Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Titus 2:13
JOB—TYPE AND ANTITYPE.
PROLOGUE. JOB'S TWELVE SPEECHES. ELIPHAZ'S THREE SPEECHES. BILDAD'S THREE SPEECHES. ZOPHAR'S TWO SPEECHES. ELIHU'S SPEECH. JEHOVAH'S THREE SPEECHES. EPILOGUE.
AS A RULE the books that type J.'s work do so from the standpoint of the small or smallest antitypes. To this rule there are several exceptions, one of which is the book of Esther, of which there is but one antitypical fulfillment. Another exception to this rule is the book of Job (greatly injured, greatly hated or greatly persecuted), which also has but one antitypical fulfillment. From the literary standpoint the book is mainly a dramatic poem, whose poetic parts are preceded by a prose prologue and followed by a prose epilogue, and is rightly considered, yea, even by skeptics, e.g., Gibbon, the skeptical, but very able historian, as the supreme literary product in existence. There are especially seven persons who take part in this drama: God, Satan, Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar and Elihu. In the narrative, i.e., prose portions of the book, others are referred to, like angels, the members of Job's families, his wife even making a short speech, his brothers, sisters and friends; but the above-mentioned seven are the main actors in the drama. In these poetic parts Job speaks more than the others, eleven times in all; Eliphaz and Bildad each make three speeches and Zophar makes two, Elihu one, though a lengthy, repetitious and apologetic one, and God two. In the prose parts God makes seven speeches, Satan four, and Job three. Thus in all 35 speeches are made in this book. Of the five human speakers only Job, a prophet (Jas. 5: 10, 11), speaks infallibly, as inspired in his utterances (Job 42: 7, 8). While the record of the speeches of the other four is inspired, the contents of their speeches are uninspired and, in not a few places, untruthful and erroneous. This is by God directly
affirmed of Job's three friends (42: 7, 8), and implied in the fact that God approved of Job's utterances, of many of which Elihu disapproved. All four repeatedly bring false accusations against Job, and are anxious, but unable to prove him a rebel and wrong-doer.
That Job, as well as the other prophets, is a type is evident from Jas. 5: 10, 11. The Greek word hypodeigma, here translated "example," usually means types, as is evident from four of its other five uses in the Greek New Testament (Heb. 4: 11; 8: 5; 9: 23; 2 Pet. 2: 6). In John 13: 15 it evidently has the senses of our English words, example and type. In Jas. 5: 10, 11 it has the sense of types, but collectively in the singular, for the prophets type, some certain ones, others all of God's people in their suffering wrongs and longsuffering. Heb. 12: 1, compared with Heb. 11: 32, proves that "the prophets" are typical. Hence when James in v. 11 cites Job as one of the prophets, as types, he implies that Job was a type. While our Pastor used Job as an illustration of unfallen, fallen and restored mankind, he did not use him as a type of such. That Job is a type of an officiating priest is evident from his offering to God the sacrifices of his three friends acceptably and praying acceptably to God for them (42: 8-10), which facts prove that he could not type the race and which facts also prove that no antitypes could be found for his three friends as reconciled to God by those about to get restitution.
We evidently have a prophetico-typical allusion to Job in Ezek. 14: 12-20. In this section, to show the wickedness of the supporters of the symbolic earth, society, in the second evil world and the impossibility of their escaping one or more of the four great forms of evil—famine, pestilence, the sword (the World War and Revolution) and wild beasts (the anarchists—lawless, like wild beasts)— whereby it would be destroyed, God tells us that only Christ (Noah), Bro. Russell (Daniel) and another brother (Job), if they should be parts of this society, could be delivered therefrom, all its supporters being punished under one or more of the four
forms of wrath there mentioned. In contrast, God shows (vs. 21-23) that while the nominal church would be destroyed even more exemplarily than society, yet the Little Flock (sons) and the Great Company and Youthful Worthies (daughters) would gain deliverance therefrom. There is no doubt that the entire section (vs. 12-23) refers to the Parousia and Epiphany messages on the Time of Wrath and on what it will do to the symbolic heavens (the nominal church) and earth (society) and to their inhabitants. Hence Jesus is meant by Noah, the Parousia messenger by Daniel, as elsewhere shown, and J. by Job. It is certainly fitting that, as these three for the end of the Age are typed by Moses (Jesus) and Aaron (the two messengers, Ex. 19: 24), they should here be symbolized by Noah, Daniel and Job in the symbolic book of Ezekiel, just as they are variously represented in the symbolic book of Revelation. Again, as a proof of Job's typing J., it may be said that the facts as they will be set forth in this chapter as antitypes will be seen to correspond to the typical facts as set forth in the book of Job.
