Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
financial obligations as to the Tabernacle, e.g., the mortgage, he would continue to control its affairs, the connection showing that he had been asked to give up that control. His answer showed under what conditions he was willing so to do. He further told the managers to find out whether the ecclesia desired to assume all the financial obligations; and, if so, he was willing to place in its control all its activities and business; if not, he would continue to control these. The parts of the letter that stated these conditions H.J.S. concealed from the elders, under the plea that they were confidential. Thus he deliberately deceived the elders on the real situation. Under the impression that J. Hemery had the previous Sunday, Jan. 21, told the detailed facts of the conspiracy, J., on discovering this deception, proved publicly before the meeting that H.J.S. was a deliberate deceiver of 9 of the signatory elders, and thus a gross evil-doer, and gave him before the church one of the severest rebukes that he has ever administered to any Levite. The above facts are the antitypes of the facts of Esther 7: 1-10, which antitypical facts will now be connectedly set forth as the antitypes of those of vs. 1-10.
As said above, the discussions and acts as to the London Tabernacle election and its related matters from Jan. 7 to Jan. 28 are the antitype of the banquet scene of vs. 1-10. In the second banquet J. is no longer alone, as in the first banquet, used to represent the Church (Esther, the queen, v. 1), but others also are joined to him in this representative capacity. The first of these others was H.C. Thackway, with his resolution acts of Jan.' 7. Then the other six non-signatory elders, particularly J. Hemery, then increasing numbers of the ecclesia's membership, until by Jan. 28, at the end of J.'s address, the vast bulk of the ecclesia, some being yet in doubt, not knowing as yet the full essential facts, which J. had supposed they had heard from J. Hemery on Jan. 21. All of these who joined in condemning H.J.S. also acted therein as representatives
of the whole Church everywhere. Our Lord through the events, beginning Jan. 7, asked the Church (second day, v. 2) again, in its representatives (said again unto Esther), what things she desired (petition … request), assuring her that as His joint-heir they would be granted her (performed … half of the kingdom). The actual petition was preceded by a tactful introduction (found favor … please the king, v. 3). Then it was expressed in H.C. Thackway's resolutions, which in effect asked as her petition (petition) that the Church's life as to controlling, by her vote, her affairs be granted, and that the same right, as the life of the Truth people, i.e., to control in her affairs, everywhere may be granted, as her request (request). Then the exposure of the conspiracy followed. This had its first beginnings in the discussions on the above-mentioned resolutions, Jan. 7, a larger expression by the exposure through J. Hemery's address on Jan. 21, as expressing J.'s opinion on the conspiracy, and its blunt and forceful exposure through J.'s address on Jan. 28 (sold, I and my people … to perish, v. 4). It was said that if a measure of power to have a voice in the control of the Church by her vote had been left her, she would not have brought out the matter (sold for bondmen and bondwomen, I had held my tongue), even though the evil-doer could not prevent some injury to come to the Lord's cause (enemy … king's damage).
