measures to be undertaken against Pharaoh ("Now shalt thou see"), so our Lord before His Second Advent was not by God given to know all the details of God's measures to be undertaken against Satan during our Lord's Parousia and Epiphany. As many of these were left over for explanation to Moses until after he would come into the actual work of effecting Israel's release, and that as they were about due to be put into execution, so many of the details that our Lord was to work out during His Second Advent mission were withheld from His knowledge until it was about time to put them
into execution. Hence His sorrow over antitypical Israel's increased suffering from the aggravated curse, as it was manipulated by Satan, was removed by Jehovah's revealing to Him how He would overcome Satan's oppositional measures and force him by the exhibition of great power ("a strong hand"; v. 1) not only to let them go, but to do it so emphatically as to drive them out of his domain of darkness, even as in the type not only did Pharaoh let Israel go, but in his anxiety to get rid of such trouble-occasioning slaves, he thrust them out in his desire to rid himself and his people from such as had so plaguesome a God as Israel's God had proven Himself to be to stubborn Pharaoh and his people.
(21) The repetition of thought in v. 2, found in the expression, "God spake unto Moses, and said unto him," is intended for the sake of emphasis, and the thing said certainly deserved emphasis: "I am Jehovah." This types how God, after assuring Jesus (in v. 1) that He would force Satan to accede to Jehovah's will in the matter of the deliverance of God's people, emphasized the thought very markedly by His language—language that was appropriately emphatic because of what it was to introduce. God's saying to Moses, "I am Jehovah," types that God assured Jesus by His attributes of being and character that He would see to it that the deliverance would follow in due course; for He thereby pledged Himself in all that He was and could do to effect His purpose. God's contrasting the revelation of Himself (v. 3) to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob merely as the Almighty, with the revelation of Himself to Moses as the self-existing God of perfect character, types God's contrasting the factual revelation of Himself in His love, to Jesus and the Church in the Jewish Harvest as the Almighty, with the factual revelation of Himself to Himself in His love and to Jesus and the Church as the self-existent God of perfect wisdom, justice, love and power, during the Parousia and Epiphany. There is a marked difference in the two
factual revelations of the two Harvests. While in the Jewish Harvest it was more God's power that revealed itself as acting in His factual revelation of Himself, as, e.g., this is shown in the first living creature, which was power, calling "Come," at the opening of the first seal (Rev. 6: 1; compare with vs. 3, 5, 7 and Rev. 4: 6, 7); in the Gospel Harvest all of God's attributes of being and character (Jehovah) are factually revealed as working coordinately unto a triumphant conclusion of God's Gospel-Age purpose, with greater emphasis than was given in the factual revelation of the Jewish Harvest. How much more gloriously does God's wisdom shine (and will yet even more gloriously shine as the Epiphany unfolds) in the greater amount of factual light of this Harvest compared with that of the Jewish Harvest! The same is manifest of His justice, power and love, as these shine in the greater works of this Second Advent period, contrasted with those of the First Advent period. This is why the factual revelations that the Jewish Harvest made of God can be spoken of as exhibiting to God in His love and to Jesus and the Church the inferior conception underlying the expression God Almighty, while the factual revelations of the Parousia and Epiphany rightly make Him manifest Himself to Himself in His love and to Jesus and the Church as the self-existent God of perfect wisdom, justice, love and power. For details on the name Jehovah, as it is set forth in this verse, we refer our readers to the discussion thereon of Ex. 3: 13-15 in the preceding chapter.