Most of the book of Job, i.e., Job 3: 1–42: 6, except 32: 1-5, is written as poetry, but Job 1; 2; 32: 1-5; 42: 7-17 are written in prose. The prose parts of this book are narratives, first, of Job's state of prosperity, secondly, of his twofold form of affliction, one of which was the loss of his property, sons and most of his servants, and the other of which was his bodily affliction, and, thirdly, of the introduction to the speech of Elihu and, fourthly, of God's reproof of Job's three friends and his returning prosperity to Job in greater measure than was his former prosperity, God's and Satan's part in the second feature being set forth in connection therewith. In the antitype of the prose parts of the book there are set forth J.'s position, character and possessions as the Epiphany messenger officially functioning as such from Nov. 1, 1916 to Feb. 26, 1917 (1: 1-5), his loss of possessions, including seven of his special supporters, and his reaction thereto (1: 6-22), his being afflicted in his faults
and the reaction of his close supporters, himself and the three Levite groups to all his afflictions (2: 1-13), Jehovah's rebuke of, and charge to these Levite groups (42: 7-9) and, finally, Jehovah's increased favor to J. (42: 10-17). In the antitype of the poetic parts of the book there are set forth J.'s lamenting his ever having been given his office, before he came to see its real nature (3: 1-26); the Merarites' and Gershonites' faulting J. in connection with his defense of the Lord's arrangements, and J.'s replies to them (4-10); the Kohathites', the Merarites' and the Gershonites' faulting J. in connection with his teachings, and his replies to them (11-19); the Kohathites', Merarites' and Gershonites' faulting J. in connection with his refutations of their errors, and his replies to them (20-31) (it will be noted that these three antitypical features correspond to the first three attempts of the little antitypical Delilah and Philistines to capture the little antitypical Samson); the crown-losers' in the Epiphany movement, the good Levites', years-long unkind and largely untruthful and inappropriate criticisms of J., to which J. gave no formal answer, so far as this book is concerned, but his reaction thereto will come out in the next chapter, (32-37); and, finally, Jehovah's speeches and J.'s reaction thereto (38-42: 6). This, then, is the general setting of the antitypes.
In our explanation of the antitype of the poetic parts of Job we will not attempt an exposition of every word, phrase or even of every verse, for that would take much more space than the limits of a chapter could fairly demand. Rather, as a rule, longer or shorter summaries of their verses and occasionally of their paragraphs will be given, enough, we trust, to make the antitype clear; but in the prose parts of the book general details of the antitypes will be brought out. With these introductory remarks we will now begin the exposition of the antitypes. Job 1; 2 are properly called the drama's prologue; and Job 42: 7-17 may properly be called its epilogue. Let us remember a statement made above, that Job 1: 1-5 types J. officially functioning as the
Epiphany messenger from Nov. 1, 1916 to Feb. 26, 1917. Among those who were in places of power (Uz, strength) among God's people was J., who later became greatly injured, hated and persecuted (Job, greatly injured, greatly hated or persecuted). God here says of him that he was perfect in love and upright in justice, who in all things put God first and hated and avoided wrong of all kinds (Job 1: 1). Among God's people he had seven special supporters: J.F.R., H.J. Shearn, J. Hemery, Menta Sturgeon, A.I. Ritchie, I.F. Hoskins and R.H. Hirsh, and three special powers: those of a writer, speaker and executive (v. 2).