The discussion on H.C. Thackway's resolution, Jan. 7, was by the Lord manipulated in a way to raise faintly the question in the minds of some of the brethren of the ecclesia as to who sponsored the movement that would have killed the Church and others of the Lord's people as to their right to control by their vote their church matters. This question was raised more clearly through J. Hemery's above-mentioned address as J.'s representative, Jan. 21, and was most clearly raised in the minds of all the ecclesia by J.'s address, Jan. 28 (king … said … Who is he, and where … presume [literally, whose heart
filled him] … to do so? v. 5). With increasing clearness, beginning Jan. 7, proceeding through Jan. 21 and culminating Jan. 28, the informed brethren, as representatives of the Church (Esther said, v. 6), pointed out H.J.S. as the guilty one, whose guilt as an opponent, ill-wisher and evil-doer was increasingly brought out between Jan. 7 and 28 (adversary and enemy is this wicked Haman). Fear before the Lord and the Church seized on H.J.S. on his exposure's coming out faintly, on Jan. 7, increasingly, on Jan. 21 and culminatively, on Jan. 28 (Haman was afraid before the king and the queen). At each stage of H.J.S.'s fear, the Lord withdrew Himself from the discussion in displeasure with him (king … banquet of wine in his wrath, v. 7) and occupied Himself with other features of the work (garden). Thus the subject was by the Lord dropped from Jan. 7 until Jan. 21, and then was again dropped until Jan. 28. In the meantime H.J.S. made a faint plea for himself with the Church on Jan. 7, and came out more clearly in self-defense as a plea for his standing to the Church on Jan. 21 (stood up … for his life to Esther … evil determined … by the king). This moved J. Hemery, at J.'s direction for such a contingency, to make the statement above-mentioned, which was a return to the scene by the Lord (king returned … place of the banquet of wine, v. 8). H.J.S.'s self-defense was in reality the offering of an insult to the Church in their representatives who accused him, for it implied broadly that the views of his accusers were false (Haman was fallen upon the bed whereon Esther was). The returned Lord (king returned) was made most indignant at this impudent self-defense of H.J.S., who should have heartily pleaded guilty and humbly asked for mercy, instead of making a defense, which was actually an attack upon the Church in her representatives, an aspersion upon her honor. This indignation was, first, expressed by a resolution, passed Jan. 21, asking J. to appear on Jan. 28 as the
Society's special representative, and as such give on the situation his thought, which J. Hemery had in his statement assured the ecclesia was an adverse one; and it was, secondly, expressed by J.'s making that appearance as an accuser of H.J.S. (Will he force the queen also before me in the house?). The passing of that resolution, Jan. 21, and J.'s appearance before the ecclesia, Jan. 28, were the Lord's sentence on H.J.S. (word … covered Haman's face).
J, studied H.J.S.'s self-defensive and deceitful letter to him, of Jan. 11, received Jan. 13, at Glasgow, Scotland. It was while J. (Harbonah [ass-driver, i.e., doctrine-teacher], v. 9), one of our Lord Jesus' servants (chamberlains), was preparing to address the ecclesia, Jan. 28 [In some way this event was mistakenly dated Jan. 21 in Vol. VII, 42. J. was about 300 miles away from London, at S. Shields, England, on Jan. 21, and was at London on Jan. 28, the proper date for this event], that he discovered, by a comparison of a part of a quotation in H.J.S.'s letter of Jan. 11 to J. with part of a smaller section of that quotation in the report that the elders wrote to Bro. Russell accompanying the conspiracy resolution, that H.J.S. had made an incomplete quotation of a part of a letter of Bro. Russell, of Oct., 22, 1915, to his fellow elders. H.J.S.'s letter of Jan. 11, quoted in large part in Vol. VII, 39-46, was a part of his theory of the Tabernacle situation—his theory being the symbolic gallows on which he desired to prove J. a public wrongdoer. J.'s noting the above-mentioned difference in the two quotations a few hours before he addressed the Tabernacle congregation the afternoon of Jan. 28 was the antitype of Harbonah's stating before the king that Haman had prepared a gallows on which to hang Mordecai and that this gallows was in Haman's house (v. 9). Immediately the thought arose in J.' s mind, Was it by this incomplete quotation that H.J.S. made the elders think that Bro. Russell wanted to surrender his control of Tabernacle arrangements? He decided to
find this out at the afternoon's meeting by inquiring of the elders: (1) whether that incomplete part of the quotation had convinced them that Bro. Russell wanted the change; (2) whether they knew that the rest of the quotation as it was given J. in H.J.S.'s letter to him, of Jan. 11, immediately followed what H.J.S. had read to them; and (3) whether they would have believed that Bro. Russell was by the full quotation expressing a desire to be relieved from control of the Tabernacle arrangements. When J. appeared before the ecclesia, after a few introductory remarks, he put these three questions to the seven signatory elders present (two having already left the church to form a new church; and, of course, J. did not ask them of H.J.S. and W. Crawford), reading the full quotation after asking the second question and before it was answered. To the first all seven answered, Yes; to the second all seven answered, No; and to the third all seven answered, No.