(22) The allusions to the Oath-bound Covenant in its earthly and heavenly features, typically set forth in v. 4, and the allusions to God's sympathy with groaning Israel and the renewed promise to fulfill the Covenant and deliver them with great power and bring them to Canaan, set forth in vs. 5-8, have been explained, type and antitype, under Ex. 2: 23-25; 3: 6-10, 16-19; hence we need not repeat these explanations here. We will here explain, type and
antitype, only such features in vs. 4-8 as were not alluded to under the verses just cited. Such an item is contained in v. 6, in the expression, "a stretched out arm … and with great judgments." This expression means: manifestly expressed and exercised power, and large punishments. These were manifest in the rods scenes of Ex. 7, in the ten plagues and in the overthrow of the Egyptians in the Red Sea. The typical and antitypical significance of these we hope to give in due course. Another such item is found in v. 7, in God's promise to take Israel for His people and to offer Himself to them as their God, which types God's offering antitypical Israel of the spiritual and earthly classes the privilege of being His people and His offer of Himself to be their God, thus dwelling with one another in Oath-bound Covenant relations. The assurance to Israel (v. 7) that they would know that it was Jehovah who was their God types that God would to antitypical Israel in the Parousia and Epiphany and in the Millennium theoretically and factutually so reveal Himself to them that they would recognize that their God is the self-existent One, perfect in wisdom, power, justice and love. This entire address (vs. 18) types the comfort and encouragement, based on the Oath-bound Covenant, given by God to our Lord amid the disappointing experiences begun in 1877 by Satan's speeding up the curse. It is noteworthy that God both comforts and encourages even the glorified Jesus by the Covenant promises. Whenever, therefore, we are distressed, disappointed, cast down or otherwise in tribulation, let us learn to apply to ourselves, as faithful in consecration, the Covenant promises (Gen. 22: 16-18), bound to us as they are by an oath of Jehovah Himself; and we shall find in them sufficient comfort, encouragement and strength (Heb. 6: 13-20). It is also noteworthy that as God comforted and encouraged our Lord (vs. 1-5), He then charged Him to give the same comfort and encouragement to antitypical Israel (vs. 6-8), even as in
these verses He gave Moses the typical comfort, etc., and then charged him to administer these to Israel. Let us do so with one another after He has ministered His rich comfort and encouragement to us. Please note here again God stresses the Oath-bound Covenant.
(23) Very appropriately did God say that Israel (v. 7) would recognize Him as Jehovah, who was bringing them out from under the burdens of the Egyptians; for this is what was to be expected: that the God whose nature had such attributes of being, and whose character had such graces as Jehovah's, would show Himself as the Befriender and Deliverer of His oppressed people from their oppressors and that in such capacities He be recognized by them as Jehovah, their God. So antitypical Israel in seeing and experiencing God's befriending and delivering work for the Church and the world would thereby recognize that their covenant God is indeed Jehovah, the one absolutely perfect in all His attributes of being and character, all of whose attributes shine out as revelatory of Him in His nature and character in His glorious delivering and upbuilding work for His people as against their oppressors now and in the end of the next Age. Precious indeed to oppressed us are the assurances as to our promised inheritance of heavenly Canaan; and precious to the oppressed world are the assurances as to their promised inheritance in the paradisaic Canaan, as these are typed by the preciousness to oppressed Israel of the assurances of their promised inheritance in earthly Canaan (v. 8). The oath made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob types the oath attached to the Covenant (Gen. 22: 16-18) as it applies to God, in His attribute of love especially (Abraham), to Jesus (Isaac) and to the Church (Jacob). How reassuring that oath is to us, especially in those great and sore trials amid which everything earthly is breaking against us! This, beloved, is indeed the anchor of our souls, both sure and steadfast and entering within the vail, whither the Forerunner hath for us entered, Jesus, made a High
Priest after the order of Melchizedek for the (this) Age (Heb. 6: 19, 20)! God's adding here to the promise the statement, "I am Jehovah" (v. 8), was to certaintee to both typical and antitypical Israel the immutability of the promise. He Himself, in His attributes of being and character, is the guarantee to the respective Israels of the certainty of their promises, fulfilment. Praised be our God, the great Jehovah, in heaven, on earth and under the earth! And let the Israel of God everywhere say, Amen and Amen!