God put into his charge His people, who at that time were all regarded as of the Little Flock (7,000 sheep), the three corporations then existing: the W.T.B.&T.S., the P.P.A. and the I.B.S.A. (3,000 camels), their charters and their powers as to by-laws (500 yoke of oxen), the Truth literature (500 she asses) and very many Truth servants (a very great household), which resulted in his being the chief servant of God among His people (v. 3). Each one of his seven special helpers performed a special service among his other six brethren and each of them used in connection therewith J.'s powers as a writer, speaker and executive (v. 4). And as each one of these had performed his service J. promptly examined him and sought to purge him from pertinent faults, and in so doing performed for each one a service on which Jehovah manifested His acceptance; for J. feared that each one had by his acts spoken evil of the Lord's matters in his heart; hence he pursued this course with them continually as each one of them had finished his pertinent service; thus as to vs. 4, 5, J. began to fulfill this part of his service toward J.F.R. before sailing for Europe, Nov. 11, i.e., on Nov. 3, when he cautioned him against seeking the place of the steward, and finished it in the case of R.H. Hirsh the night of July 11, 1920, at Jersey City. J., however, did not begin to know that he had any feature of such an office
as is typed in vs. 2, 3, until he had been functioning in this office slightly over three months; and even then, and for a long time afterward, he did not realize the true import and full scope of this office.
It was during these slightly more than three months that the scene of vs. 6-12 was enacted in antitype. We are not to understand, either in the type or antitype, that Satan entered God's presence in the sense of going to God's abode; for Satan has been forever cast out of that heaven, and has been ever since confined to the atmosphere about this earth as his present prison (Luke 10: 18; Eph. 2: 2; 2 Pet. 2: 4). Rather, the thought seems to be this, that as the good angels busied themselves in matters pertinent to God, so Satan presumed to busy himself in matters pertinent to God, which were at that time the matters especially connected with J.'s ministry in Britain (v. 6). Nor are we, in either type or antitype, to understand that there was vocal conversation between God and Satan, between whom there is no conversing whatever. Rather, God's attitude and works toward Job's and J.'s pertinent works suggested to Satan's mind the respective typical and antitypical thoughts embodied in God's words of vs. 7, 8, 12; and Satan's attitude and works toward Job and J. suggested to God the respective typical and antitypical thoughts embodied in Satan's words in vs. 7, 9-11. God's attitude and works toward J.'s British ministry, in view of Satan's seeking by the revolutionary British brethren to thwart it, was a demand upon Satan to tell Him from what activities he had come prior to his presuming to busy himself in the Lord's affairs. And Satan's manner indicated that he had come into busybodying in such matters from his general activities in human society (v. 7). Next Jehovah's attitude and works as to J.'s ministry suggested to Satan the thought that God was demanding of him as to whether he was giving special attention to J., whom God's attitude and works showed to be His chief servant on earth and the one among God's people most like God in character, reverently
serving God and avoiding evil (v. 8). Satan's attitude toward J. and his work questioned J.'s motives, charging that he was selfish in his service of God (v. 9), rendering it only because of God's giving him, his and his supporters special protection, prosperity and increase of possessions on all hands (v. 10). His attitude further told God that if God would by His power take from J. all that he had, J. would blaspheme God by teaching things derogatory to God in matters pertaining to Him (v. 11). Jehovah, knowing J.'s loyalty, to test and demonstrate it, by His attitude toward J.'s opposers in Britain and J.F.R.'s first disapproval of him while he was yet in Britain, gave Satan to understand that he could do anything that he wished with J.'s special possessions as to God's work, but refused him power to control entirely J.'s official powers. This ended the scene pictured in vs. 6-12 (v. 12).
Vs. 13-19 cover the period from Feb. 26, 1917, when J.F.R.'s "absolutely without authority" cable reached J. and when his cable recalling J. was sent from Los Angeles to London, to the night of July 11, 1920, when R.H. Hirsh at a meeting of the Jersey City Convention publicly denounced and renounced J. as an evildoer, in the presence of at least 50 brethren, including J. It was during this period that all seven of J.'s chief supporters were engaged in their pertinent selfish appropriations in relation to J.'s three powers as writer, speaker and executive, and that in the house of ambition which J.F.R., the principal one of the seven, had erected. Accordingly, all seven had unholy ambitions relating to J.'s three special powers (v. 13). The first feature of their power-grasping was in relation to J.'s Divinely-given powers as to the Society's charter, its bylaw powers and its literature; for all seven of these main supporters of J. sinned from various standpoints against these: J.F.R. in seeking control over these and fighting everyone and everything opposing him therein, especially J.'s oppositions to his usurpations, A.I. Ritchie and I.F. Hoskins in voting him managerial and executive power as to these, R.H. Hirsh
and Menta Sturgeon in acquiescing with them therein, and H.J. Shearn and J. Hemery in their usurpations as to these in "the scheme" and otherwise. Thus in these and other ways, including J.F.R.'s ousting of the four directors and deceiving the shareholders on the resultant controversy on corporation control, these seven and their partisan supporters variously despoiled J. of his powers as to the three charters, their by-law possibilities and the Truth literature, and as antitypical Sabeans (spoilers) perverted all but a very few of J.'s pertinent supporters to their erroneous views. There remained only a handful of J.'s supporters who were not perverted on this phase of J.'s despoiling, and who announced it to him (vs. 14, 15).