By the series of the above-mentioned acts, beginning just after the discovery of the discrepancy between the two quotations, proceeding through the drawing up of the three questions and ending with the answer to the third question, our Lord charged J. to prove publicly before the assembly of perhaps from 700 to 800 brethren, H.J.S. to be a gross wrong-doer: (1) in seeking to presbyterianize the church; (2) in deceiving nine of the ten elders (W. Crawford, the 10th, was not deceived; he was privy to the deception) into believing that Bro. Russell favored ridding himself of the control of the Tabernacle arrangements, as a step precedent to the presbyterianizing of the church and (3) in trying to justify his course (the king said, Hang him thereon). Backed by the knowledge, of H.J.S.'s Bethel and Tabernacle wrong-doings, J. was filled with righteous indignation at the discovery of his trickery against the elders; and he proceeded publicly and very severely, but tersely to prove H.J.S. a willful wrong-doer in the above
three respects. The symbolic hanging was most unceremonious; but it was complete; and it was done on his theory of the situation, which he had prepared to prove publicly J. to be a wrong-doer (hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai, v. 10). Not having sufficient knowledge on the matter, some in the audience showed marked disapproval of J.'s course that afternoon; and some others, though recognizing that H.J.S. had been guilty of wrong-doing, feared that he had been too severely dealt with; but the bulk of the audience saw enough of the nature of the wrong-doing to give hearty approval to J.'s course that afternoon. J., however, knew that he had the Lord's approval in what he had done; and v. 10 shows that his course satisfied the Lord, and that the punishment inflicted by J. upon H.J.S. that afternoon satisfied our Lord's sense of justice (king's wrath pacified).
H.J.S.'s public exposure was not the end of the fight. There were other but less sharp battles to follow. But the events of Jan. 28 ended in our Lord's putting the whole movement of H.J.S. into the Church's control (that day … Ahasuerus give the house of Haman … unto Esther, 8: 1). The bulk of the Church that day owned its oneness with J. in Christ (Esther had told what he was unto her). This gave J. a still more favored standing with our Lord (Mordecai came before the king), who gave him in the Church's support the proof of his having chief charge in the Lord's work, as our Lord's special representative (king took off his ring … taken from Haman, and gave it unto Mordecai, v. 2). Moreover, the Church in its London Tabernacle representatives put J. ahead of the signatory elders (Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman). But there yet remained the work of destroying the whole clericalistic movement in the Church; and this work the faithful set themselves to do by entreating the Lord to put an end to H.J.S.'s clericalistic movement against the Church's right to rule under the Lord in her midst (Esther spake … king
… at his feet, and besought him … put away the mischief of Haman … against the Jews, v. 3). To this petition the Lord Jesus showed the favor of His power (king held out the golden sceptre toward Esther, v. 4). Thus encouraged, the Church appeared before the Lord for the matter at hand (arose, and stood before the king). With expressions of her desire to be favored by the Lord (please the king … found favor … right before the king … pleasing in his eyes, v. 5), the Church asked that the subject be disposed of by reversing the permission gotten by H.J. S: to take away the right of the Lord's people to rule under the Lord by vote in her midst (reverse the letters … wrote to destroy the Jews); for she could not endure seeing these rights abolished from the consecrated, especially from the Little Flock (endure … evil … my people … destruction of my kindred, v. 6). This petition came from the hearts of the brethren after H.J.S., following J.'s proving him a wrong-doer, asked the Church that afternoon to disregard J., "this stranger in our midst." Instead of following H.J.S.'s advice, the Church, encouraged by the Lord's Word and providence, secured from the Lord the power of prescribing ways and means to overthrow H.J.S.'s scheme.