(24) Moses' telling (v. 9) the things stated in vs. 1-8 to Israel types the declaration of the Truth that Jesus made to the Lord's people from 1878 to late in 1880. It was during this time that by Him the brethren in the flesh were made to understand, and that more clearly, the overthrow of Satan's empire and the first resurrection as beginning in 1878 with the awakening of the sleeping saints and as proceeding with the others as they died, and the ransom as, to the Church, greatly clarified, incidental to the no-ransomism sifting that began in June, 1878, and proceeded throughout the three following years, yea, continued for years later and still continues. It was especially during this period, in 1879, that the light on the tabernacle in general, and on Leviticus 16 in particular, was by Jesus given, first to that Servant and then later to the Church, showing the two antitypical Sin-offerings, the two salvations in natures separate and distinct, the three great Covenants, one each proper and exclusive to each of the three Ages—Jewish, Gospel and Millennial—with the Christ, Head and Body, as the product of the Sarah Covenant and the Mediator of the New Covenant. Here, too, the doctrine of the World's High Priest was brought to light. It was in the giving of these truths, and others less important, from 1878 to 1880 that Jesus antityped Moses' telling (v. 9) the Israelites the things that God told him in vs. 1-8. In giving them to antitypical Israel Jesus spoke them, not exclusively, but especially
through our Pastor, who was, shortly after this period began, made that Servant—in 1879. We have described how this was done in its historical setting in EPIPHANY STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. IX, 361-373. How finely these truths and others accompanying them at that time antityped the statements of vs. 1-8, rehearsed by Moses to the Israelites (v. 9)! But the reception that Israel at this juncture gave to Moses' declaration was to him deeply disappointing—"They harkened not to Moses for anguish of spirit, and for cruel bondage." These words deserve special attention. They indicate that the increase of their oppression had so broken their spirit as to have crushed out of their hearts the expectation of deliverance and therefore they heeded not Moses' words. In this they typed the experience that antitypical Israelites not in the Truth had between April, 1878, and about October, 1881. This particular period was the most barren of the whole reaping time, so far as winning new ones for the Truth is concerned. We do not refer to the new Spirit-begettings, none of which occurred between April, 1878, and about October, 1881; for it will be recalled that the fulness of the Gentiles came in probationally by the Passover of 1878 (Rom. 11: 25-29; compare B 210, par. 1 with 223, pars. 13); and that special calls began to go out by October, 1881, as a proof that the general call had shortly before ceased. Naturally there would be no new begettings between the time of the Gentiles' fulness in April, 1878, on the one hand, and the going forth of the first special calls October, 1881, on the other hand, a proof of the end of the general call April, 1878. But it is not so much this particular feature that is referred to in v. 9. Rather, it refers to the fact that the message received scant attention from new creatures and others outside of the Truth movement and that very few new ones, even those newly begotten, came into the Truth in these 3½ years.
(25) It was the antitypical increase in the oppression that wrought this effect, as the antitype of the Israelites'
not harkening to Moses' message to them, as an effect of the increased oppression described in Ex. 5. This message was a repetition of that found in vs. 1-8 and was given immediately afterward by Moses (v. 9) to Israel. If we look at this antitypical increase of oppression from the standpoint of error especially, this will become apparent. In the Spring of 1878 not only had the brethren expected favor to return to Israel (B 223, par. 1), they expected not only the sleeping saints, but also the living saints, to get their change on Nisan 16, 1878, paralleling our Lord's resurrection (Z '16, 38, 4). This proclamation was made not only in private, but also in public, resulting, when the change of the living saints did not take place as forecast, (1) in many of the public turning against the Truth movement as a falsely prophesying one; and (2) in Mr. Barbour (who radically and dogmatically advocated this change at that date, while Bro. Russell, though expecting it, also told the brethren to be conservative about it as by no means a certain dogmatic thing), to prevent his losing influence as a teacher, seeking to divert attention from his mistake, by denying the ransom and thereby inaugurating and increasing the first Harvest sifting, which continued full-fledged until about October in 1881. The antitypical Israelites, both those begotten and those unbegotten of the Spirit, outside of the Truth movement, beholding these two untoward things—a false forecast proven such by the event, and the ransom controversy raging among the Truth people, naturally held aloof from its message. Furthermore, many antitypical Israelites, not knowing of the two above-mentioned unfavorable conditions, were nevertheless so blinded by Babylonian error on the Church in God's plan, on this life ending all probation, on eternal torment, on the judgment day, on God's justice, on the day of wrath, etc., as to think the message of restitution too good to be true and the high calling too great for them to aspire to. Thus they harkened not to the message that Jesus gave between
April, 1878, and about October, 1881. The increased oppression in the form of sin in its varied ramifications, as shown above, beat down some by their weakness in its presence, bringing them into repeated falls, which discouraged their efforts to live according to the Truth; and it did the same with others, by its increasing their difficulties in overcoming it, which hindered their coming into the Truth, as putting harder demands on their overcoming powers. Thus for anguish of spirit and cruel bondage antitypical Israelites harkened not to the voice of Jesus for the about 3½ involved years, through the Truth message antitypical of the statement of v. 9, in its implying the thoughts of vs. 1-8. Immeasurably sadder was the condition resulting from the antitypical oppression than that from the typical oppression referred to in v. 9, since the antitypical was the worse oppression.