Close on the heels of this announcement came another still more severe: that of the loss to J. of the bulk of the Truth people, including the bulk of the pilgrims and elders, which occurred through the disfellowshipment (fire from heaven, Rev. 13: 13) agitation, grossly advocated and practiced by the Societyites and more refinedly advocated and practiced by the other Levite groups. This agitation spread destructively among the Lord's people, even among their elders and pilgrims, until the bulk of them were lost to J., only a few of such remaining with him to announce this result to him (v. 16). Scarcely had this announcement come to J. when another small group came telling him that the antitypical Chaldeans (encroachers) in the three Levite groups—Merarites, Gershonites and Kohathites—in their pillaging controversies on the three corporations— W.T.B.&T.S., P.P.A. and I.B.S.A.—had despoiled J. of these, and by their respective errors had perverted from him to themselves severally his supporters as to these, except the few who announced this evil to him (v. 17). Finally, as this announcement was coming to an end, a still more painful one came to J., telling him of his being despoiled of his seven chief supporters, namely that his seven above-named special supporters, much loved by him as symbolic sons, while indulging their selfish ambitions in connection with
J.'s powers as writer, speaker and executive, in the house of J.F.R.'s ambitions, originating in the isolation of God's people, were, by revolutionism, as a symbolic whirlwind (Jer. 25: 32), lost to J., by the fall of that house, struck from every side by revolutionism. This news came from the few that still supported J. (vs. 18, 19).
Vs. 20-22 set forth the effect upon J. of these calamities that bereaved him as the Epiphany messenger of all his stewardship possessions and their appurtenances, except his powers as a Truth writer, speaker and executive, though greatly limiting his use of these three powers, nothing being said as to Job's three daughters' perishing in the wrecking of the house (vs. 18, 19). Nobody, except the Lord and J., knows what grief fell to his lot over the situation, especially over his bereavement of the symbolic sheep and sons. He has at various times experienced four major griefs; but this one overshadowed the other three by far. In fact, certain phases of it moved him to violence to his office and to shear himself of parts of his powers, even unto almost giving them up; but while in its deepest depths he submitted to God's providence (v. 20), declaring by his acts during these years that as a pilgrim developed under and by Bro. Russell's arrangements he had none of the possessions that he lost between 1917 and 1920, and that he would return to his pilgrim state with none of them; for he recognized that God had given and then taken away those possessions; and by word and acts he reflected credit upon God's character (v. 22). In his pertinent course J. did not violate proper principles, nor did he by erroneous teachings attribute an unwise course to God.
Another form of afflictive matters as to the Lord came into enactment, beginning about the middle of, and ending after the previous set of experiences were had. The first form treated above was connected mainly with service, the second mainly with character expressions. The good angels partook helpfully in providential ways in such matters of the Lord; and Satan presumed to exert activities in this sphere,
of course with fell purpose (2: 1). God's pertinent course— acts, not words—suggested to Satan's mind a demand as to what he had been doing; and Satan's pertinent course—acts, not words—suggested the answer that he was active in matters of human society (v. 2). God's pertinent course— acts, not words—asked Satan if he had not been studying J., and, as a result, if he had not been finding him to be as God had held and declared of him in Job 1: 8, despite the fact that God had given him up to Satan to afflict him with the harrowing experiences typed in Job 1: 13-19 (v. 3). Satan, by act, not by word, suggested that J. had not yet been afflicted enough unto bringing him to an abandonment of his faithfulness and to an impugning of God by erroneous teachings, that J. had piously submitted to the loss of his stewardship possessions and exercise of most of his powers merely to preserve himself (skin for skin), since self-preservation is the first law of nature (v. 4); and that if God would afflict him as to his teachings (bone) and character (flesh), by permitting others to make subtle attacks on them and revolutionisms against the Parousia teachings and arrangements, he would turn against and publicly blaspheme God by erroneous teaching (v. 5). By act, not by word, God gave Satan permission to war against J. with the subtlest errors and attacks on his faults; but by His providential acts supporting J., He circumscribed Satan within such limits as would not permit him to take away J.'s office as the Epiphany messenger, even though he was deprived of his office goods and limited in the use of its powers (v. 6).