Accordingly, the Lord's providences, pointing back to the work already done (king said … have given Esther the house of Haman, and him … upon the gallows, because he laid his hand upon the Jews, v. 7), indicated that the Church and J. by the Lord's authority institute decrees that would unchangeably empower His people to defend their right to control their affairs by their free vote (Write ye … as it liketh you, in the king's name, and seal it with the king's ring … which … no man may reverse, v. 8). Accordingly, suitable motions, at J.'s suggestions, were passed, the voting on H.J.S. and W. Crawford as elders was delayed, and word was sent to the churches by these motions [for many members of many churches were present at this
meeting who acted as messengers therein] for the brethren to stand for their involved rights (were the king's scribes called … was written … all that Mordecai commanded … according to their language, v. 9). This news was carried by letter and word of mouth (v. 10), informing the brethren everywhere that the Lord had granted them the right to stand refutatively for ecclesiaism as against clericalism (king granted the Jews … to gather … stand for their life … to slay … all … that would assault them … the spoil of them for a prey, v. 11). This they should do at their elections (one day … 13th. … of Adar, v. 12). The statement of this permission for their elections was circulated (commandment … was published, v. 13) in every church in Britain by word of mouth or letter (posts … hastened … by the king's commandment, v. 14). Thus the happenings at the Tabernacle business meeting of Jan. 28 were made an example for all churches (decree was given at Shushan the palace). At the end of the service that night, after J.'s credentials were read to the congregation and after J. preached to a congregation of from 750 to 800 brethren, J. in actuality and in the belief of the congregation left the scene clothed in full executive authority as the Lord's special representative, found faithful and righteous (royal apparel of blue and white, v. 15), as the Lord's authorized mouthpiece (great crown of gold [Rev. 4: 4]), and as a royal priest—one who had maintained his priesthood until after the door was closed (with a garment of fine linen and purple), amid the rejoicing of the Tabernacle ecclesia, which had witnessed his fight against, and victory over the chief of the clericalists (city of Shushan … was glad). Especially were the faithful glad, enlightened and honored at this turn of affairs (Jews had light and gladness … honor, v. 16). The same things occurred among the faithful in all the British churches where the message of the Lord's pertinent dealings came (whithersoever the king's commandment…
came, v. 17). Yea, not a few of H.J.S.'s sympathizers were by the facts of his guilt turned into supporters of ecclesiaism as against clericalism (became Jews; for the fear … fell upon them).
On Jan. 28 it was decided to go on with the affairs of the Church as against presbyterianism so as to give the supporters of ecclesiaism the opportunity to crush the former and firmly establish the latter. This decision, as shown above, was antitypical of the decree of 8: 10-13. Chapter 9 shows how this decree was carried out in two parts: (1) on Feb. 4 and (2) on Feb. 18. On Feb. 4 the defenders of ecclesiaism gathered in large numbers for a business meeting of the Tabernacle, according to the motion of Jan 28. The defenders of ecclesiaism on Feb. 4 were not only encouraged at the utter discomfiture of H.J.S. on the previous Sunday, but were greatly increased in numbers by defections from H.J.S.'s former supporters. Hence as the determined day approached (day … drew near, v. 1) when the Shearno-Crawfordite clericalists hoped to have the victory over the ecclesiaists (the day that the enemies … hoped to have power), it turned out exactly the opposite (turned to the contrary), for the ecclesiaists had complete power over the clericalists (Jews had rule over them). In courage the ecclesiaists assembled (Jews gathered themselves together, v. 2), intent, not only on destroying (1) presbyterianism, the rule of elders in their midst, but also on destroying (2) the revolutionistic practices that the clericalists had been advocating and partially had introduced, i.e., (a) dividing the London Tabernacle congregation into a large number of small and uninfluential ecclesias, of which they had already formed two from its members, (b) setting aside Berean lessons, (c) introducing textbookism, i.e., the study of the Bible as a textbook, (d) filling the Tabernacle pulpit with amateur preachers, contrary to that Servant's arrangements, and (e) setting aside J. Hemery as assistant Pastor, despite Bro. Russell's arranging
for him to be such. Of these evils presbyterianism and textbookism were the worst. By the ecclesia's resolution of Feb. 4 all six of these things were overthrown in its midst; and when the other churches were apprised of the situation, they were likewise overthrown in their midst. Everywhere the ecclesiaists swept everything before them by overwhelming majorities (in their cities … no man could withstand them), for their enemies were put into abject fear of them (such as sought their hurt … for the fear of them fell upon all people).