(26) During this same period, April, 1878, to about October, 1881, God encouraged our Lord to launch another public effort along lines similar to that of April, 1877, to April, 1878, antitypical of God's second charge to Moses to go to Pharaoh and request of him to let Israel go out of his land (vs. 10, 11); for we are to remember that the private work done among antitypical Israel antityped the work done in the type to typical Israel, while the public work of the Harvest time antityped the addresses, requests and demands made on Pharaoh. And such public efforts, but very feeble and small, were attempted during these about 3½ years, feeble and small because of the untoward circumstances of the Truth movement and the irresponsiveness of the oppressed antitypical Israelites outside of the Truth. And, as indicated above, almost no new ones were won for the Truth and exceedingly little heed was given to the message in public meetings, in sharpshooter and volunteer work and in the correspondence and conversation work. These conditions made those the most barren 3½ years of the entire reaping period. Moses' reply as to the Lord's charge
in vs. 10, 11, is quite significant and seemed a strong argument. It seemed and was unanswerable, if winning immediate results were the only consideration prompting one to carry out the Lord's charges; for if Israelites would not harken to Moses, Pharaoh certainly was not to be expected so to do. Notice the difference in the expressions: Jehovah spake to Moses; Moses spake before Jehovah. Apparently Moses did not speak the thoughts of v. 12 directly to God, but to others, especially to Aaron (v. 13), and of necessity in Jehovah's hearing and respecting matters of God, hence said it in Jehovah's hearing. This is, we think, the import of the difference in the two expressions.
(27) Antitypically we believe this refers to our Lord's attitude toward the almost entirely resultless public work of the 3½ involved years as being this: it is useless to spend energy on so unpromising a work. His attitude doubtless was reflected in the attitude of antitypical Aaron toward the most entirely fruitless public efforts put forth during that time. Thus our Lord's attitude toward the almost fruitless public efforts was the antitypical speech before Jehovah. Attitudes, as well as acts, speak louder than words, especially to Jehovah! Certainly it is true that if antitypical Israelites would not harken to the Harvest message at that time, Satan, when just starting out with his increased oppression to prevent antitypical Israel's release, was in no mood to accede to the demand. By Moses' saying that he was of uncircumcised lips, he probably meant that his speech and propaganda seemed to Pharaoh to be too undeferential for an ambassador to put before him as a king and was contrary to Pharaoh's ideals and desires as to the matter at issue between them; hence he impressed Pharaoh as being lacking in a proper meekness toward him as Egypt's king—a figurative uncircumcised condition of lips in Pharaoh's sight, thus making the end sought by his ambassadorship unobtainable, Moses' speech and propaganda being unacceptable to the king.
This types the fact that the Harvest message which Jesus gave at that time and stage of its development struck Satan as not that of a consecrated (circumcised) kind. Satan had his idea of consecration and its accompanying teachings. These he had issued forth, especially through his clerical mouthpieces. Jesus' message, even in its at that time comparatively undeveloped form, struck Satan as not submissive and deferential enough to, and not harmonious enough with, his ideals on such subjects; for there were fundamental contradictions between the two sets of views, making the end sought by Jesus' ambassadorship with the emperor of the present evil world unobtainable, which was a fact so long as it was sought by moral suasion alone. Thus force had to be added, both in the type and antitype. Noteworthy is the dual form of the Hebrew word for lips, not plural shephatim, but dual shephataim (v. 9), i.e., two lips, which word, we believe, refers in the antitype to the teachings of the two salvations, the lower being the main theme of the Old and the higher being that of the New Testament. We believe that vs. 29, 30, refer, as a repetition, to the same conversation and words as are found in vs. 1012, but that they are repeated because God wanted to identify the time of this conversation with the continuance of it in the first part of chapter 7, Ex. 6: 14-27 being thrown in as a parenthesis, which antitypically enables us to see that the period of the antitypical efforts at, and success in deliverance covers the Parousia and Epiphany, as vs. 14-27 prove. Therefore vs. 10-13 and 28-30 are to be connected with the conversation of Jehovah and Moses in Ex. 7: 1-5.