Under such providential checks and limitations Satan busied himself in stirring up the Levite leaders to introduce many revolutionisms on matters of Truth teachings and arrangements and many official misdeeds, Satan having therein the specific purpose of working on J. to afflict him by playing on his lacks, and arousing his weaknesses and faults into activity. And there was not a weakness or fault or lack in him that Satan did not work
on and bring to the surface in word, manner and act, particularly in connection with his defense of the Truth and its arrangements against Levite revolutionisms. The hypocritical, the self-seeking, the power-grasping, the dishonest, the reputation-assassinating, the error-teaching and the arrangement-perverting course of the Levite leaders in the three Levite groups greatly horrified and later severely angered J., as he saw their evil course and the evil effects of their course upon the Truth and brethren; for at first he sought by loving and long-drawn-out remonstrances and persuasions to draw away these misleaders from their evil works and designs. Their wilfulness frustrating J.'s pertinent efforts, indignant at their stubbornness in wrong teaching and practice, and at the evil effects of these upon the brethren, J. ceased to exercise his accustomed mildness, and in word and act failed to be as longsuffering, forbearing and gracious in his proper opposition to them, and at times allowed too much anger and severity to mark his manner, speech and writing against them.
Moreover, he at times went too far in his efforts to vindicate himself and his office against the misleaders' false accusations along personal and official lines. These things made him at times too severe in manner and speech, while doing and teaching the things that God willed him to do and teach. These faults were surface, not heart faults, even as Job's boils were surface blemishes (v. 7). It will be noted that God approved of J.'s ministry and teachings against his three group antagonists—approving of his ministry against them by calling him His servant, and of his teachings against them by saying that he spoke aright of the Lord's matters, whereas they taught and practiced error thereon (42: 7, 8). J. sought to overcome these faults, lacks and weaknesses by using parts, hence not enough, of the Truth teachings against them, as he dwelt on the memory of his misfortunes (v. 8). The successive groups whose cause he espoused urged him to teach certain errors, e.g., the Society as the channel,
corporations having the right to control the priests' general work, a future first smiting of Jordan, etc., etc. At the same time these urged him to cease claiming and exercising his Divinely-given office, as they claimed it to be the cause of his troubles, all the while demanding of him, some by word and act, and some by act alone, why he should not give up what was actually his loyalty and his office powers (v. 9). By his attitude and speech he gave them to understand that he considered their affirmations to be of a piece in folly with those of the Romanist Church. And he demanded of them, if they dared to deny the proposition, that if we have received toward experiences from the Lord, we should be willing to receive from Him untoward ones. By so doing J. kept himself from teaching and practicing error (v. 10).
The first attitude of the three Levite groups toward J. in his calamities is described in vs. 11-13. It was one of brief sympathy, ere long to change into one of increasing opposition, false accusations, condemnations and disfellowshipment. Their sympathy was aroused at their hearing of his calamities, each group occupying a different point of view, but each one being moved with a mutual understanding with one another to sympathize with, and to comfort him: the Merarites (Eliphaz, a mighty one in purity, the Temanite, right-hand one, names indicative of the Merarites' self-estimate as a group), the Gershonites (Bildad, contentious one, the Shuhite, depressed one, in allusion to their actual condition as those who are strifeful and degraded in rank; for the Gershonites, as Levi's firstborn, should have been the chief group of the Levites, but were degraded to the lowest class of them) and the Kohathites (Zophar, chirper, the Naamathite, a pleasant one, in allusion to their temporarily chirping more or less agreeably to J. as against the others; v. 11). They stood aloof from J.'s viewpoint as they gave attention to his condition, not recognizing him, so altered was he from his former self, which caused them grief, violated their office
powers and characters and publicly exhibited signs of mourning. They put themselves in thought into his place, and were made speechless by the sight of him for a full period; for they saw that J. was in the depths of grief. So far we have studied the antitype of the prologue to the drama. Hereafter our comments will be much briefer, as short summaries of the contents usually of the separate verses and sometimes of paragraphs.