The elders and deacons in other ecclesias (rulers … lieutenants … deputies and officers, v. 3) furthered ecclesiaism as against presbyterianism (helped the Jews); for what they saw and learned of J.'s powers and acts made them fear to oppose the reforms that were being advanced (fear of Mordecai fell upon them). The reading of J.'s credentials by the London Tabernacle's secretary, at J. Hemery's suggestion, to the from 750 to 800 brethren from many ecclesias, at the night meeting, of Jan. 28, to show what powers "this stranger in our midst" had, greatly increased J.'s influence wherever his powers became known, which was in all the churches (Mordecai was great in the king's house, and his fame went … provinces … Mordecai waxed greater and greater, v. 4). The ecclesiaists routed in the debate every opponent of ecclesiaism who dared raise his voice even weakly in defense of presbyterianism (Jews smote all their enemies with … destruction, v. 5) and did to the defenders of presbyterianism what they thought right required (did what they would unto those that hated them). In the Tabernacle ecclesia they refuted and defeated all new-creaturely and other revolutionists, who were thus in a class lower than the Divine class (in Shushan … Jews slew and destroyed 500 [500 is the product of 10, 10 and 5; the two tens stand for Great Company and Youthful Worthy revolutionists and the five stands for their being unclean],
v. 6). Moreover, the ten signatory elders were thoroughly refuted in their course as to the resolution, report and covering letter, the main part of the revolutionists' correspondence sent to Brooklyn. Not only so, but those of them that had been re-elected Jan. 22 were required to promise to submit to the ecclesia's arrangements in the six above-mentioned particulars of revolutionism, of which they were varyingly and unequally guilty. These ten elders are, in vs. 7-10, set forth typically as slain (refuted), in addition to the 500 of v. 6. These ten were J. Gentle (Parshandatha [given forth to light], v. 7), T. Hart (Dalphon [dropping]), R. Cormack (Aspatha [given by the horse-doctrine]), J. C. Radwell (Poratha [ornament], v. 8), W. Crawford (Adalia [bulky]), E. J. Doe (Aridatha [strong]), F. B. Edgell (Parmashta [strong-fisted], v. 9), A. Cruickshank (Arisai (lion-like]), C. J. Cotton (Aridai [strong] and W. P. Frazer (Vajezatha [white]). These ten elders, who submitted to H.J.S.'s program of presbyterianizing the Church (ten sons of Haman … enemy of the Jews, v. 10), the brethren in the meeting of Feb. 4 refuted in their theory and practice (they slew), but the anti-clericalists in their victory took no advantage of them, e.g., they did not expel from the eldership those of them who were re-elected, and who promised to submit to the ecclesia's arrangements (on the spoil laid they not their hand). And during that day (on that day, v. 11) a description (number) of the refuted ones among the elders, deacons and unofficial members of the ecclesia (slain in Shushan) was made (brought … king).