(28) God's giving (v. 13) a charge to Moses and Aaron toward Israel and Pharaoh, to deliver Israel from Egypt, types God's charging Jesus and the Church to work privately (Israel) with antitypical Israelites and publicly (Pharaoh) with Satan, to deliver antitypical Israel from Satan's empire. This charge was given from about October, 1880, to October,
1881. As a preparation for its execution, so far as Jesus' acting through that Servant is concerned, Jesus and that Servant occupied themselves in the preparation of the two booklets, Food For Thinking Christians, or Why Was Evil Permitted? and Tabernacle Shadows, which were prepared from October, 1880, to about June, 1881, and then went through the press in the summer of 1881 and were ready for distribution in September. The public distribution of the first of these two pieces of literature was one of the most important single features of the entire Harvest. The second of these was sent out, not to the public in general, which would be an address to Satan, asking deliverance for antitypical Israel, as was the first of these, but to those only who were interested by the first to the extent of inquiring for more help (antitypical Israelites). Thus both features of Jehovah's charge of v. 13 entered into fulfilment with the fall of 1881. The first of these works, as clearly commanded and then executed, is typically described in Ex. 7: 8-13, under whose consideration we hope to give the pertinent details. It is because of the great forwarding of the Harvest work caused by the distribution of Food For Thinking Christians, and because of the immediately preceding and accompanying siftings, as well as of those that followed, that the genealogies, as typical of the groupings of many of the Lord's people resulting therefrom, are, as a parenthesis, sandwiched in between the command to do the involved public and private work and certain accompanying instructions and encouragements pertaining to, and the execution of, that work. While the type does not seem to show why this parenthesis on certain genealogies (Ex. 6: 14-27) occurs here, the antitype fully clarifies the presence of this parenthesis where it is.
(29) If we keep in mind the antitypical setting of the section of Scripture which we are studying, from the time of Moses' and Aaron's arrival in Egypt onward to Israel's departure from Egypt, as referring to
conditions during the first and second stages of our Lord's Second Advent, we will see that this part of the type refers not only to the Parousia, but also to the Epiphany. We have already called attention to this fact as pointed out in types previously considered; and in the study of Ex. 6: 14-27 we will find other very strong evidence in proof of the same fact. Note, after giving the genealogies and mentioning Moses and Aaron among them, this section, in vs. 26, 27, remarks as follows: "These are that Aaron and Moses, to whom the Lord said, Bring out [by a private ministry] the children of Israel … "according to their armies [groups of warriors for the Lord—the Parousia Priests and the Epiphany Priests, Levites and the twelve secular tribes]. These are they [Moses and Aaron, acting antitypically in their capacity as God's Special Ambassador and this Ambassador's special mouthpiece during the Parousia and Epiphany] which spake [by their public ministry] to Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to bring out the children of Israel from Egypt. These are that Moses and Aaron [not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the wilderness march to the Red Sea and its crossing, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the march to Sinai, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of Sinai, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the wilderness journey from Sinai onward, not the antitypical Moses and Aaron of the smitten rock and the consequent exclusion from Canaan]." These definite and limiting expressions are inserted here to enable us in the antitype to recognize exactly the phase of the Moses and Aaron antitypes that is here called to our attention. They therefore prove that their ministry from the standpoint of the type, from their arrival in, to their departure from Egypt, types the delivering activities of Jesus and the Church during the Parousia and Epiphany. This fact enables us to construe the primary antitypes of the genealogies of Ex. 6: 14-25 as belonging to the Parousia and Epiphany, though the tentative and reckoned deliverance
that faith justification has given from symbolic Egypt all through the Age warrants, as secondary antitypes, our application of the Levite features of this genealogy to the Gospel-Age Levites, as we have done, e.g., in EPIPHANY STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. VIII, 27-108. With these prefatory remarks we are now prepared for a consideration of the details, type and antitype, of Ex. 6: 1427, particularly those in vs. 14-25, having just given details on vs. 26, 27.