Crushed by his calamities, J. denouncingly wished that he had never been given the office of leading "the Opposition" to what proved to be the bad Levite leaders, their ledlings and their movements. This was especially, but not exclusively, the case as to the Merarites and Gershonites. He felt sorry that the arrangements had developed him unto his being sent to Britain; and by his acts of intense grief he spoke against that whole period of his development for what proved to be the work of the Epiphany messenger, though at the time of such renouncing grief he did not really understand exactly what his office was; yet as much as he understood of it he wished had never come into existence, or to have ended as it came into existence as such (Job 3: 1-19). During the earlier spasms of his grief J. wondered over the question as to why he should have come into such troubles, knowing that he had acted out right principles in the various experiences that brought him such loss (vs. 20-26).
In our study of the separate antitypical features of the book we are to remember that in the antitype, not the full end of acts and speeches comes before other acts and speeches set in; rather, while the successive beginnings follow one another in the time order given in the book, the ending of one antitypical feature does not set in before the next one's beginning sets in. We can illustrate this by the workings of the seven volumes of the Studies as pictured by the plaguing of the seven vials: Vol. I did not cease to plague, and then after such cessation Vol. II start to plague, but the plaguing by Vol. I continued after that of Vol. II and each other's plaguing set in and ends only as all the others
end their plaguing. So while the controversy over the Lord's arrangements was the first to begin, it continued throughout the other two controversial features: that over the truths that J. announced and that over the errors that the three Levite groups announced; as also the controversy over such truths continued after that over such errors began. It is necessary to keep this thought in mind, else confusion will prevail as to the antitypical facts. Another thought should be kept in mind: the details of these three controversial lines of thought are not the special things that are discussed typically in Job. Rather, the main features of the speeches are the Levitical faultfindings against J. for his stand on the Lord's arrangements and teachings and the others' errors and J.'s defending himself against such faultfindings, which in practically all cases were untrue and proceeded from the others' selfish ambitions and desires to slander and condemn J. Hence the points typically discussed in Job are mainly personalities arising in connection with the threefold controversial lines of thought above given. But the discussions on these personal attacks and personal defenses are connected with the threefold lines of controversy: the Lord's arrangements, the Lord's truths and the Levite errors. Let us repeat the necessity of keeping these two thoughts in mind in order to a clear understanding of the progress of the antitypical controversy and points of issue between J. and the three Levite groups. We will, when coming to Elihu's repetitious, long-winded and faultfinding speech, make some general remarks thereon which, we trust, will prove helpful to its proper appreciation.
In time the controversy on the Lord's arrangements was the first to begin, which was begun by the Merarites' faulting J.'s stand on the Lord's arrangements as given through Bro. Russell in his ordering of things in the London and Brooklyn Bethels and Tabernacles, by the way that the Lord through him had adjusted them before he died and by his charter and will, which came into operation after his death. It was J.'s insistence on such arrangements' being
observed, his setting aside those who would not observe them at the London Bethel, and his securing their non-election at the London Tabernacle that started the Merarites, first and primarily in J.F.R., and second and secondarily in his supporters, to embark on a course of criticizing and slandering J. The burden of their claims was this J. had done wrong in his stand as to the Society matters at London and Brooklyn; therefore God was punishing him; but if he would repent and right his (alleged) wrongs, God would again restore him to a prosperous condition. With this epitome of the antitype of Eliphaz's first speech, let us look at a few details. They began their faultfinding course, which they called, "Commune with thee," with the question as to whether it would grieve J., yet say they cannot be silent (4: 2). Then they faulted him as having sought to help others to bear up under trouble and allegedly fainting under it himself (vs. 3-5). Sarcastically they threw into his teeth his alleged confidence in his piety and integrity (v. 6), and preached him a sermon to the effect that, not the righteous, but the wicked are afflicted by God (vs. 7-9), and illustrated this by the course of the ravenous lion (vs. 10, 11). Then they stated that they had gotten a special truth under terrifying conditions (vs. 12-16), to the effect that God's justice is so much greater than man's that God distrusts His servants and charges His angels with folly (both of which statements are untrue). This was said with the false implication that J. was claiming to be more pure than God, and they alleged in proof of their position that all were as easy to crush as a moth (vs. 17-19), that all were soon undone, perished unnoticed, with their achievements plucked up and dead like fools, and that this applied to J. (vs. 20, 21).