By His providences the Lord Jesus made clear (the king said, v. 12) to the faithful (Esther) that the measurably faithful were refuted (slain … 500 men) in the Tabernacle (Shushan the palace), including the signatory elders (ten sons of Haman). He raised in their minds the question as to what the true ones had done in the other British churches (what … rest … provinces?). His providences in the meeting of Feb. 4, connected with the
brethren's desire for more information on the conspiracy, and with what should be done with the elected signatory elders, also suggested that the faithful present their further wants for themselves (petition) and for their brethren thy request further), He pledging to grant these. To meet the desires of the brethren in these two particulars, the faithful (Esther, v. 13) asked that, the Lord being willing (please the king), the facts exposing the details of the conspiracy be presented to the Church by J., on Feb. 18, that the Church may pass its judgment thereon (let … Jews … Shushan to do tomorrow also … this day's decree) and do to the signatory elders what the evidence may require (Haman's ten sons be hanged). The Lord, through the passing of the pertinent motions, Feb. 4, charged that these two things be done Feb. 18 (king commanded … done, v. 14). Accordingly, the ecclesia requested J. to appear before it Feb. 18, to give it the details of the conspiracy and to suggest the final disposal of the matters pertinent to the ten signatory elders. Accordingly, the afternoon of Feb. 18 J. appeared before about 800 brethren of the London Tabernacle and other ecclesias (Jews … Shushan gathered … 14th … Adar, v. 15), and for two and one-half hours exposed the conspiracy in detail, as a cesspool of iniquity.
He had beforehand prepared in outline the facts of wrong-doing under the subject, Objections To The Election Of H.J.S. (and W. Crawford) to eldership in the London Tabernacle. The following seven general charges were presented as reasons against their being so elected: I. They engineered the entire project of the resolution. II. They were disloyal to their fellow elders. III. They were disloyal to the assistant pastor (J. Hemery). IV. They were disloyal to the ecclesia. V. They were disloyal to Bro. Russell. VI. They were disloyal to the Truth. VII. They were consciously disloyal to their office. In proof of each charge, every one of which contained a number of specifications,
some of them as many as seven, J. read extracts from the correspondence sent to Bro. Russell, from the minutes of the elders and from some of the documents that the ecclesia's secretary gave him, as well as called on many brethren present, especially elders, for their evidence as to the facts. Incidental to these matters and their proof, the ten signatory elders were, proven wrong-doers (hanged Haman's ten sons). Six of the ten had been re-elected as elders. Under J.'s questioning that afternoon they acknowledged their wrongs, expressed their regrets and asked the ecclesia for forgiveness. Up to Feb. 18 there was quite a number of H.J.S.'s sympathizers in and out of the ecclesia who were incensed against J. for his exposure and sharp rebukes of H.J.S. on Jan. 28. Some who were not his sympathizers, and who knew but little of the facts, felt that J. had dealt H.J.S. too hard blows on Jan. 28. But after his charges and proofs were heard on Feb. 18, even H.J.S.'s sympathizers who were present were convinced that H.J.S. richly deserved what he received (slew 300 men at Shushan). None of the brethren took advantage of the refuted ones (on the prey they laid not their hand). This entire assembly of about 800 brethren thereupon unanimously voted J. thanks and appreciation for what he had done for the Church, and confidence in his character as a servant of the Lord. H.J.S. and W. Crawford were nearly unanimously defeated as elder candidates.