(30) First of all it will be noted that vs. 14-25 do not give a full genealogy of Israelites and Levites. Only three of the tribes are mentioned, one of which is that of Levi. Again, the subdivisions of the Amramite and Hebronite Levites are not here given. These omissions are not to be regarded as accidental. They are specifically designed; for only those genealogies are given that are intended to describe only specially active divisions among the Levites and tribal Israelites, as a finished picture, after our Lord's Parousia set in, up to, and including the departure from symbolic Egypt of the involved groups by the end of the Epiphany. First of all, two of the twelve non-sacred tribes, in their heads of families, are presented: Reuben in his four groups descendent from Reuben's four sons, and Simeon in his six groups descendent from Simeon's six sons. We understand that the Epiphany Camp adherents of those Epiphany Levites, who sought but failed to obtain control of the three corporations that our Pastor left, and not those Levites themselves, are here typed by Reuben and his descendants; and that the Epiphany Camp adherents of those Epiphany Levites who sought and obtained control of the three corporations that our Pastor left, and not those Levites themselves, are here typed by Simeon and his descendants. The reason that we so view this matter is the following: The leaders [crown-losing princes of the Epiphany, not those of the Gospel Age!] of these two Epiphany tribes (Reuben and Simeon),
as parts of the Epiphany Camp, are Epiphany Gershonite Levites and Epiphany Merarite Levites.
(31) Already have the Epiphany Merarite Levites in their Society adherents built a fair sized part of the Epiphany tribe of Simeon. And they will after their cleansing, which will perhaps take place after Armageddon, though it may take place during Armageddon, greatly increase their Epiphany Camp adherents. This we gather, among other things, from the fact that Jehu's grandson Joash, or Jehoash, as the third member of the Jehu dynasty to reign after Jehu's revolution, in his capacity as king regarded Elisha as the Lord's special mouthpiece to Israel and acted in harmony with that thought (2 Kings 13: 1425). This implies Elisha's great influence at that time and types the large post-Armageddon influence of the Society brethren over the Epiphany Camp. On the other hand, after their cleansing the Epiphany Gershonites, as the lay preachers, missionaries, evangelists, leaders of pastoral workers' classes and pastors of that time, will turn many through faith in the truths of Volume I into the Epiphany tribe of Reuben in the Epiphany Camp. We believe the divisions of these two tribes, as indicated in vs. 14, 15, are along language lines, as were those of the Gospel-Age Reubenites and Simeonites, EPIPHANY STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. VIII, 15 (14)—18 (16). Therefore we classify them as follows: Reuben's son Hanoch, or Enoch (teaching, or dedicated) represents the English-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Gershonite Levites. His son Pallu (famous) represents the Germanic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Gershonite Levites. His son Hezron (blooming) represents the Slavonic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Gershonite Levites. And his son Carmi (vine dresser) types the Scandinavian-speaking Camp adherents of the Gershonite Levites. The Gershonite activities as such are now in the lands of these four language groups almost exclusively among Truth people,
except in Poland, where they work toward the public; for as yet they as a whole are doing very little in the way of a camp-building work among the peoples of these four language groups. Simeon's son Jemuel (God's day) represents the English-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Jamin (right hand) represents the Germanic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Ohad (might) represents the Romancelanguaged (French, Hispanian and Italian) Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Jachin (established) represents the Slavic-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. His son Zohar (brightness) represents the Scandinavian-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. And his son Shaul (asked, desired) represents the Greek-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites. Shaul's being the son of a Canaanitish woman perhaps types the fact that the Greek-speaking Camp adherents of the Epiphany Merarites will be the most error-developed group of this tribe, being influenced by the Greek Church.