Then they asserted that none of the consecrated would give him any heed ("Avoid them"; 5: 1). They falsely charged J. with wrath and envy, which they claimed destroyed him as a New Creature (v. 2). They claimed that they saw him, the foolish one, as making some progress,
but as the channel they suddenly spoke evil of him and his position in Harvest Siftings (v. 3), with the result that supporters of his came into danger, they were publicly overcome without anyone to save them (v. 4), all the fruitage of their labor was devoured by greedy ones, who took it amid trying conditions, and temple robbers devoured their possessions (v. 5). They assured J. that his troubles were not accidental, implying that he was being punished by God (v. 6) in a manner different from that of the Adamic curse (v. 7). Then they advised him to submit to God as allegedly working through the channel (v. 8), whose marvelous and numerous dealings they (falsely) alleged were prospering the channel (v. 9), that God who sent prosperity (v. 10) for the exaltation of the lowly and sad in safety (v. 11), who foiled the (alleged) schemers (allegedly) conspiring to destroy the Society (v. 12), and checkmated the plans of the (alleged) shrewd ones and power-graspers (v. 13). They said of J. and his supporters that they went into error, while they, the channelites, were enjoying the alleged advancing light of Vol. VII (v. 14). They claimed that God had rescued their allegedly humble from the Opposition's theory on Society arrangements and from their power (v. 15), resulting in their humble having hope and the opponents being silenced (v. 16).
Then they made effort, mainly by letters, to bring J. to repentance of his alleged evil-doings, as a happy end of the Lord's correcting and chastising him (v. 17), assuring him that his afflictions were upon him to bring him to amendment (v. 18), and that the Lord would be merciful to, and deliver him out of all his troubles, healing him from their effects (v. 19), delivering him from his supposed lack of Truth, which they thought they had in unmixed purity in Vol. VII, from the controversy in which he was engaged (v. 20), from the verbal lashings that fell to his lot in Harvest Siftings and in many letters and from the danger of the Second Death (v. 21), claiming that he then could disdain the Second Death, the lack of Truth and the civil
powers on the military question (v. 22), even suggesting that if he made the channel his refuge, it would make him secure with the great ones of earth and the civil powers as a conscientious objector (which events soon disproved for them, v. 23), alleging that he could then be sure of his position and be in it without sin (v. 24), promising him much fruitage among the brethren (v. 25), and that he would end his ministry with much wisdom and fruitfulness as due (v. 26). Then they told him that this was the true outcome of their studies on the subject, and asked him to take part of it as for his good (v. 27). As the brethren recall the Merarites' claims and teachings from 1917 to 1920, during the controversies involving the Lord's pertinent arrangements, they will recognize that their pertinent criticisms of, and exhortations to J. are very accurately described in Eliphaz's first speech.
J.'s reply to the Merarites' criticisms and exhortations connected with the controversy on the Lord's arrangements are typed in Job 6; 7, which, with God's help, we will now very briefly connect with the type as its antitype. J. felt that his grief and troubles should be properly appraised (6: 2); for they were very great and weighty. His great love for the Truth, its service and the brethren in view of the prevailing confusion made these silence and crush him (v. 3); since he recognized that all the steps of a child of God are ordered by Him, he knew that these griefs and troubles the Lord was pleased to bring upon him as symbolic arrows whose poison was eating him up; and terrors such as only God can make one feel were battling with him (v. 4). J. showed that if his circumstances were favorable, he would not speak or do the inappropriate things of his grief (v. 5). He asked whether his sense of appreciation should be exercised on unappreciable things (v. 6). He declared that the troubles that he had abhorred he had in sorrow now to accept (v. 7). He longed that God would answer his ardently desired petition (v. 8). Even at the cost of being crushed by God (A. R. V.), he longed for God to remove
His power from him and cut him off from his griefs and troubles (v. 9). Yet this would be his comfort, even in hardening pain, that he had not denied the Truth of God (v. 10). He feared that his strength would not hold out, and questioned whether the outcome should nerve him to continue energetic efforts in his work (v. 11); for he felt that he had the strength of neither a great nor firm one (v. 12). He despaired that he had in himself the strength and wisdom to help him out of his condition (v. 13, A. R. V.). He lamented that while friends should kindly support friends about to give up their fight of faith, even when they were about to give up their reverence of God (v. 14), yet his brethren had dealt deceitfully and disappointingly with him, even as dried-up streams disappoint travelers in the desert, who as a result turn away from the dried channel into the desert wastes and perish; for such is the experience of some members of the Arabian tribes whose hopes were disappointed on coming to such dried-up streams (vs. 1520).