The pertinent happenings at the London Tabernacle were reported to the ecclesias throughout Britain and Ireland by mail, as well as by verbal statements, mainly of brethren from other ecclesias who were present at the pertinent London Tabernacle business meetings. These reports gave a death-blow to the clericalists and their supporters at the subsequent elections of the extra-London ecclesias throughout Britain and Ireland (Jews … provinces gathered … stood for their lives … slew … 75,000, v. 16). So complete was the victory of ecclesiaism over
presbyterianism that in such churches the defeat was complete at but one set of meetings, whereas at the London Tabernacle two sets of meetings had to be held before clericalism was slain (rest from their, enemies). Accordingly, they fought for their right to rule by vote at but one set of meetings (13th day … Adar, v. 17). These, like the London brethren, did not take advantage of the defeated clericalists (laid not their hands on the prey). From then onward they had rest from the clericalists (14th day … rested). Of course they joyously feasted on the Word and the pertinent privileges that it conferred on them (made it a day of feasting and gladness). After their two sets of meeting periods when they fought for their right to rule by their vote (Jews … Shushan assembled … 13th … 14th, v. 18), the London brethren had rest from their struggles (15th … rested). They then feasted on the Word and the pertinent privileges that it gave them (made it a day of feasting and gladness). The victory was followed in the extra-London churches (villages … unwalled towns, v. 19), on the antitypical 14th day, by joy and Truth feasting (gladness and feasting), a holiday (a good day [to this day the Jews call a holiday by the words, a good day]), and they made it the occasion of exchanging the good things of Truth as gifts (sending portions one to another). J. by his teachings, preachings, letters and conversations everywhere sent the message that the brethren should maintain in teaching and practice ecclesiaism as against presbyterianism (Mordecai wrote … letters … Jews … nigh and far, v. 20), and to fix the matter thus at all their meetings and elections always (establish … keep the 14th … and the 15th … yearly, v. 21). These meeting and election times should be held as such, because they mean congregational liberty enjoyed as the fruit of victory over clericalism in the form of Presbyterianism (rested from their enemies, v. 22), the victory that turned sorrow into joy (month … turned … sorrow to joy), bereavement into rich possession (mourning into a good
day). He exhorted them to make such days times of enjoyment of the Truth and gladness (days of feasting and joy), bestowing the good things of the Truth on one another (sending portions one to another) and offering the Truth to the Truth-hungry who did not have it (gifts to the poor).
The properly disposed (Jews, v. 23) accepted the privilege, which they 'had exercised immediately after the victory, as a perpetual thing (undertook to do as they had begun), even as J. charged them (as Mordecai had written), in commemoration of the overthrow of the dangerous conspiracy started and directed by H.J.S. (Haman … devised, v. 24), the enemy of the faithful (the enemy of all the Jews), the vote-casting maker (had cast Pur … lot), in seeking the injury of the ecclesiaists (consume … destroy them). But the wicked conspiracy (wicked device, v. 25) against God's people (against the Jews) was by our Lord Jesus' command (he commanded) turned against him (return upon his own head), resulting in the public proof of his and his ten co-conspirators' guilt as wrong-doers (he and his sons … hanged). Hence the church business and election meetings are made voting affairs whereby each ecclesia under the Lord regulates her own matters (called these days Purim [votes] after the name of Pur, v. 26). This the Lord's people do because of the teachings of J.'s message (all the words of this letter), because of what they witnessed in this matter (had seen concerning this matter) and because of what they had experienced therein (had come unto them). Accordingly, the Lord's people obligated themselves (took upon them … seed, v. 27) and all who would come into the Truth (joined themselves [literally, were joined] unto them) as an unalterable thing (should not fail) to maintain this right to regulate their business affairs and their elections (would keep these two days) according to the Truth always (according to their writing and … time every year). The keeping of this matter was repeated and stressed as a memorial and an observance
(these days … remembered and kept, v. 28) always (every generation), in each elect class (family), in every ecclesia (province), in every sub-class (city), in order that their managing of their business affairs and elections by their votes cease not among the various Truth people (day of Purim should not fail from among the Jews), nor its remembrance be forgotten in any class of them (their memorial perish from their seed).