(32) Next (v. 16) come the Levites in this genealogy, as the last of the three tribes here genealogized. We have in various parts of our writings given the most of the Epiphany antitypes of these and will for the most part but briefly indicate these here. The Epiphany Gershonites type those Truth people who in the Epiphany sought but failed to obtain control of Bro. Russell's corporations and then formed two organizations of their own. The Epiphany Merarites represent those Truth people who in the Epiphany sought and obtained control of Bro. Russell's corporations and then, in the case of one of their groups, formed another corporation. The Epiphany Kohathites represent those Truth people who in the Epiphany use no corporations or associations to do their work, their work, while largely individually wrought, being more or less directed by certain of their leaders. All three classes of these Epiphany Levites are, like the three
groups of Levites in the other periods, typed from the standpoint of their adherence or non-adherence to corporations or associations, in Num. 8: 1-9. Levi himself represents the Levites as a whole. The Epiphany Gershonites (v. 17) are divided, into two groups: the Epiphany Libnites (free or wilful ones) are the adherents of the British Bible Students Committee (B. S. C., for short). The Epiphany Shimites (famous ones) are the adherents of the Pastoral Bible Institute (P. B. I, for short), of which the Dawnites are an off-shoot. The Epiphany Amramites (v. 18) are the Hirsho-Kittingerites. The Epiphany Izeharites (v. 18) are the self-appointed usurping Levitical exegetes. The Epiphany Hebronites (v. 18) are the Ritchieites, who, however, are now feeling around for another leader, since Bro. Ritchie refuses to act as a leader. The Epiphany Uzzielites (v.. 18) are the Sturgeonites, who for years have lost Menta Sturgeon as a leader and have ceased to act as a movement, which is also true of the Ritchieites. Others are now making their bid to be their leaders. Kohath himself type's the organization or association abhorring and non-adhering Levites. The Epiphany Mahlite Merarites (v. 19) are the Society adherents; and the Epiphany Mushite Merarites are the Standfasts, whose present most active group is the Elijah Voice Society, which seems to have and control the fourth Merarite antitypical wagon.
(33) In v. 20 Amram does not represent the same as the Epiphany Amramites, which he does in Numbers; for it will be remembered that in v. 20 Amram's sons, Moses and Aaron, represent Jesus and the Church in the Parousia and Epiphany, as we showed above. Moreover, it was Moses' two sons, Gershom and Eliezer, who headed the Amramite Levites, not Amram, nor Aaron, nor Moses, since the latter two are regarded by God as His priests (1 Chro. 23: 14-17; Ps. 99: 6). As pointed out in Chapter I, Amram (high people) here seems to type God as our
Lord's and the Church's Father, and Jochebed (glorified) seems to type the Truth and its Servants, the Sarah Covenant. The Septuagint, the Vulgate and the Syriac all render a part of this text as follows: "the daughter of his father's sister." There has, therefore, probably fallen out of
v. 20 the Hebrew word for daughter (bath) before the words, "his father's sister". This remark must be made, since it is a violation of moral law to marry a father's sister (Lev. 20: 19), but not so in the case of a first cousin. Also God would scarcely have blessed such an immoral relation with such children as Moses, Aaron and Miriam (Num. 26:59). It will be noticed that the name of Miriam is in this verse omitted. But one of the old Hebrew MMS., the Samaritan Pentateuch, also the Septuagint and the Syriac texts of this verse, all have it. The expression, "and Miriam, their sister," probably belongs in this verse. If it does, she should be regarded here, as in some (but not all) other passages, as a type of the Great Company. As already shown, Izehar types, for the Epiphany, the self-appointed usurping exegetes, who are divided into the sin-offering siftlings of the Parousia and Epiphany (Num. 26: 11) (Korah—baldness—in allusion to their great bereftment of Truth), into the adherents of Bro. Olson (Nepheg—root) and into the adherents of Bro. Gunter (Zichri— remembered). We have already shown that the Uzzielites (v. 22) are the Sturgeonites. Milton Riemer with much of Menta Sturgeon's views, spirit and practices, masking under the name of a St. Joseph, Mo., class, is leading the movement of Riemerites, typed by Mishael (whom God saves); others have taken up some of Menta Sturgeon's spirit, views and practices, apparently not suspecting this fact, and formed two groups: the Bolgerites (Elzaphan— God watches) and the Lardenites (Zithri-protected).