So far as helping J. was concerned, the Merarites might just as well have been non-existent; for they saw his troubles and feared to relieve him (v. 21). J. had asked nothing of them in the way of money, gifts, deliverance or ransom from his oppressors (vs. 22, 23). Accusing him of error, they were asked by him for enlightenment, he assuring them of the power of truth; but he told them that their reasoning hitherto had effected no refutation (vs. 24, 25). Further, he asked them whether they reckoned mere words to be refutation, and the speeches of a despairing one to be mere wind (v. 26). Then he charged them with overwhelming brethren bereaved of their teachers and with framing a legal pit, i.e., J.F.R.'s illegal legal points, with which to entrap a friend such as J. had been to them (v. 27). He asked that they investigate his course, both in Britain and in America, and do so thoroughly, demanding of them whether they regarded him to be a liar (v. 28). He pleaded with them to reverse their course, and not let it become a wicked course,
and asked them to vindicate him as having done righteously in his course in Britain and America. This was done by his petition for a review of his British work by the Board and in his publication of Harvest Siftings Reviewed (v. 29). He asked whether his teachings and defense contained sin and error, and whether his appreciation of the Truth and its Spirit could not discern matters of truth and right (v. 30).
In Job 7 J. is represented as preferring to cease having his office to his suffering under such circumscribed conditions of its administration. He recognized that a servant of God had an appointed time to serve on earth, and recognized that his days were, like those of a natural servant, defined and limited (7: 1). As a wearied servant who earnestly longs for the shadows of night that end his toil, and as a paid servant who longs for his wages (v. 2), so J. had long periods of sorrow and nights in which he was weary (v. 3); for he suffered much from insomnia, induced by weariness, sorrow and testful conditions, during the period from 1917 to 1920, while normally he should have slept the night through (v. 4). He bewailed the fact that his powers were decayed with faults and covered with sad memories, that surface matters with him were in a poor condition (v. 5). Swiftly and hopelessly did his time pass (v. 6). This made him plead with God to be mindful of his transitoriness, declaring that happy days would no more be his because of the desolations in the Church (v. 7). He believed that he would lose entirely his office from the sight of the brethren, and that God was marking him for death officially (v. 8), fearing that as the cloud that disappears never again reappears, and just as Second Deathers after going into the second hell never return to their position and life, so he would lose his office, and as such an officer never exist again (vs. 9, 10).
These thoughts made J. break his silence, speaking in the depth of his sad heart and uttering his plaint in the grief of his being (v. 11). He wondered as to whether he was like the
rebellious race or like an evil spirit, that God had to set a guard over him (v. 12). He looked to the Truth for comfort and ease from his distress (v. 13), but was frightened and terrified by certain teachings and pictures that God had unfolded to him, revealing further calamities as being in store for him (v. 14). Under such conditions he preferred the strangling and end of such an official course rather than its possession (v. 15). He loathed its frustrated activities and desired not to continue in them for long; hence he pleaded for freedom from their cares, since they seemed to lead to no practical results (v. 16). As an example of man he wondered how God should magnify him, or give him attention (v. 17), or fellowship with him early in his Christian life and try him continually (v. 18). He wondered when God would cease trying him, and leave him undisturbed long enough to appropriate some of Truth (v. 19). He recognized that he had in many ways come short of God's glorious character likeness, and inquired as to what he could do for God, who was closely observing him, asking why God had marked him out for special tribulations, even unto his becoming a burden to the Lord (v. 20). Seeing trouble continually increasing, and fearing that he rested under God's disapproval, he asked why God did not forgive his sin and take away his error, since he thought that as a special servant of God his ministry would be only a memory, and when God should seek him He would not find him to be His special servant (v. 21).
Job 8 types the Gershonites' making false charges, assumptions and sophistries against J. because of his misfortunes experienced in connection with the controversy on arrangements of doing the Lord's work, particularly on presenting new typical, symbolic and prophetical thoughts unsanctioned by them, and on corporations controlling the priests' work. They faulted him, alleging that he spoke too much and long on the Lord's arrangements, and engaged in too mighty a controversy (v. 2), falsely implying that J. was charging Almighty God with perverting right (v. 3), also