J.F.R. ordered an investigation of J.'s London Bethel and Tabernacle work, appointing thereto an investigative commission of five influential and able British brothers: Bros. McCloy, Warden, McKenzie, Robinson and Housden, all members of J.'s special advisers in British Church affairs. This made in addition to J.'s investigation a second investigation of both the Bethel and Tabernacle matters. Here we will present only those matters that concern the Tabernacle. Various brethren of the ecclesia appeared before this commission and witnessed against H.J.S. and the ten signatory elders. J. also appeared before them affirming that the Lord had justified his work, protested against the investigation as not right, because his work was done as one with power of attorney and as the one whom the Lord had appointed in charge of the priestly work [which by a very natural misunderstanding, already explained, he thought to be that of the steward of the Penny Parable] and refused to give testimony further than to say that his investigations completely proved the guilt of all eleven signatories, especially that of H.J.S. The faithful's and J.'s making these appearances with their reassertion of the propriety of their course in this matter was a reaffirmation of their ecclesiaism as against the presbyterianism of the eleven (Esther … Mordecai … this second letter of Purim, v. 29). The representatives of the ecclesia as representatives of the general Church gave powerful testimony on this subject (daughter of Abihail [father of power]). The witness of the ecclesia's representatives, as that of the Church, and J.'s statement and protest, as that of the Lord's
special representative, were with full authority (wrote with all authority), in confirmation of another message (he sent letters, v. 30) that went forth everywhere in Britain and Ireland among the churches (all the Jews … provinces of the kingdom). With these J. united words of prosperity (peace) and Truth (truth), to add strength on the subject of the churches' control, under the Lord, of their business and election matters (confirm these days of Purim, v. 31), as J. (Mordecai) and the Church (Esther) had charged (enjoined them), as matters on which they obligated themselves and all of like mind (decreed for themselves and for their seed) and for which they had sacrificed (fastings) and suffered (cry). The London Tabernacle, as a representative of the Church (Esther, v. 32), fixed these matters firmly by refusing to elect H.J.S. and W. Crawford even as deacons, though the investigative commission recommended this latter thing (decree … confirmed these matters of Purim). And the matter was recorded in the ecclesia's minutes (written in the book).
In the trialsome experiences preparatory to, associated with, and following after the separation of antitypical Elijah and Elisha from about May 1, 1917 to Jan. 8, 1918, our Lord Jesus (king Ahasuerus, 10: 1) demanded obedience to the principles of the Lord's Word pertinent to these experiences (laid a tribute) of all Truth people throughout the earth, both of the Elijah class (the land) and of the Elisha class (the isles of the sea). Our Lord's post-Pentecostal Gospel-Age acts—throughout the whole Gospel Age, even until the Great Company and Youthful Worthies leave the earth (all the acts of his power and might, v. 2)—are recorded in various Bible books, particularly in those on the types and prophecies (written in the book … kings of Media and Persia). Additionally, in these books there is written in the types and prophecies the explanation of the high offices that He gave J. (declaration of the greatness of Mordecai), which implies repeated promotions from the Lord (whereunto
the king advanced him). J. has frequently been ridiculed as "seeing himself in the Scriptures." This chapter and the three preceding ones are witnesses of the fact that he also sees others in the Scriptures. Here is a passage that proves him right on this point. In some Scriptures he appears in the large Gospel-Age picture. Some of these cases are mentioned in Chapter II. In the book of Esther and in another that will be explained later, he also so appears in the large Gospel-Age picture. Again, as seen in the three Gospel-Age miniatures, he appears from the death of our Pastor on as the star-members of the last five churches in the small, as those of the last six churches in the medium, and of the last six in the large miniature. This fact implies that in every type where the work of the star-members is expressly or impliedly represented and in every prophecy where their work is set forth literally or symbolically, his work is typed or set forth literally or symbolically in the large, medium and small pictures, e.g., wherever Bro. Russell is typed or foretold in the large, J. is typed or foretold in the three small pictures. What this implies can be seen from the fact that Jehovah has declared that He will do nothing in the outworking of His plan and its agents that He has not prefigured in the types and forecast in the prophecies of the Bible (Amos 3: 7). The Lord has been pleased to make him in the Epiphany His prime-minister on earth (next unto the king, v. 3), prominent among his brethren (great among the Jews), and will shortly cause him to be received as the Epiphany messenger and executive by the bulk of the Truth people (accepted of the multitude of his brethren), ambitious not for himself, but to advance the welfare of the Lord's people (seeking the wealth [literally, the good] of his people), and as the Lord's mouthpiece blessing them with the Truth unto their prosperity (speaking peace [literally, prosperity] to all of his seed). For these and all other blessings may thanks, glory, praise and honor redound to God alone, through Jesus Christ, our only Savior and Lord!