(34) Aaron (enlightened, teacher; v. 23) represents here the Parousia and Epiphany Church as Christ's mouthpiece to the brethren and the public.
Elisheba (God's oath) represents the Oath-bound Covenant, by union with which the Church as Christ's mouthpiece developed (1) certain Truth-leaders in the Parousia who later became the Parousia leaders of siftings by teaching false doctrines (Nadab—wilful; Lev. 10: 1, 2); (2) certain Truth-leaders in the Epiphany (Abihu—He is my father) who later became Epiphany leaders of siftings by teaching false doctrines (Lev. 10: 1, 2); (3) the Parousia messenger (Eleazar—God is help), who was given charge (a) of the Church, (b) of its doctrinal, correctional, refutational and ethical teachings, (c) of its work (Num. 4: 16; Matt. 24: 4547; Luke 12: 42-44), (d) of the Kohathites (Num. 3: 32) and (e) specifically of the correct interpretation of the Scriptures on the ransom, atonement, sin-offerings, mediator and covenants (Num. 16: 37-41); and (4) the Epiphany Messenger (Ithamar—land or isle of palms=Great Company and Youthful Worthy matters), whose charge is (a) to interpret for the Church, Great Company and Youthful Worthies everything Biblical not interpreted by the Parousia Messenger (Rev. 19: 9, 10); (b) to expound and defend correctly everything connected with the antitypical Tabernacle, regardless of whether it was already done by the Servant or not (Ex. 38: 21); (c) to supervise the work of dealing with the Great Company and the Youthful Worthies; (d) to direct the work of the Epiphany Gershonites and Merarites of both the Great Company and Youthful Worthies (Num. 4: 28, 33) and (e) to arrange their corporations and associations (Num. 7: 8). Korah's three sons (v. 29) type the three groups of the sin-offering siftlings: (1) the Williamsonites (Assir, prisoner); (2) the Henningesites (Elkanah, provided by God); and (3) the McPhailites (Abiasaph, my father gathers). Eleazar (v. 25) types our Pastor as that Servant in his relations as overseer and teacher to the Church and the Kohathite Great Company and Youthful Worthy Levites, i.e., toward these as Truth people;
but Eleazar's son, Phinehas (brazen face), types our Pastor in his relation to the nominal church—the Camp (Num. 25: 1-18). Our Pastor suffered great affliction (Putiel—afflicted for God) in his zeal for God as He was misrepresented, slandered and dishonored by the false teachings and wrong practices of the Camp, which made him of strong countenance—"he presented a bold front"—(developed himself into Phinehas, brazen face) against such teachings and practices. Phinehas, therefore, types him as a priest in his relations to the errors and wrong practices of the nominal church. Certainly his face was set like brass in strength against these errors and wrong practices. The name of Eleazar's wife is nowhere mentioned in the Bible, so far as we have been able to trace. This may type the fact that Eleazar did not exercise other qualities and teachings than his usual qualities and teachings exercised as a priest among the real people of God, when he developed himself into the Phinehas feature of his ministry—his work toward the nominal people of God. The above are the groups and individuals (v. 25) specially brought to attention as particularly active in the Parousia and Epiphany, the deliverance time.
(35) We have above sufficiently commented on vs. 2630, severed by the genealogical parenthesis of vs. 14-25, from vs. 10-13, of which they are a repetition. Accordingly, our study has completely covered Ex. 6 and brought us up to Ex. 7, which up to v. 14 we will now proceed to expound. From Ex. 7: 13 we will skip to Ex. 10: 21. The reason for the omission is that the omitted verses treat of the first eight plagues, whose detailed discussion we leave for consideration until we treat the three woes and seven last plagues of Revelation. We cannot well avoid the treatment of the ninth and tenth plague here, because they are most of all vitally, directly and causally related to Israel's deliverance, and because its general thought has already been given by our Pastor, while he has written next to nothing